One thing that Democratic politicians can count on in every election is the black vote.


Presumably because Democrats and liberals are more tolerant and  care more about the poor.

Republicans, on the other hand, are racists and care only about the rich.

Walter E. Williams is black and an economist and you can be sure he’s not a Democrat or a liberal:

“According to an American Community Survey, by the U.S. Census Bureau, the top 10 poorest cities with populations more than 250,000 are Detroit, with 33 percent of its residents below the poverty line; Buffalo, N.Y., 30 percent; Cincinnati, 28 percent; Cleveland, 27 percent; Miami, 27 percent; St. Louis, 27 percent; El Paso, Texas, 26 percent; Milwaukee, 26 percent; Philadelphia, 25 percent; and Newark, N.J., 24 percent.

The most common characteristic of these cities is that for decades, all of them have been run by Democratic and presumably liberal administrations. Some of them — such as Detroit, Buffalo, Newark and Philadelphia — haven’t elected a Republican mayor for more than a half-century. What’s more is that, in some cases for decades, the mayors of six of these high-poverty cities have been black Americans.”


You say, “What’s the point, Williams?” Let’s be clear about it. I’m not stating a causal relationship between poverty and Democratic and/or black political control over a city. What I am saying is that if one is strategizing on how to help poor people, he wants to leave off his list of objectives Democratic and black political control of cities. According to Albert Einstein (attributed), the definition of insanity is “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”





Be Sociable, Share!
Share →


  1. Heisenberg says:

    Two centuries ago, a somewhat obscure Scotsman named Tytler made this profound observation: “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.”
    People dependent on government vote for democrats. Democrats keep them dependent on government to keep them voting for Democrats.

    • That’s exactly why we don’t live in a democracy. The founders despised them. James Madison said he couldn’t find any clause in the constitution that gave the government the power to take money from its constituents for the purpose of “benevolence.”

    • Blasto says:

      I am not dependent on Government whatsoever and usually vote Democrat. I know of many others who feel and do the same. It’s been shown and proven on this board ad naseum that the “red” states are really the welfare queens

  2. Dr. Phibes says:

    You could also ask why the Jewish vote goes so strongly to the left when most Dems would be perfectly fine with Israel being erased off the map.

    • Tim says:

      I’m pretty sure that 78% of Jews wouldn’t have voted for Obama in 2008 if that was the case.

    • Blasto says:

      Man are you guys full of shit, what Dem is that who is O.K. with “Israel being wiped off the map?”

      • Dr. Phibes says:

        Neil Abercrombie-D Hawaii: “In another instance on Feb. 15, 2006, Abercrombie was the only member of the House to vote against a straight-forward resolution saying the United States should never give financial aid to the Palestinian Authority if the party is controlled by members who are calling for Israel’s destruction.”

        Maybe this was just a vote by an extemist anonymous congressman in 2006? Hardly; Abercrombie was a 10-term congressman and is now the governor of Hawaii.

        Here’s John Dingell – D Michigan stating clearly that he is not against Hezbollah; Yes, he means THAT Hezbollah, one of the largest terrorist organizations in the world, who will happily tell you of their goal to wipe Israel off the map. The ones who bombed the Marine barracks in Beirut, remember?

        But Dingell is just a fringe Democrat right?……..not exactly. He’s the longest serving member of the House (ever) and is the current Dean of the House. Kind of mainstream.

        Plenty more examples out there that you can look up on your own.

        Bald guy: Jewish vote went 78% to Obama in 2008 and 74% to Kerry in 2004. That is not a wash. Brainwashed maybe, but not a wash.

        The disconnect is not so much that the Jews love the Dems, but that they fear the Christian-heavy Republicans. Christians vs Jews as well as Muslims vs. Jews are 2 games that go back thousands of years. While the Muslims are more dangerous, they are “over there” while the not quite as dangerous Christians are “over here”. Voting against the enemy next door outweighs the enemy far away. Hence, the Dem stronghold.

        • Blasto says:

          You are right “Dr.” Phibes- that proves that “most Dems would be perfectly fine with Israel being wiped off the map.” Thanks for clearing that up.

