Friday, May 29, 2015


By Rich Lowry


BlackLivesMatter, the slogan of the movement that began in earnest after the police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, is a lie.

Taken at face value, the phrase is a truism, since obviously all lives matter. But the people who use it as a shibboleth don’t care about black lives per se so much as scoring points against the police.

When there is some awful tragedy, involving a cop shooting or doing harm to a young black man (sometimes justifiably, sometimes not), they muster every ounce of their moral dudgeon and stage demonstrations eagerly covered by a sympathetic media.

Baltimore was an obsession of the BlackLivesMatter crowd and of the news media after the death of Freddie Gray from a terrible injury suffered in police custody. But now that 35 people have been murdered in the month of May, the highest in a month since 1999, the response has been muted.

A few Baltimore organizations are staging anti-violence protests, but they won’t command major media attention. There have been headlines and TV reports about the killing spree, but nothing like the ubiquitous calls for yet another national “conversation” after Freddie Gray’s death.

Let’s be honest: Some black lives really don’t matter. If you are a young black man shot in the head by another young black man, almost certainly no one will know your name. Al Sharpton won’t come rushing to your family’s side with cameras in tow. MSNBC won’t discuss the significance of your death. No one will protest, or even riot, for you. You are a statistic, not a cause. Just another dead black kid in some city somewhere, politically useless to progressives and the media, therefore all but invisible.

The same Memorial Day weekend during which there were nearly 30 shootings and nine mostly young people were murdered in Baltimore, demonstrators were out in force, blocking traffic — not to protest the shootings, of course, but the state of Maryland funding a youth jail in a city that rather desperately needs a youth jail.

When April Ryan of the American Urban Radio Networks asked White House spokesman Josh Earnest on Tuesday what can be done about violence in places like Baltimore, Earnest first suggested passage of more gun-safety laws — even though Baltimore already has some of the strictest gun-control laws in the country.

When Ryan followed up with a query premised on more summer jobs and rec centers as a short-term answer to the shootings, Earnest referred her to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, as well as those of Labor and Education. It was the blind questioning the blind.

What neither of them mentioned is the police. In Baltimore, the famous looted CVS stopped burning, but the riot kept going in a different form. Just as the Freddie Gray unrest was initially stoked by an inadequate police response, the wave of shootings has been enabled by less aggressive police patrols.

The Baltimore Sun ran a headline (since changed) that had the air of a conundrum, although it isn’t very puzzling, “With arrests down in Baltimore, mayor ‘examining’ increase in killings.” According to the paper, arrests have dropped by about half in May. The predictable result is that violent crime is spiking.

The implication is clear: More people need to be arrested in Baltimore, not fewer. And more need to be jailed. If black lives truly matter, Baltimore needs more and better policing and incarceration to impose order on communities where a lawless few spread mayhem and death.

Why have the police in Baltimore pulled back? Baltimore’s police commissioner, according to the Sun, “has said police are struggling to stop violence in West Baltimore, where officers have been routinely surrounded by dozens of people, video cameras and hostility while performing basic police work.”

If the message is supposed to be that they don’t want the police there, it has been received.

Daniel Webster of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research told Vice News that he thinks Baltimore police have been overwhelmed by the unrest, and the rioting carries its own toxic message: “We just had a huge display of lawlessness and disrespect for law and law enforcement. That mindset can spread easily and affect behavior.”

Meanwhile, anonymous police officers say they feel that city authorities don’t have their back, understandably enough when city leaders are loath to call rioters “thugs” and Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby rushed to announce charges against the Freddie Gray officers to placate the mob.

It is wrong for the police to shrink from doing their job, but the last month in Baltimore shows how important that job is. This is especially true in dangerous, overwhelmingly black neighborhoods. They need disproportionate police attention, even if that attention is easily mischaracterized as racism. The alternative is a deadly chaos that destroys and blights the lives of poor blacks.

It is a paradox that a figure who is anathema to the BlackLivesMatter movement, Rudy Giuliani, saved more black lives than any of his critics ever will. He did it by getting the police to establish and maintain basic order in New York’s neighborhoods and defending the cops when the likes of Al Sharpton maligned them.

Now that Mayor Bill de Blasio has pulled back, shootings are trending up in New York City. But it’s OK, as long as nameless young black men are the ones being shot at. For progressives only some black lives matter.


Monday, May 25, 2015

The True Black Tragedy

 by Walter E. Williams

Hustlers and people with little understanding want us to believe that today's black problems are the continuing result of a legacy of slavery, poverty and racial discrimination. The fact is that most of the social pathology seen in poor black neighborhoods is entirely new in black history. Let's look at some of it.

Today the overwhelming majority of black children are raised in single female-headed families. As early as the 1880s, three-quarters of black families were two-parent. In 1925 New York City, 85 percent of black families were two-parent. One study of 19th-century slave families found that in up to three-fourths of the families, all the children had the same mother and father.

Today's black illegitimacy rate of nearly 75 percent is also entirely new. In 1940, black illegitimacy stood at 14 percent. It had risen to 25 percent by 1965, when Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action" and was widely condemned as a racist. By 1980, the black illegitimacy rate had more than doubled, to 56 percent, and it has been growing since. Both during slavery and as late as 1920, a teenage girl raising a child without a man present was rare among blacks.

Much of today's pathology seen among many blacks is an outgrowth of the welfare state that has made self-destructive behavior less costly for the individual. Having children without the benefit of marriage is less burdensome if the mother receives housing subsidies, welfare payments and food stamps. Plus, the social stigma associated with unwed motherhood has vanished. Female-headed households, whether black or white, are a ticket for dependency and all of its associated problems. Ignored in all discussions is the fact that the poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994.

Black youth unemployment in some cities is over 50 percent. But high black youth unemployment is also new. In 1948, the unemployment rate for black teens was slightly less than that of their white counterparts -- 9.4 percent compared with 10.2. During that same period, black youths were either just as active in the labor force or more so than white youths. Since the 1960s, both the labor force participation rate and the employment rate of black youths have fallen to what they are today. Why? Are employers more racially discriminatory today than yesteryear? Were black youths of yesteryear more skilled than whites of yesteryear? The answer to both questions is a big fat no.

