Why I (a black woman) left the Democratic Party

page: 8
82
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Why do people blindly follow either party - it's Coke versus Pepsi.

Both party's are controlled by the same globalist puppet masters.




posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 06:39 AM
link   
Glad that you see the Democratic party for what it is. I've tried pointing many of the same issues to hardline democrat black voters over the years and they all say the same thing, "My Grandparents voted Democrat, my parents voted Democrat and I will always vote Democrat, no matter what!". All I ask of these people is to choose what party they belong to honestly and for themselves. I believe the Democrat party has done more to keep black people in America more oppressed than any other group, via social welfare and social programs.

For further reading, check out the origins of Planned Parenthood and its ethnic cleansing founder, Margaret Sanger.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Just remember when GW Bush shook Obama's hand, and then turned to an aid who squirted hand cleaner into his hands so he could wash them. Pretending Republicans are pro civil rights and Democrats are not, is ludicrous. However, neither party really cares about their base, they just posture to get votes. Especially on abortion.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


And that's my entire problem with the welfare system in this country. There are marked disincentives to work, and you get shot in the foot any time you try to better yourself. The concept of social safety nets is good, I think, but they have to be structured the right way. Problem is, politicians lack the common sense to do so.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by muse7

In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to the Republican Party strategy of winning elections in Southern states by exploiting anti-African American racism and fears of lawlessness among Southern white voters and appealing to fears of growing federal power in social and economic matters (generally lumped under the concept of states' rights).


Seems like you are just suffering from Stockholm Syndrome


Yes, because she couldn't possibly be rational or intelligent.

OP: Good thread. Leaving the Democratic party shows a level of maturity that is sorely missing in the U.S.

S&F

/TOA



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Now I do not lean toward any political party but wasn't it Clinton who enacted welfare reform ? Hes a democrat I think.
Yes here it is .......(quoted from wikipedia)

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA)

The bill was a cornerstone of the Republican Contract with America and was introduced by Rep. E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-FL-22) who believed welfare was partly responsible for bringing immigrants to the United States.[1] Bill Clinton signed PRWORA into law on August 22, 1996

The bill's primary requirements and effects included the following:

Ending welfare as an entitlement program;
Requiring recipients to begin working after two years of receiving benefits;
Placing a lifetime limit of five years on benefits paid by federal funds;
Aiming to encourage two-parent families and discouraging out-of-wedlock births.
Enhancing enforcement of child support.
So it looks like both parties wanted the system fixed and worked TOGETHER to make the bill pass.

I only post this because I see the good and bad in both parties, so to bash the Dems on this is somewhat unfair in my opinon.
Deny Ignorance.....have a good day.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Its easy to say why you don't like a certain Party (Dem).

So tell me, What wonderous things will the GOP do for a "black woman".



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Your friend may think she has got it all figured out. However, later this year when the planned economic collapse occurs, she will starve to death in her Section 8 housing. Anyone who relies on the Government to survive is already dead....they just don't know it yet. Sadly, this is all planned. Don't think so? Go try and deface THE GEORGIA GUIDESTONES - you'll be Beat-Tased-Cuffed-Jailed faster than you can say Welfare check!!!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Love your post, but one thing to watch out for: the two-party system is an oke-doke. There is one party of them vs. the party of us( us being the American people as a whole). If republicans actually behaved the way they spoke, you'd be right on point.

But they don't.

To be honest, you'd be better off as a registered independent, and life your life based on your values, which you refine(I'm sure you know what they are, I'm saying make them even better) via critical thought, and not buying anyone's program. Both parties are not parties at all.

They are both controlled by unseen hands.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Honestly I feel a constitutional republic (what our country was founded as) is based on bottom-up ‘management’ not top-down ‘regulation’ [democracy]. I often use this analogy for why democracy is dangerous. If 51% vote to make wearing a red shirt illegal… then it would be. In a constitutional republic 99% of the people could not do this… The People’s Democratic States of America is what we should change our name to because we do not deserve to be called the ‘United States’. Why you ask? Simple because we must be different to be united, a HUGE centralized government does not allow for this. NDAA + Drones = We are all @*&$^#. This is what a democracy has led us to. All the ‘party’ talk whether it be: repub, demo, commy, liber, tea,.. etc. this is group think and makes the idea that we are all sovereign and do not need ‘federal representation’ harder to realize. Go tell someone on the street that they should have as much say in the ‘government’ as their president – it will either be a blessing or a curse in their eyes.