    • bald guy says:

      Being Jewish, I can give you some insights as to why most Jewish Americans are Democrats. When it comes to Israel, there is strong support both among Democrats and Republicans. It’s a wash. Your rhetoric about Democrats wanting Israel wiped off the map is nonsense.

      When it comes to other issues of importance to Jewish Americans, like separation of Church and State (e.g. no prayer in public schools), maintaining a woman’s right to choose (given that in Judaism life does not begin at conception), the Democratic positions are more in line with what Jewish Americans believe.

      • oksteelerfan says:

        Prayer in public schools: Democrats will never take prayer out of public schools, they can’t control a person’s thoughts.

        A woman’s right to choose(Judaism life does not begin at conception): When does it start, at birth? Democrats are for late term abortion as well.

        • Lefty says:

          I think a life of an unborn child is one that would be able to sustain life on it’s own.
          But ideally, all abortions would be done in the first trimester. I think even the most ardent pro-choicers agree with that. Nobody wants to see a late term abortion, so please don’t lump the fact that they happen into all pro choicers saying “Late term abortions are great.”
          Let’s use some common sense here.

          • So it’s OK to kill the unborn baby 84 days after concepton, but it’s not OK on day 85? That may make the person killing the baby feel less guilty but it’s not a very good deal for the baby. Technology will eventually make it impossible to make that argument, anyway. And millions of women will have to find another birth control method.

          • JimGott says:

            “Technology will eventually make it impossible to make that argument,anyway. And millions of women will have to find another birth control method.”

            -When this happens (which can’t come soon enough) it may make the war on women go nuclear. Can’t wait to hear ole Sandy Fluke tell us that all of this new technology is just another ploy by evil, women hating conservatives in this country to take away the “rights” of women.

          • oksteelerfan says:

            Nobody wants to see it but the Democratic President is in favor of it. That doesn’t make sense at all to me. If you don’t want to see it then you should be in favor of banning it. If you’re put in the position of actually being able to cast a vote on it, you cast a vote that says I won’t see it.

            If late term abortions are bad, you don’t support them. It’s pretty simple.

            I don’t claim to know or understand Jewish law but I did find an article that seems to say there is disagreement.
            It almost seems to me from reading this article that abortion on demand is not supported.

            I honestly don’t know how anyone male or female but especially female can look at pictures on this site and be okay with abortion.

  3. RKR says:

    Those of you that hate Rush Limbaugh, I challenge you to tune in to his show when Walter Williams is the guest host.

    You will not have to hear Rush, and Williams will teach you more about economics in three hours than you learned in a whole class in school.

  4. Gary M says:

    A young, hip, charismatic African American runs for president of the united states and pulls something like 97% of the African American vote.
    An old, rich, white, establishment democrat runs for president of the united states and pulls something like 95% of the African American vote.
    At some point, you have to ask, how much leverage does your demographic have with a 2% swing. And a demographic that historically, doesn’t come out to vote.
    But those were the numbers between Obama’s run and Kerry’s run.
    If Kerry had just one single change, the moniker republican, instead of democrat, what do you think his number would have been?

  5. Forbes St. Clair says:

    I’m wondering when the black community will start calling Williams an Uncle Tom.

    • Dave says:

      I’m sure he’s been hearing that for years. He and Thomas Sowell are the polar opposites of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

    • bald guy says:

      Sounds like you’re just fine criticizing people for what you think they might say.

      Using your logic, I’m wondering when you’ll use the “N” word.

      • Paul says:

        Who was criticized? Forbes asked “when”. And people are free to use the “N” word or whatever else they might want to say.

      • Forbes St. Clair says:

        Sorry I didn’t look this up before I posted but see the article below. Here is Former NAACP President Benjamin Hooks who called people like Sowell and Williams “a new breed of Uncle Tom … some of the biggest liars the world ever saw.”

        Sorry Bald Guy, I hate to use facts to defend my point but I figured you needed something to reference before you start to insinuate that I am a racist. I feel like a lazy prognosticator, it’s my fault for not posting this article sooner.