The minimum wage law and other labor regulations have cut off the bottom rungs of the economic ladder. Put yourself in the place of an employer, and ask: If I must pay $7.25 an hour -- plus mandated fringes, such as Social Security and workers' compensation -- would it pay me to hire a worker who is so unfortunate as to possess skills that enable him to produce only $5 worth of value per hour? Most employers view that as a losing economic proposition. Thus, the minimum wage law discriminates against the employment of low-skilled workers, who are most often youths -- particularly black youths.

The little bit of money a teenager can earn through after-school, weekend and summer employment is not nearly so important as the other things he gains from early work experiences. He acquires skills and develops good work habits, such as being prompt, following orders and respecting supervisors. In addition, there are the self-respect and pride that a youngster gains from being financially semi-independent. All of these gains from early work experiences are important for any teen but are even more important for black teens. If black teens are going to learn anything that will make them a more valuable employee in the future, they aren't going to learn it from their rotten schools, their dysfunctional families or their crime-ridden neighborhoods. They must learn it on the job.

The bulk of today's problems for many blacks are a result of politicians and civil rights organizations using government in the name of helping blacks when in fact they are serving the purposes of powerful interest groups.



Monday, May 18, 2015

The dirty little secret no one wants to admit about Baltimore

By Allen West

The population of Baltimore is 622,000 and 63 percent of its population is black. The mayor, state’s attorney, police chief and city council president are black, as is 48 percent of the police force. But as 36-year-old Robert Stokes says, “You look around and see unemployment. Filling out job applications and being turned down because of where you live and your demographic. It’s so much bigger than the police department.”

Everyone wants to have an honest conversation about race, so let’s us endeavor to do just that. Now, of course, when you speak the hard truth about race issues in America – and not just the liberal progressive talking points – and you’re white, you’ll be branded a racist. And if you’re black, well, y’all just watch the comments below and see the denigrating drivel.

As posted on by John Nolte, “Contrary to the emotional blackmail some leftists are attempting to peddle, Baltimore is not America’s problem or shame. That failed city is solely and completely a Democrat problem.”

“Like many failed cities, Detroit comes to mind, and every city besieged recently by rioting, Democrats and their union pals have had carte blanche to inflict their ideas and policies on Baltimore since 1967, the last time there was a Republican Mayor. In 2012, after four years of his own failed policies, President Obama won a whopping 87.4% of the Baltimore city vote. Democrats run the city of Baltimore, the unions, the schools, and, yes, the police force. Since 1969, there have only been only been two Republican governors of the State of Maryland. Elijah Cummings has represented Baltimore in the U.S. Congress for more than thirty years.”

“As I write this, despite his objectively disastrous reign, the Democrat-infested mainstream media is treating the Democrat like a local folk hero, not the obvious and glaring failure he really is. Every single member of the Baltimore city council is a Democrat. Liberalism and all the toxic government dependence and cronyism and union corruption and failed schools that comes along with it, has run amok in Baltimore for a half-century, and that is Baltimore’s problem. It is the free people of Baltimore who elect and then re-elect those who institute policies that have so spectacularly failed that once-great city. It is the free people of Baltimore who elected Mayor “Space-to-Destroy”.

Mr. Nolte is white and we all know the invectives which will be hurled his way — but he is absolutely correct.

I was watching the news reports from Baltimore and hearing all the condemnations from some about being kept down and the lack of jobs, opportunity, good schools — then why do these blacks keep voting for the same people? And this isn’t a phenomenon isolated to Baltimore.

Every single major urban center in America is run by Democrats — more specifically, liberal progressives, black or white. The morass that became Detroit. The killing fields of Chicago. The depravity of Washington DC. The shame of South Dallas. And yes, even the place that was once my home, Atlanta — even with all the successful black entertainers.

Now, I remember the first black mayor of Atlanta, Maynard Jackson. That guy was a leader and even spoke at my high school Baccalaureate. But today, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed has done such a bang-up job that the Atlanta Braves are moving to Cobb County!

Just do the assessment yourselves, who are the elected officials heading up the urban centers? And where does one find the most dire socio-economic statistics?

Yet we hear these rioters blame whites — well, they need to make sure they’re specifically blaming the correct whites — those on the left. Blacks have been herded into these inner city clusters, a new economic plantation and in this 50th year of President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society — well, the unintended, or maybe intended, consequences are deplorable.

But Mr. Nolte does bring up an interesting comparative analysis. He writes:

“Poverty has nothing to do with it. This madness and chaos and anarchy is a Democrat-driven culture that starts at the top with a racially-divisive White House heartbreakingly effective at ginning up hate and violence. Where I currently reside here in Watauga County, North Carolina, the poverty level is 31.3%. Median income is only $34,293. In both of those areas we are much worse off than Baltimore, that has a poverty rate of only 23.8% and a median income of $41,385. Despite all that, we don’t riot here in Watauga County. Thankfully, we have not been poisoned by the same left-wing culture that is rotting Baltimore, and so many other cities like it, from the inside out. We get along remarkably well. We are neighbors. We are people who help out one another. We take pride in our community, and are grateful for what we do have. We are far from perfect, but we work out our many differences in civilized ways. Solutions are our goal, not cronyism, narcissistic victimhood, and the blaming of others.”

The truth is that it is a culture of dependency as promulgated by the race baiters and new plantation overseers of the inner city that has created what we’re seeing play out in Baltimore. There is where the blame lies, but there are very few who are willing to admit just that.

Remember what ESPN sports commentator Stephen A. Smith said? He wished that for one voting cycle, the black community would vote Republican. Heck, they could do no worse — and look, even the people of the state of Maryland decided to try something different and elected a Republican governor. Who, when finally asked, immediately activated the National Guard to quell the violence and chaos which the Democrat Mayor of Baltimore failed to comprehend, and control. Perhaps what we’re witnessing in Baltimore is the pure definition of insanity — continuing to do the same thing and expect different results.

Yes, the dirty little secret that no one wants to admit is that Baltimore, and so many other urban areas and inner city communities in America are a reflection of the abject failure of liberal progressive socialist policies as advanced by the Democrat party.