Senge, Peter. 1994. The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. Doubleday. New York. NY

Helen Keller’s two choices – between being protected from harm and distress, and learning to live on her own – illustrate a pervasive dynamic which we call “Shifting the Burden.” Then well-intentioned actions of her parents shifted the burden of responsibility for her welfare (citizens) to themselves (government)…

Shifting the Burden Archetype:

The solution (or solutions) are obvious and immediate; they relieve the problem symptom quickly. But they divert attention away from the real or fundamental source of the problem, which becomes weaker as less attention is paid to it. This reinforces the perception that there is no other way out except the symptomatic solution.

(135-136)
edit on 17-6-2012 by ConspiracyBuff because: (no reason given)
edit on 17-6-2012 by ConspiracyBuff because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by muse7

In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to the Republican Party strategy of winning elections in Southern states by exploiting anti-African American racism and fears of lawlessness among Southern white voters and appealing to fears of growing federal power in social and economic matters (generally lumped under the concept of states' rights).


Seems like you are just suffering from Stockholm Syndrome


Yes, because she couldn't possibly be rational or intelligent.

OP: Good thread. Leaving the Democratic party shows a level of maturity that is sorely missing in the U.S.

S&F

/TOA


unless you join the so called republican party. neither of them are going to fix america.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


I am callin' BS darlin'. The first bit of bull crap story that you relate is so trite and overused that it is laughable. I have lived on "welfare" before and believe me, you cannot have a nice house (sec.8, are you kidding?) nice furniture, lots of food nor a nice car; even with all benefits available. BTW, if she got her car from using a tax-return that would mean that she was working at some sort of job and apparently a fairly good one to have received a return large enough to purchase a car. So, logic would seem to dictate that "your friend" was either working and scamming welfare, her boyfriend was paying for everything, or you are lying. Take your pick.

Your second story regarding losing funds because of an arbitrary cut-off does have somewhat a ring of truth to it, but again, it also smells just a bit. Most programs aimed at single mother's in school have time limits and require one to re-register every few months. Most qualifications are based on income and need, not how long you have been on the program. I find it funny that you could just tell them to shove it. This would say to me that you did not need the assistance to begin with, as most of us who have had to rely on the system know that to just walk away will leave you completely destitute, especially if you are going to school and have a child to provide for.

And then you go on to parrot all of the tired BS spouted by those who try to divide and conquer by using the old "southern democrat' garbage, which is totally irrelevant today.

There are lots of reasons to change parties, in the end it doesn't make a whole lot of difference. Your post sounds just like the stuff I read all the time from people who try to justify their dislike of social programs, their fear of minorities and why an oligarchy is good for "the poor".

I am pretty sure you are not black and I doubt you are even a woman. Know why? Because you never speak of your child in the entire rant. That is not the way mommies roll.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


You seem to be totally obsessed with politics, to the point that it has taken over your life and you have joined that group of very annoying people that posts on a forum that has nothing to do with politics. You will therefore be far more at home as a Republican than as a Democrat



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Oh you poor confused person.

I don't think I even need to point out your flaws in your story about someone living a lavish lifestyle on welfare
That is obviously a distorted story.

But I will focus on this


It was the Democratic Party who:

upheld the slavery institution/ rebelled against the gov't that freed the slaves/ formed the KKK as a terrorist arm to scare newly voting blacks into the democratic party/ developed the 'Southern Strategy' to trick blacks into voting democratic forever, in exchange for lifelong entitlements

It was the Republican Party who:

freed the slaves / voted blacks in the Congress/ enacted the Civil Rights/ was against segregation/ tried to educate misinformed blacks that lifelong entitlement was just like the 'plantation.


Let me correct that for you:

It was the Conservatives who:

upheld the slavery institution/ rebelled against the gov't that freed the slaves/ formed the KKK as a terrorist arm to scare newly voting blacks into the democratic party/ developed the 'Southern Strategy' to trick blacks into voting democratic forever, in exchange for lifelong entitlements

It was the Liberals who:

freed the slaves / voted blacks in the Congress/ enacted the Civil Rights/ was against segregation/ tried to educate misinformed blacks that lifelong entitlement was just like the 'plantation.


You need to learn the history of the parties and realize that the ideologies of the parties have changed throughout history.


I feel sorry for you, because you have bought into lies from Conservative talking heads.