  6. VinceL says:

    After LBJ’s “War on Poverty” policies were implemented,the 2 parent black family was devastated.Out of wedlock births skyrocketed.Single women are the strongest Democrat voting bloc.Lefty the poltician comes along and says I’ll take care of you if you keep me in power.Government is your daddy.I don’t give a damn how much the government spends or cuts or who the president is or what party is in power.It’s a social problem and it can only be solved by individuals in their homes and families. What’s happened to the black male? They can’t even find enough black men to serve as pastors in churches. Despite this,the term “family values’ has been derided and mocked by the left. The greatest cure for poverty is a stable family.

  7. Tim says:

    A big part of the reason that blacks are dependent on the government is because the stupid government has made criminals out of many of them simply because they have used or sold drugs. With a criminal record they are unemployable.

    • Forbes St. Clair says:

      The stupid government and their “laws”. I’m sure criminal records are the only thing keeping these drug users/sellers from obtaining a job.

  8. saneman says:

    Trayvon Martin was gunned down by some psycho with a superhero complex for simply walking down to his dad;s house with a SKITTLES and Iced Tea. The cops, instead of checking the mental state or the intentions of the shooter, Zimmerman, decide to take his side and whitewash the incident. This is not even a case of a split second confusion. The cops are excusing their inaction saying that the Stand Your Ground law renders them helploess to do anything., BULLCRAP. By their interpretation of the law, then anyone can say they felt threatened by anyone and chase them and gun them down . This guy Zimmerman was even cautioned by the 911 guy not to follow the “suspect”.

    Why do I bring this up? FOX NEWS did very little on such an outrageous incident but will spend loads of time talking about some controversial speech by a preacher Obama went to years ago or some other birther thing. They will go over the stupidity of some trivial regulation gone wild and focus on that. But when it comes to this, they stay quiet. Has a single Republican seen fit to condemn the cops for their inaction and possible coverup(they released an edited version of the 911 tape initially after much pressure).

    Why do you think most blacks are going to vote republican under such circumstances? Read up on Robbie Tolan, a case in which Bryant Gumbel’s Real Sports (Bernie Goldberg is part of this show too) covered. He is the son of a former major leaguer and he was a promising player himself and now he is disabled because he was shot in HIS OWN HOME. No disciplinary action at all on the cops who did this because the conservative jury and mayor supported these cops.

    People lost their crap over the OJ incident. But I would rather he get convicted than any of these numerous injustices that still happen.

    I am disappointed you didn’t point this out in your blog as you have seen fit to comment on many other trivial annoyances that go on in the country. But I dont know why you didn’t find this outrageous. I am a libertarian from the liberal side. You try to say you are a libertarian bent person from the right. But this is one area where I would expect common ground. An innocent person of any race should be expected to walk without getting harrassed , let alone shot.

    • Blasto says:

      I wonder how quickly the shooter would be apprehended if it was a black man shooting a white kid…..any guesses??

      • Dan says:

        Statewide manhunt.

          • saneman says:

            Even now, you dont see much from FOX or even Bill O Reilly who loves to normally cite liberalism gone amuck in cases where some poor innocent guy got shot by a thug and the thug is being let off on some technicality and the liberals get blamed for it. And actually the few times I support O Reilly is when he did get on these cases. But for whatever reason, FOX has been eerily quiet on this case. Just to show how simplistic repulbican lawmakers can be when they set laws. Now, the Stand Your Ground law should not excuse what Zimmeman did. BUt the conservative police chief is on record using that same law as an excuse not to even collect evidence on the scene. Shouldnt he have collected the gun and leave it to the DA whetehre this guy’s actions are covered under Stand Your Ground? How dumb are these people to say that Zimmerman said he acted out of self defense , so there is nothing they could have done on the scene. Can you imagine the excyse every single person can use if they decide to shoot someone in a range of situations – whether they just feel like it, or whetehr they are paranoid, or whether they are on the losing end of a fistfight that they started,?

            Even if you believe every tiny thing that Zimmerman said to the cops, does that excuse shooting him? Can you imagine if I decide to pick a fight outside a bar in that town and if some guy is beating the crao out of me, instead of taking my lumps like a man , I decide to not endure any more pain and shoot the guy to avoid further injury because at that point it will be very easy for me to use self defense. And the sad thing is the cops should not have believed every little thing Zimmerman said. Collect all evidence and let the DA decide the law.