The preeminent question is whether or not those in Baltimore and other places will recognize who is truly responsible for their plight. Or will they continue to be manipulated and propagandized by the liberal progressive media and the poverty pimps like the one supposedly heading down from New York City.

John Nolte’s piece was spot on and this is not about an American failure, it is about a Democrat failure. And ask yourself, who were the ones who developed the concept of urban economic empowerment zones — as opposed to the ones who have produced urban depraved enslavement zones?


About the author

Allen West is a former United States Congressman and current contributor for Fox News and PJ Media – Next Generation. After a 22-year military career, he entered politics in the 2008 election, when he ran for U.S. Representative from Florida's 22nd congressional district as a Republican, but lost against Democratic incumbent Ron Klein. In a re-match against Klein in 2010, West won the seat, coinciding with historic Republican gains in the 2010 midterm elections. On January 3, 2011, West took office as the first black Republican Congressman from Florida since Josiah T. Walls left office in 1876. West served on the Armed Services and Small Business Committees. He was also a member of the Tea Party Caucus and has been referred to as one of the champions of the Tea Party movement.

Friday, May 15, 2015

Black Republican Frequently Asked Questions

Black Republican Frequently Asked Questions


Answers are provided below.

1. Does The Democratic Party Owe Blacks An Apology?

2.  Did The Republican Party Fight For Black Freedom And Equality?

3.  Were The Anti-Civil War “Copperheads” Democrats?

4.  Did The 1863 Emancipation Proclamation Free All Blacks From Slavery?

5.  Did The 1964 Civil Rights Act Grant Blacks The Right To Citizenship?

6.  Did The 1965 Voting Right Act Grant Blacks The Right To Vote?

7.  Did The Democratic Party Pass Those Black Codes And Jim Crow Laws?

8.  Did Republicans Pass The Civil Rights Laws Of The 1800s?

9.  Did Democrats Repeal The Civil Rights Laws Of The 1800s?

10.  Did Democrats Support The “Separate But Equal” Doctrine?

11.  Was The Ku Klux Klan The Terrorist Arm Of The Democratic Party?

12.  Did Republicans Pull All Troops Out Of The South After The 1877 Compromise?

13.  Did Republicans Establish The NAACP And HBCUs?

14.  Did Republicans Put Up The Confederate Flag?

15.  Did The Parties Switch Sides On Racism?

16.  Did The “Dixiecrats” Become Republicans?

17.  Was Republican President Richard Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” A Racist Appeal?

18.  Did Republicans Push To Achieve The “Brown v. Board of Education” Decision?

19.  Did Republican President Richard Nixon Start Affirmative Action?

20.  Did Democrat President Woodrow Wilson Kick All Blacks Out of Federal Government Jobs?

21.  Did Republican President Eisenhower Achieve The Desegregation Of The Military?

22.  Did Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal” Harmed Blacks?

23.  Was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen The Key To Modern-era Civil Rights Legislation?

24.  Was Democrat President Lyndon Johnson A Civil Rights Advocate?

25.  Was Democrat President John F. Kennedy A Civil Rights Advocate?

26.  Did President Kennedy Make The Call That Got Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Out of Jail?

27.  Was Senator Barry Goldwater A Racist?

28.  Was Republican Strategist Lee Atwater A Racist?

29.  Was David Duke Embraced by Republicans?

30.  Do Most Blacks Vote For Democrats Today Because Democrats Help Blacks Prosper?

31.  Did Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Write An Autobiography?

32.  Was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. A Republican?

33.  Do Democrats Talk Tolerance, But Practice Intolerance?

34.  Did Democrats Smear Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?

35.  Is The Democratic Party The Party Of The Rich?

36.  Do Republicans Stop Blacks From Voting With Voter ID Laws?

37.  Is The Democratic Party The Party Of Socialism?

38.  Do Republicans Cut Programs For Poor Blacks?

39.  What Have Republicans Done For Blacks Lately?

40.  Has President Barack Obama Caused Great Harm To Blacks?


1.  Q:  Does The Democratic Party Owe Blacks An Apology?

A:  Yes.  

The time is long overdue for the Democratic Party to apologize for that party’s nearly 200-year history of racism and cease using racial politics for partisan political gain.  Only then can we finally end the racial divisiveness that has torn our nation asunder.

Etched in history is the fact that the Democratic Party, through its racist agenda and "States' Rights" claim to own slaves, sought to protect and preserve the institution of slavery from 1792 to 1865, thus keeping enslaved millions of blacks. 

The Democratic Party enacted fugitive slave laws to keep blacks from escaping from plantations; instigated the 1856 “Dred Scott v. Standford” decision which legally classified blacks as property; passed the Missouri Compromise to spread slavery into 50% of the new Northern states; and passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act designed to spread slavery into all of the new states.

As author Michael Scheuer stated, the Democratic Party is the party of the four S's:  slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.  Clearly, then, it is the Democratic Party that owes black Americans an apology – not the Republican Party, nor the United States of America.

Rev. Wayne Perryman sued the Democratic Party for that party’s 200-year history of racism, case No C-11-1503.   The Democrats came into court and confessed since they could not lie under oath, but refused to apologize because they know they can take the black vote for granted.  Rev. Perryman included a copy of the lawsuit in his book:  “Whites, Blacks & Racist Democrats: The Untold History of Race & Politics Within The Democratic Party From 1792 –2009.”

National Democratic Party leaders should follow the example set by the Democratic Party leaders in North Carolina, who, as a result of the 1898 Wilmington Race Riot Commission Report of May 31, 2006, issued a unanimous apology on January 20, 2007 for the Democratic Party's 1898 murderous rampage where dozens of black Americans were massacred.

In a letter to the North Carolina Democratic Party, then North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Richard H. Moore wrote: “We can no longer ignore the fact that many of us grew up being taught a much sanitized – and inaccurate – history…. The truth is ugly.”

2.  Q:  Did The Republican Party Fight For Black Freedom And Equality?

A:  Yes. 

The Republican Party was started in 1854 as the anti-slavery party and Republican President Abraham Lincoln fought the Civil War (1861 to 1865) to free blacks from slavery, with over 600,000 citizens being killed, including many thousand blacks.