Fredrick Douglas / Madam CJ Walker/ Harriet Tubman/ Sojourner Truth/ Rev Martin Luther King Jr, and Sr


These people were all Liberals. Ideologies don't change...party labels and platform does....none of these people above would be modern day Republicans.
edit on 17-6-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
An ideological shift occurred in American politics in the 20th century. As anyone who investigates the issue recognizes, the parties, in some ways, exchanged viewpoints. The Republican Party today would have been members of the Democratic Party in prior times.

Indicating an uneasiness with the contemporary Democratic Party because of the past, particularly with regard to the South or Civil War-era politics is denying oneself reality. This is pretty widely known and accepted. To eschew this is a big red flag of disingenuousness.

In addition, to profess a lack of religious interest, tolerance and support for abortion, then to indicate an allegiance to Republican Party ideals is severely inconsistent. Yes, it is often that an individual does not buy into the entirety of a party's platform. But these three issues, in particular, are fairly core to the modern Republican Party. And since they seem to be issues of note to people, they typically are major influences on party alignment.

One is not going to feel at home in the Republican Party if one does not want religion shoved down one's throat, anyone else's throat or society's throat. One is not going to feel at home in the Republican Party if one believes in tolerance and that all people should have the same rights and no one should be allowed to infringe on others'. One is certainly not going to feel at home in the Republican Party if one supports the right to have abortion options legal.

These three key issues (separation of church and state, tolerance and freedom, the right to have a choice) are anathema to the Republican Party. To suggest this party meets one's needs when the party is so diametrically opposed to such core issues is akin to repeatedly banging one's head against a door with the expectation that, at some point, it's going to stop hurting.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
I don't trust either party. They're the same corporate controlled entity.

Yes, welfare is being abused in the US. I see it all the time. I usually get called heartless when I point this out, but I know this to be true.

I hope people aren't calling Obama a socialist because he wants everyone to pay the private insurance companies
. Lobbies bring the most hilarious solutions. "Are you having a problem buying insurance because you can't afford it? Well, just live on rice and water, because now you have to buy it." The medical industry is going to live and live well.

Socialism is about equality. It's not about giving to the lazy. It's not about a good ole boy network empowering and enriching themselves at the expense of the citizen. This is what we have.

These good ole boys hold power over us, as they have the money and organizational skills to keep the power. They have the police, FBI, the military, etc at their command. They run the US. They buy off the poor. People have been manipulated into complacency. They broadcast propaganda to inspire others to become just like them. Why fight a system that gives people all this "hope"? People will literally fight to remain slaves.

You cannot vote these people out. You cannot defeat these people in any way. You will be publicly humiliated or killed. You can only leave the system. You have to form self sufficient communes. You have to ween yourselves from your masters.
edit on 17-6-2012 by gentledissident because: commas, it's always commas



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


So on the whole many black people vote blindly for the Democrats and many rich / white people blindly vote for the Republicans?

I think most people know this...



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Forgot to mention: This threat sounds a lot like some tea party chain emails. The tone of the post is very similar to people saying "I don't hate black people, I have many black friends...but let me tell you that racist joke...". Very suspicious, and most definitely not logical at all



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
S&F for the OP. I'm glad someone finally said it, and a black woman no less! Thanks for bringing some sanity to this forum.

I have to say though, I despise both parties, and every election day I die a little more inside being forced to vote for the "lesser of two evils". The coming election will be the worst ever, since we'll have a choice of an anti-constitutional anti-2nd amendment, pro-illegal immigrant, healthcare-nazi liberal, and Barack Obama. Anyone else notice that the red/blue line gets thinner and thinner each election? I will go so far as to say that 2012 is the year that will be remembered as the year that the U.S. became a single-party system.


Originally posted by benrl
Im Hispanic, was raised in a "democrats" household, I left after Obama got the primary. Now I am registered republican, but honestly I lean Dem on some issues and Rep on other.

I can't see voting for either in the upcoming elections, don't know what ill vote.

No one party represents even 50 % of what I believe.
edit on 16-6-2012 by benrl because: (no reason given)


Truth is, you're the average American. I have met very very few people in my life that agree with either party even 80%. That was exactly the appeal of Ron Paul. If you're open minded and really look at his stance on the issues that count, he is the best of both parties. That's exactly why he never had a chance - he's a uniter, and the Democrats and Republicans need division to survive, and collude to keep it that way.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Why I (a white man) is responding to your thread!

I find it awkward and nonconstructive that you focus so much on race.
Race is really just an issue for black people!
What legitimacy to an argument does bringing up the pigmentation of ones skin bring to it?





new topics
top topics
 
82
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join