Hawkins of Big Journalism points out that Rush Limbaugh was correct when he stated that Pelosi and Hoyer were moving Rep. Clyburn, a black democrat, to the back of the bus in order to guarantee that they, two white folks, would hold the key positions on the Democrat side of the House. Hawkins also points out the hypocrisy of Al "racial ambulance chaser" Sharpton accusing Limbaugh of "race-baiting". Sharpton is the person who is guilty of race-baiting.Source URL: https://outlawrepublican.blogspot.com/search/label/Al%20Sharpton Visit Out law republican for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
So, Al Sharpton speaks at least half the truth for once. This is socialist health care. I would guess that about half of the citizens that voted for Obama did vote for him because of his socialist beliefs. When Obama said to "Joe the Plumber" that he intended to spread the wealth that should have been a clue to people of Obama's socialist beliefs. But, some may have been so enamoured with his smoke and mirrors slogan of "hope" and change" that they drank his Kool-aid and ignored the reality of his socialist and radical beliefs. Obama tried to appear as a centrist on the campain trail. Now, it is self-evident that the people who were not educated in the area of politics got snookered when they thought that they were voting for a centrist and in fact ended up voting for an avowed Leftist who surrounds himself with radicals, Socialists, Communists and Marxists, and has sorrounded himself with these types of people for years. Voters didn't want a Bush-like or a Bush-lite candidate like McCain so they voted for a political candidate that was different. But, I doubt that half of voters actually were voting for socialist medicine. They were voting for "change" and health care reform, but not this type of health care "reform". The aforementioned-Communism, Socialism, Marxist- are all related to one another. It just depends how radical the individual is, as to which of these political ideologies the person chooses to follow. Of course the poor want a free handout. Who really wants to work? Not many people. But, most people take the responsibility and initiative to take care of themselves and their own needs. Of course its different if the person is truly sick and can't take care of themselves. The sick deserve charity. They deserve to be helped. Socialists, like Obama, are just cheating the poor out of having a sense of fulfillment and personal responsibilty by having them indebted to the government. The Democrats are chaining them down like dogs who are laying around just waiting for their next meal or welfare check to come along. Conservatives see them as an indivisual human being with needs and not just a part of the collective. Conservatives love to help lift people up and help them better themselves. They want to help the poor be successful and make as much money as possible. Conservatives value that entrepreneurial spirit, want people to achieve their goals, while socialists limit the individuals' success and ability to achieve their goals in life. Yes, Al Sharpton, Obama's policies are at the least socialist and this health care bill is bad for America, and goes against everything that the Founders fought to achieve for this country-Liberty and Freedom. We will fight back, like revolutionaries, and repeal this Obamascare bill.
Over the years, I have been taught that the word Negro is racist. The 2010 Census includes the word Negro as a classification for a person's race. Why would the Census use the word Negro along with African-American and black? That doesn't make sense to me. The word Negro harkens back to at least the days of Jim Crow and has a racist connotation, so why would our government be encouraging racism, or such divisiveness among Americans by using the word Negro? Is this one more example of our government muddying the waters? IMHO, it seems like the use of word Negro is racist. But, maybe the word really isn't racist? On one hand, I have heard some people from within the Black Community, and The New Black Panthers who have expressed concerns and outrage over this wording on the census. But, I haven't heard anything from the "big shots", or the black community's spokesman on African-American issues - Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. If Bush was still president today, do you think that Sharpton and Jackson would have spoken out by now and called on an outcry from African-Americans to speak and claim that Bush was a racist because of the census wording? I have a suspicion that both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would have spoken out by now if Bush was still the President today. The Census Bureau spokesman Jack Martin said the use of "Negro" was intended as a term of inclusion.
But, on the other hand, others believe differently, like Stanley Crouch in his article states:
"As the Census Bureau begins embedding a test in the 2010 census that "will measure the effect of removing the term 'Negro' on reports about a person's racial identity," my preference is not with those who either feel insulted or think "Negro" outdated and derogatory. That actually applies to another N-word.
As a writer, I find the term African-American unwieldy. I use terms like Negro, black, and am sometimes tempted to use colored because that range of skin tones is so undeniably epic. All of them are no more than words, but there is something far from backward about the sound of Negro and the magnificent people who used that word to describe themselves. They gave it majesty; they made it luminous. They inspired, organized and led what amounted to our most recent civil war. They welcomed all comers as they went about removing the teeth from the Grand Dragons of Southern racism."
"Of course, hip hop has demeaned millions for the making of millions and used it at every chance. But that's another story. "
So, is the word Negro a word of praise and inspiration that has been twisted over the years to seem like it has a racist connotation? Or is the word really racist?