Republicans then championed civil rights for blacks from the time of Reconstruction through the modern civil rights era of the 1950’s and 1960s, over the objection of Democrats.

3.  Q:  Were The Anti-Civil War “Copperheads” Democrats?

A:  Yes.

Starting in 1861, anti-Civil War Democrats in the North were called "copperheads" like the poisonous snake. 

The ‘copperheads” wanted to appease the South and accept a negotiated peace, thereby, creating an independent Confederacy where blacks were kept in slavery. 

They also showed their deep opposition to the Civil War military conscription by verbally attacking Republican President Abraham Lincoln and taking their anger out on blacks, murdering and maiming blacks in virtually every Northern state.

Anti-Civil War Democrats in New York engaged in "Four Days of Terror" against the city's black population from July 13th to 16th in 1863, and the anti-Civil War chant of the Democrats, as reported by one Pennsylvania newspaper, was: "Willing to fight for Uncle Sam, but not for Uncle Sambo".

4.  Q:  Did the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation Free All Blacks From Slavery?

A:  No.  

During the Civil War, President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863 which ordered the freeing of slaves in states that were rebelling against Union forces. 

In the book “The Political Lincoln: An Encyclopedia” Professors Paul Finkleman and Martin J. Hershock debunk the absurd myth that President Lincoln was somehow a “racist” because of his measured approach to ending slavery in the rebelling South first, while waging a war to end all slavery throughout the nation.

After the Civil War, Republicans passed the Thirteenth Amendment on January 31, 1865 that was ratified on December 6, 1865 to abolish all slavery in the United States.

5.  Q:  Did The 1964 Civil Rights Act Grant Blacks The Right To Citizenship?


The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution pushed by Republicans granted blacks citizenship and was ratified in 1868.

6.  Q:  Did The 1965 Voting Right Act Grant Blacks The Right To Vote?


The Fifteenth Amendment pushed by Republicans granted blacks the right to vote and was ratified in 1870.

7.  Q:  Did The Democratic Party Pass Those Black Codes And Jim Crow Laws?

A:  Yes.  

Democrats passed discriminatory Black Codes in 1865 to suppress, restrict, and deny blacks the same privileges as whites.  The Codes forced blacks to serve as apprentices to their former slave masters.  Democrats also prevented blacks from getting their promised “40 acres and a mule”.

Democrats passed discriminatory Jim Crow Laws in 1875 to restrict the rights of blacks to use public facilities. 

8.  Q:  Did Republicans Pass The Civil Rights Laws Of The 1800s?

A:  Yes.

In response to the Black Codes and Jim Crow Laws enacted by Democrats, Republicans passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 which prohibited racial discrimination in public facilities.

Republicans also passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that were designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks.

9.  Q:  Did Democrats Repeal The Civil Rights Laws Of The 1800s?

A: Yes.

When the Democrats regained control of Congress in 1892, they passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned all of 1880s civil right laws that had been enacted by Republicans. 

10.  Q:  Did Democrats Support The “Separate But Equal” Doctrine?

A:  Yes.

Democrats sided with the U.S. Supreme Court which issued a ruling in the 1896 case of “Plessy v. Ferguson” which established the "separate but equal" doctrine.  That opinion stated that it was not a violation of the Constitution to have separate facilities for blacks. 

It took Republicans nearly six decades to finally get the civil rights laws of the 1950’s and 1960’s passed over the objection of the Democrats, which negated the “Plessy v. Ferguson” decision.

11.  Q:  Was the Ku Klux Klan The Terrorist Arm Of The Democratic Party?

A: Yes. 

In 1866, the Ku Klux Klan was started by Democrats to lynch and terrorize Republicans, black and white, and the Ku Klux Klan became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.  Democrats also fought against anti-lynching laws.  Details about the Democratic Party and the Ku Klux Klan can be found in the book “A Short History of Reconstruction” by Dr. Eric Foner.

12.  Q:  Did Republicans Pull All Troops Out Of The South After The 1877 Compromise?

A:  No. 

Notably, the Hayes-Tilden Compromise of 1877 was another attempt by Republicans to end the 1876 presidential election stalemate, as well as get the Democrats to stop the lynchings and respect the rights of blacks. 

Contrary to legend, President Rutherford Hayes did not remove the last federal troops from the South, but merely ordered federal troops surrounding the South Carolina and Louisiana statehouses to return to their barracks.

13.  Q:  Did Republicans Establish The NAACP And HBCUs?

A:  Yes.  

To advance civil rights for blacks, Republicans started the NAACP on February 12, 1909, the 100th anniversary of the birth of President Abraham Lincoln.  The first black head of the NAACP was black Republican James Weldon Johnson.  He became general secretary in 1920 and wrote the lyrics to the song “Lift Every Voice and Sing”.   Republicans also founded the HBCU’s (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) because Democrats were trying to prevent blacks from getting a good education.

14.  Q:  Did Republicans Put Up The Confederate Flag?

A:  No.

Black Democratic Party civil rights agitators continue to raise a ruckus about the Confederate flag, particularly in South Carolina, but ignore the fact that it was Democrat Senator Ernest Hollings who put up the Confederate flag over the South Carolina state Capitol building when he was the governor.

15.  Q:  Did The Parties Switch Sides On Racism?

A:  No. 

It does not make common sense to believe that, after Republicans spent over 150 years fighting the Democrats to achieve freedom and equality for blacks and won, they suddenly crossed the isle and switched sides with the Democrats.  It didn’t happen. 

In fact, Democrats declared they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than a Republican because the Republican Party was—and still is—the party for blacks.

The fact that Republicans today are not racists is explained clearly in the article “The Myth of the Racist Republicans”  by Gerard Alexander published by the Claremont Institute.

Another article by Mr. Alexander is “Conservatism does not equal racism. So why do many liberals assume it does?”

16.  Q:  Did The “Dixiecrats” Become Republicans?

A:  No. 

The so-called “Dixiecrats” remained Democrats and did not migrate to the Republican Party.  The Dixiecrats were a group of Southern Democrats who, in the 1948 national election, formed a third party, the State’s Rights Democratic Party with the slogan:  “Segregation Forever!”  Even so, they continued to be Democrats for all local and state elections, as well as for all future national elections.

Democrats denounced Senator Trent Lott for his remarks about Senator Strom Thurmond.  However, there was silence when Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd praised Senator Robert Byrd, a former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan, as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment.”

Senator Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and, after he became a Republican, Senator Thurmond defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats.

However, Senator Byrd was a fierce opponent of desegregating the military and complained in one letter: “I would rather die a thousand times and see old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen of the wilds”.

In the early 1970's, Senator Byrd pushed to have the Senate's main office building named after a former "Dixiecrat”, Democrat Senator Richard Russell who was Senator Byrd's mentor and leading opponent of anti-lynching legislation. 

In 2001 Senator Byrd was forced to apologize for using the "N-word" on television.  While an Illinois Senator, President Barack Obama wrote a letter of support for Senator Byrd that helped that racist win re-election.

17. Q:  Was Republican President Richard Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” A Racist Appeal?

A:  No. 

In the arsenal of the Democrats is a condemnation of Republican President Richard Nixon for his so-called “Southern Strategy.”  These same Democrats expressed no concern when the racially segregated South voted solidly for Democrats for over 100 years, yet unfairly deride Republicans because of the thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party that began in the 1970's.  

Nixon's "Southern Strategy” was an effort on his part to get fair-minded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks.  Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Governor Bobby Jindal in 2007.

As the co-architect of President Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”, Pat Buchanan provided a first-hand account of the origin and intent of that strategy in a 2002 article .

In that article, Mr. Buchanan wrote that when President Nixon kicked off his historic comeback in 1966 with a column about the South (written by Mr. Buchanan), President Nixon declared that the Republican Party would be built on a foundation of state’s rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense.

President Nixon said further that he would leave it to the Democratic Party, the “party of Maddox, Mahoney and Wallace to squeeze the last ounce of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice”.

During the 1966 campaign, President Nixon was personally thanked by Dr. King for his help in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1957.  President Nixon also endorsed all Republicans, except the members of the John Birch Society.

18. Q:  Did Republicans Push To Achieve The “Brown v. Board of Education” Decision?

A:  Yes. 

Unknown today is the fact that the Democratic Party supported the Topeka, Kansas school board in the 1954 “Brown v. Topeka Board of Education” Supreme Court decision by Chief Justice Earl Warren who was appointed by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower. 

This landmark decision ended school segregation and declared that the "separate but equal" doctrine created by the 1896 “Plessy v. Ferguson” decision violated the 14th Amendment.

After the Brown decision, Democrat Arkansas Governor Orville Faubus tried to prevent desegregation of a Little Rock public school.  President Eisenhower sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate the schools and pushed through the 1957 Civil Rights Act. 

In 1958, President Eisenhower established a permanent US Civil Rights Commission that had been rejected by prior Democrat presidents, including President Franklin D. Roosevelt and President Harry S. Truman.

19.  Q:  Did Republican President Richard Nixon Start Affirmative Action?

A:  Yes. 

Notably, the enforcement of affirmative action began with President Richard Nixon‘s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher who became known as “the father of affirmative action enforcement”) that set the nation‘s first goals and timetables.  Today, Democrats have turned affirmative action into an unfair quota system that even most blacks do not support.  Notably, President Nixon was also responsible for the passage of civil rights legislation in the 1970’s, including the Equal Employment Act of 1972.

Mr. Fletcher, as president of the United Negro College Fund, coined the phrase “the mind is a terrible thing to waste.”  Mr. Fletcher was also one of the original nine plaintiffs in the famous “Brown v. Topeka Board of Education” decision. 

Mr. Fletcher briefly pursued a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 1995.  Upon his death in 2005, the NAACP paid tribute to Mr. Fletcher, heralding him as “the father of affirmative action enforcement" who “as he often said, it 'put flesh and blood on Dr. King's dream'." 

20.  Did Democrat President Woodrow Wilson Kick All Blacks Out of Federal Government Jobs?

A: Yes.  

President Richard Nixon began his merit-based affirmative action program to overcome the harm caused by Democrat President Woodrow Wilson who, after he was elected in 1912, kicked all blacks out of federal government jobs and prevented blacks from obtaining federal contracts. 

Also, while President Wilson was in the White House and Congress was controlled by the Democrats, more discriminatory bills were introduced in Congress than ever before in our nation’s history. 

To his eternal shame, President Wilson showed D.W. Griffith's racist Civil War film “Birth of a Nation” in the White House that sparked renewed racial violence and a resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan.

21.  Q:   Did Republican President Eisenhower Achieve The Desegregation Of The Military?

A:  Yes. 

Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military.  Not mentioned is the fact that it was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

22.  Q:  Did Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal” Harmed Blacks?

A:  Yes.

Ignored today is the fact that it was Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt who started blacks on the path to dependency on government handouts during the Great Depression with his “New Deal” that turned out to be a bad deal for blacks. 

23.  Q:  Was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen The Key To Modern-era Civil Rights Legislation?

A:  Yes.

Little known is the fact that it was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Democrat President Lyndon Johnson, who pushed through the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act. 

In fact, Senator Dirksen was instrumental in the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968.

Senator Dirksen wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act.  He also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. 

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. hailed Senator Dirksen’s “able and courageous Leadership.”

The Chicago Defender, the largest black-owned daily at that time, praised Senator Dirksen “for the grand manner of his generalship behind the passage of the best civil rights measures that have ever been enacted into law since Reconstruction”.

The chief opponents of the 1964 Civil Rights Act were Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd, a former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan.  None of these racist Democrats became Republicans.

24.  Q:  Was Democrat President Lyndon Johnson A Civil Rights Advocate?


Democrats ignore the pivotal role played by Senator Dirksen in obtaining passage of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act, while heralding President Johnson as a civil rights advocate for signing the bill.

Notably, in his 4,500-word State of the Union Address delivered on January 4, 1965, Johnson mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only thirty five words were devoted to civil rights.  He did not mention one word about voting rights.  Information about Johnson’s anemic civil rights policy positions can be found in the “Public Papers of the President, Lyndon B. Johnson,” 1965, vol. 1, p.1-9.

In their campaign to unfairly paint the Republican Party today as racists, Democrats point to President Johnson’s prediction that there would be an exodus from the Democratic Party because of Johnson’s signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

Omitted from the Democrats’ rewritten history is what Johnson actually meant by his prediction. 

President Johnson’s statement was not made out of a concern that racist Democrats would suddenly join the Republican Party that was fighting for the civil rights of blacks. 

Instead, President Johnson feared that the racist Democrats would again form a third party, such as the short-lived States Rights Democratic Party.

In fact, in 1968 Alabama’s Democrat Governor George C. Wallace started the American Independent Party that attracted other racist candidates, including Democrat Atlanta Mayor (later Governor of Georgia) Lester Maddox.

Behind closed doors, President Johnson said:  “These Negroes, they’re getting uppity these days.  That’s a problem for us, since they got something now they never had before.  The political pull to back up their upityness.  Now, we’ve got to do something about this.  We’ve got to give them a little something.  Just enough to quiet them down, but not enough to make a difference.  If we don’t move at all, their allies will line up against us.  And there’ll be no way to stop them.  It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.” 

25.  Q:  Was Democrat President John F. Kennedy A Civil Rights Advocate?


Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a civil rights advocate.  In reality, President Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act while he was a senator. 

After he president, President Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph who was a black Republican. 

Dr. King criticized President Kennedy for ignoring civil rights issues.  This criticism was one of the reasons that President Kennedy, through his brother Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King.

26.  Q:  Did President Kennedy Make The Call That Got Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Out of Jail?

A:  No.

When the King family sought help with getting Dr. King out of a Birmingham jail, Republican Richard Nixon did not respond because he knew that no individual Republican could have any control over the actions of the racists Democrats in the South. 

President Kennedy’s civil rights advisor, Harris Wofford who was a personal friend of Dr. King, made the telephone call to get Dr. King out of Jail.  Mr. Wofford made the call that resulted in Dr. King’s release, without President Kennedy’s knowledge.

At first, President Kennedy was angry about the call because he feared that he would lose the Southern vote, but he later changed his tune when he realized that the release of Dr. King from jail could work to his political advantage. 

History shows, though, that the call made by Mr. Wofford eventually did work in President Kennedy’s favor and is the primary reason so many blacks wrongly revere President Kennedy today. 

The revelation about the call that got Dr. King out of jail is contained in Mr. Wolford’s book “Of Kennedys and Kings” on pages 14-23.

27.  Q:  Was Senator Barry Goldwater A Racist?

A:  No.

Democrats today castigate Republican Senator Barry Goldwater as anti-black.  However a review of Senator Barry Goldwater’s record shows that he was a Libertarian, not a racist.  Goldwater was a member of the Arizona NAACP and was involved in desegregating the Arizona National Guard.

Senator Goldwater also supported the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and the Civil Rights Act of 1960, as well as the constitutional amendment banning the poll tax. 

His opposition to the more comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on his libertarian views about government. 

Senator Goldwater believed that the 1964 Civil Rights Act, as written, unconstitutionally extended the federal government's commerce power to private citizens, furthering the government’s efforts to "legislate morality" and restrict the rights of employers.

It is instructive to read the entire text of Senator Goldwater's 1964 speech at the 28th Republican National Convention, accepting the nomination for president that is available from the Arizona Historical Foundation. 

By the end of his career, Senator Goldwater was one of the most respected members of either party and was considered a stabilizing influence in the Senate. 

28.  Q:  Was Republican Strategist Lee Atwater A Racist?

A:  No.

In 1991, Democrats shamefully sullied the memory of Republican Strategist Lee Atwater when he was no longer here to defend himself. 

Ten years after Mr. Atwater’s death in 1981 of a brain tumor at the age of 40, Democrats accused him of having used the “N-Word” in 1981, the year of his death.

Mr. Atwater was a tough political strategist who beat the Democrats in the political area, but he was not a racist.

Note that the charge that Atwater uttered a racist statement using the “N-word” was made by a liberal Professor Alexander P. Lamis, a native of South Carolina.  Dr. Lamis had worked as a research assistant at the liberal Brookings Institution before joining the Case Western Reserve University faculty in 1988.

Dr. Lamis didn’t even write his book until 1999, 18 years after Mr. Atwater allegedly made a racist remark.  To add insult to injury, Dr. Lamis’ book is about Southern politics in the 1990s, not 1980s.   In fact, his book is titled “Southern Politics in the 1990s.”

In MR. Atwater’s obituary written by Michael Oreskes that was published in “The New York Times” the morning Atwater died, Oreskes made an effort to trash Atwater even before Mr. Atwater’s body had cooled, using every negative thing ever written or said about Mr. Atwater. 

Yet, Mr. Oreskes never once mentioned any use by Mr. Atwater of the “N-word” as claimed by Dr. Lamis. 

The mean-spirited obituary about Lee Atwater was published in ”The New York Times” on March 30, 1991.

29.  Q:  Was David Duke Embraced by Republicans?

A:  No.

While turning a blind eye to how the Democratic Party embraced former Democrat Senator Robert Byrd—who was a recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan—until his death, Democrats regularly lambaste the Republican Party about David Duke, a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

Ignored are the facts that the Republican Party never embraced Mr. Duke,  When he ran for the Republican Party presidential nomination in 1992, Republican Party officials tried to block his participation. 

Hypocritical is the word for how Democrats also ignore Mr. Duke’s long participation in the Democratic Party with no efforts by Democrats to block him.

Below is Mr. Duke’s political history in Louisiana, which has an open primary system.

Mr. Duke ran for Louisiana State Senator as a Democrat in 1975. 

He ran again for the Louisiana State Senate in 1979 as a Democrat.

In 1988, he made a bid for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

Then, on election day in 1988, he had himself  listed on the presidential ballot as an “Independent Populist.” 

After his unbroken string of losses as a Democrat and an Independent Populist, Mr. Duke decided to describe himself as a Republican, without being embraced by the Republican Party.

Then Mr. Duke ran the following races where he lost every time:

In 1989 he ran for Louisiana State Representative and lost.

In 1990, he ran for US Senator and lost.

In 1991 he ran for Governor of Louisiana and lost.

In 1992 he ran for president and lost.

In 1996 he ran for US Senator and lost.

In 1999 he ran for US Representative and lost.

30.  Q:  Do Most Blacks Vote For Democrats Today Because Democrats Help Blacks Prosper?

A:  No.

Democrats first used brutality and discriminatory laws to stop blacks from voting for Republicans. 

Democrats today use deception and government handouts to keep blacks from voting for Republicans.

The dismal record of Democrat leaders in black communities is causing a shift in party identification among black Americans. 

One black newspaper, the Atlanta Daily World, reported that black voter affiliation with the Democratic Party was down to 63 percent and that 32 percent of black Americans identified themselves as Independents.

31. Q:  Did Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Write An Autobiography?

A: No.

The book “The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr.” was written by Professor Clayborne Carson, not Dr. King.

This book was first published in 1998, 30 years after Dr. King was killed.

In reality, the King estate commissioned Dr. Carson to write a book about Dr. King.  It should have been written as a biography. 

Instead, Dr. Carson chose to write the book in the first person, as if he, Dr. Carson, were Dr. King. 

It is hard to determine what is fact in the book and what is conjecture or educated guessing by Dr. Carson, a liberal professor of history at Stanford University and the Director of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute.

32.  Q:  Was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. A Republican?

A:  Yes.

During the civil rights era of the 1960's, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. fought to stop Democrats from denying civil rights to blacks.  It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican as has been affirmed in a video by his niece, Dr. Alveda C. King.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would not have joined the Democratic Party, the party of the Ku Klux Klan and segregation.

Dr. King fought against Democrat Public Safety Commissioner Eugene "Bull" Connor in Birmingham who let loose vicious dogs and turned skin-burning fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators.

Democrat Georgia Governor Lester Maddox famously brandished ax handles to prevent blacks from patronizing his restaurant.  

Democrat Alabama Governor George Wallace blocked the entrance of two black students at the University of Alabama in 1963 and thundered, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever”.  

33.  Q:  Do Democrats Talk Tolerance, But Practice Intolerance?

A: Yes.

While claiming to care about diversity, Democrats readily demean black professionals who do not toe the Democratic Party’s liberal line, denigrating them as "sellouts”, "Uncle Toms”, "House Negroes”, "House N-word", and worse.

34.  Q:  Did Democrats Smear Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?

A:  Yes.

During the 1960’s, Democrats were relentless in their efforts to smear Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and railroad his non-violent civil rights advocacy.

The disparagement of Dr. King by Democrats led to his being physically assaulted and ultimately to his tragic death. 

In March of 1968, while referring to the fact that Dr. King left Memphis, Tennessee after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, former Klansman Democrat Senator Robert Byrd called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited, which motivated Dr. King to return to Memphis a few weeks later where he was assassinated on April 4, 1968.

An egregious act against Dr. King occurred on October 10, 1963.

Democrat President John F. Kennedy gave his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, permission to authorize the wiretapping of Dr. King's telephones by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Wiretaps were placed by the FBI on the telephones in Dr. King's home and office.

The FBI also bugged Dr. King's hotel rooms when he traveled around the country.

The trigger for this unsavory wiretapping was apparently Dr. Kings' criticism of the Kennedy Administration, according to author David Garrow in his book, “Bearing the Cross”.

The justification given by the Kennedy Administration publicly was that two of Dr. King's associates, including David Levinson, had ended their association with the Communist Party in order to work undercover and influence Dr. King.

However, after years of continuous and extensive wiretapping, the FBI found no direct links of Dr. King to the Communist Party.

The unrelenting efforts by Democrats to tarnish Dr. King's reputation continued for years after his death. 

To his credit, Republican President Ronald Reagan made Dr. King’s birthday a federal holiday, ignoring how the Democrats had smeared Dr. King.

35.  Q:  Is The Democratic Party The Party Of The Rich?

A:  Yes.

An article published in the Investor’s Business Daily reveals that “by almost every measure, in fact, it's the Democrats, not the Republicans, who are the party of the rich.”

Details are in the article “Democrats: The Real Party Of The Rich” published by the editorial board of the Investor’s Business Daily.

Among the top 100 individual donors to political groups, more than half gave primarily to Democrats or their allies.

According to, from 1989 to 2014 rich donors gave Democrats $1.15 billion — $416 million more than the $736 million given to Republicans. Among the top 10 donors to both parties, Democrat supporters outspent Republican supporters 2-to-1.

Indeed, a recent book, "The New Leviathan," says donations to Democrats outstrip those to Republicans 7-to-1.  Democrat support soars when unions, universities, superPACs, nonprofits, left-wing interest groups and Wall Street (which overwhelmingly favors Democrats) are included.

So, it is obvious that Democrats don't really want to restrain money in politics as they claim, just the money that goes to Republicans.

Since 2008, the number of people who call themselves middle class has plunged from 53% to 44%, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center.

By President Obama's own admission, he and his party’s policies have led to 95% of all income gains going to the top 1% in income.  This is statistical evidence that the Democratic Party is not the party for the little guy, but, instead, it is the party of the rich.

The truly rich are Democrats who live in big cities on the east and west coasts.  The most notable rich Democrats are the following millionaires and billionaires:

President Barack Obama

Former President Bill Clinton

Former Senator Hillary Clinton

Secretary of State John Kerry

Senator Harry Reid

US Representative Nancy Pelosi

Former Senator Al Gore

Oprah Winfrey

George Soros

Warren Buffett

Bill Gates of Microsoft

Peter Lewis of Progressive Insurance

Tom Steyer, hedge fund manager and environmentalist

36.  Q:  Do Republicans Stop Blacks From Voting With Voter ID Laws?

A:  No.

A poll found that a majority of black voters support voter ID laws.  Also, there is strong support for voter ID laws in every major demographic, including Democrats.  

Voter ID laws passed in states have not resulted wholesale disenfranchisement of black voters, despite the tiresome claims of race agitators.

States that have voter ID laws provide a free ID for anyone who does not already have a government-issued photo ID. 

It’s an insult to say that black Americans are too stupid to acquire an ID.  In fact, all Americans, including black Americans, must present an ID to do business in a bank, fly an airplane, get government benefits or visit the White House.

37.  Q:  Is The Democratic Party The Party Of Socialism?

A:  Yes.

Just as Democrats built their economic power base on the backs of poor blacks during the time of slavery, Democrats today have built their political power base on the backs of poor blacks.  The despicable election-year strategy of the Democrats is to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats.

Democrats have been running black communities for the past 50+ years and turned those communities into economic and social wastelands with their failed socialist policies.  Yet, Democrats have the gall to blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions caused by the Democrats.

A clear-eyed view which exposes how Nazism is a form of socialism, an ideology that seeks to destroy capitalism and make everyone equally poor, can be found in the article “Leftists become incandescent when reminded of the socialist roots of Nazism” by Daniel Hannan.

SOCIALISM… “A philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.  Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery..." 

- Winston Churchill

38.  Q:  Do Republicans Cut Programs For Poor Blacks?

A:  No.

Since the beginning of the so-called War on Poverty, over $22 trillion has been spent on poverty programs that have created a culture of dependency.

The devastation in urban cities that are run by Democrats is the consequences of 50 years of failed progressive social  policy, where federal transfers are substituted for fathers in families. 

Democrats prop up failing public-school systems at the behest of teachers unions, turning the schools into jobs programs for teachers, rather than learning centers for children.

The problem with black poverty is not money – and it is not the Republican Party. 

Even though blacks refuse to vote for Republicans to be their community leaders, Republicans still take actions at the state and federal levels to help blacks prosper.  Republicans believe in providing a safety net for those in need who can’t help themselves, while giving a hand up to the able bodied who want to work hard to prosper.

Democrats want to provide happiness to blacks (give them a fish so they can eat for a day). 

Republicans want to help blacks pursue happiness (teach blacks how to fish so they can feed themselves for a lifetime).

39.  Q:  Have Republican Leaders Helped Blacks Lately?

A:  Yes.

Facts about how two recent Republican presidents—President Ronald Reagan and President George W. Bush—helped black Americans prosper are illustrative.

President Ronald Reagan initiated free-enterprise policies that fostered the economic growth of the 1980s and produced black prosperity, with more black Americans working than ever before in better jobs and for higher wages.

More black Americans stayed in high school, graduated and went on to college, and black business flourished, creating wealth in the black community.

Indeed, between 1982 and 1988, total black employment increased by 2 million, a staggering sum. That meant that blacks gained 15 percent of the new jobs created during that span, while accounting for only 11 percent of the working-age population.

The black executive ranks also prospered under Reagan. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reported that the number of black managers and officers in corporations with 100 or more employees increased by 30 percent between 1980 and 1985.

All told, the middle class increased significantly and constituted more than 40 percent of black households by the end of Reagan's presidency.

President George W. Bush appointed more blacks to high-level positions than any president in our nation’s history and spent record money on education, job training and health care. 

President Bush also spent $18.8 million for Historically Black Colleges, $24 billion for small business loans and grants, and $10 billion for Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance for the poor.

Under President Bush, access to free community health centers was extended to 2.2 million poor people, starting in 2001. 

In May 2003, President Bush provided $15 billion, three times more money than President Bill Clinton, to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean.

During President Bush’s tenure, our country had its longest run of uninterrupted job growth -- 52 straight months, or six straight years, with 8.3 million jobs created. GDP grew by more than 17 percent from 2000 to 2007, a remarkable gain of nearly 2.1 trillion dollars—growth thanks to President Bush’s tax cuts.

Notably, all Americans received tax cuts under President Bush’s tax cut plan—108 million families received $2,500. 

Also, over 3.8 million more poor people were freed from the tax rolls entirely, and poor blacks received an additional gift of $1,000 per child plus $1,658 per family under the Earned Income Tax Credit program.

40.  Q:  Has President Obama Caused Great Harm To Blacks?

A:  Yes.

In his book, “Dreams From My Father”, President Barack Obama described what he and other Democrats do to poor blacks as “plantation politics”. 

During the first two years that President Obama occupied the White House, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.  President Obama could have implemented any legislation or ieconomic policies he so desired.

The laws and policies President Obama implemented resulted in the worst economic recovery since World War II.  The article  “On Poverty, Obama Is Hypocritical and Clueless” by John Hinderaker provides details.

By executive fiat, President Obama eliminated the work requirements for welfare, thus killing welfare reform, eliminating the job training and child care assistance that helped poor blacks get out of poverty.   

While Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, one of President Obama’s first acts as president was to defund the District of Columbia’s Opportunity Scholarship fund.   When Republicans gained control of the House and the Congress was in a tense budget showdown with the White House, Republican Speaker of the Hours of Representatives, John Boehner, personally saw to it that the program was revived.

Then President Obama, after having attended a private school himself while a teenager and sending his own children to a private school, sued the state of Louisiana to stop that state’s school choice program designed to get poor children out of failing schools.

Here is an article on this subject by the editorial board of The Washington Post:  “The Justice Department bids to trap poor, black children in ineffective schools.”

President Obama with his socialist policies also created high black unemployment—over 11 percent. 

During President Obama’s tenure, the black poverty rate hit a record high of 27 percent and a record number of the middle class was put on food stamps. 

President Obama included just one black community in his much touted “Promise Zones” initiative.  An article about this slap in the face is “Only one of Obama’s Promise Zones is majority-Black.

He also Included NO black Americans in a seminar that was advertised as forging business partnerships with Africa.  An article about this egregious exclusion is “Blacks Missing from U.S.-Africa Business Forum”.

President Obama took heat for being “hostile” toward Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). A number of leaders, including the chair of the White House Advisory Board on HBCUs, were highly critical of President Obama. Below are several articles exposing the discontent.

BET: Does The White House Understand The Value Of An HBCU Education?

Crew of 42: President Obama Said To Be Critical Of HBCUs During CBC Meeting

Black Press USA: More Evidence of Obama’s Hostility Toward HBCUs

NewsOne: Dr. William Harvey on the State of HBCUs: “Disappointed and Saddened”

Philadelphia Tribune: Obama’s community college plan would hurt HBCUs

Black Press USA: Is President Obama Trying To Kill Black Colleges? (Part 1)

Black Press USA: Is President Obama Trying To Kill Black Colleges? (Part 2)