          • franji1 says:

            O’Reilly spent a whole segment on this tonight (3/22). He and Megan Kelly both agreed that the police are idiots, happy that the State has taken over the case, and they were very concerned about the state will have a much harder time investigating this case against Zimmerman.

            They were in agreement that this was probably NOT a hate crime, but definitely a 2nd degree murder charge.

            That doesn’t sound like they’re ignoring it or even DEFENDING Zimmerman – on the contrary, they think he’s toast.

          • saneman says:

            Wow, a month later. I am glad O reilly finally did something. What about others on FOX. Anyone else condemn the police inaction? Gingich spends more time bashing Obama over the son comment than bashing the cops. This case is wrong on so many levels. Technially, if a black guy sees Bill Lee out of uniform, he would be justified in shooting him accoridng to Lee’s interpretation of the law because the black guy just saw a guy (Lee) who thinks he is a criminal and could shoot him , and to be proactive, he can take out Lee. Same with Zimmerman. What is going to stop any black guy from shooting Zimmerman on the street as they can claim Zimmerman is a threat to all black people in hoodies as Zimmerman as proven that he will shoot someone unarmed and poses a legitimate threat to any unarmed black guy. Has Santorum said anything about the cop inaction? The white Democrats actually have been pretty cowardly about this. Even now the cops say Zimmerman is justified. Why dont they leave it to the prosecutor to judge that? All the evidence is gone. ZImmerman can throw that gun anywhere.

          • oksteelerfan says:

            There is black on black crime almost every single day in this country and I don’t see the outrage. The same as I never see the outrage when it’s black on white crime.
            This wasn’t even white on black crime, he’s Hispanic/White and his lack of arrest makes no sense.
            However, a few years ago a white man shot and killed a young white boy, similar circumstances he thought he looked suspicious and he was never charged with a crime because it was determined to be self defense. It never made national news, I’m not sure it ever even made it on local news. The story was written in a local small newspaper and didn’t even make the front page of it. I thought when I read about it how could they never have arrested this man and it’s always stuck with me the injustice of it.

          • Dan says:

            They didn’t have a 911 tape of that guy ignoring te operator’s plea to stand down. The racial component isn’t the only factor here. We have a guy on tape moments before killing the kid. He’s guilty as hell.

            Check out this column. It gives a great perspective on the burden of black youth and how they always have to be wary of how something like this could happen to them. He was on Real Time last night and described how it’s really hard to be able to relate to the constant pressure black youth are under. He described how in total control of your body you must be at all times in public – there’s a cop on the corner and his eyes fixate on you the second he becomes aware of your presence. Don’t reach for your waist at any time. Don’t run down the street. Don’t make any sudden movements that someone could take the wrong way just because you are black. It really is a problem and I’ve witnessed if firsthand, I’ve just never been able to put it in words as well as Blow has.


          • I saw the guy last night and I was impressed by what he said. I think the problem is differentiating between racism and being observant. Blacks are responsible for a ridiculously disproportionate amount of the violent crimes that are committed in America. We can have a long discussion about why that’s the case but it’s an indisputable fact. Jesse Jackson has admitted that, if he were standing at an ATM machine and heard young men’s voices behind him, he would be relieved to find out that they were white. None of this justifies what Zimmerman may have done. If he targeted this kid and killed him for no reason, he should be the poster child for the death penalty. But, the complaint from blacks that they are unfairly pre-judged is misdirected. They need to stop killing each other in such ridiculously high numbers. It’s not a white person’s fault that black cab drivers are reluctant to pick up black men. It’s not a white person’s fault that pizza deliverymen don’t don’t want to go into black neighborhoods. Why would you be surprised when people unfairly expect the worst from you when you celebrate something called gangsta rap? People –black and white –have been conditioned to believe that young black men are dangerous. Not by racism, but by simple observation. I watched a story on ABC yesterday about Larry Holmes and Muhammad Ali. They took Holmes back to the projects where he grew up in Easton, Pa. (Where he still lives.) Holmes said, “It was a lot different then. Nobody locked their doors. We didn’t worry about getting shot…” Then he told a story about how tough his mother was on him if he got in trouble. Walter Williams talk about sleeping out on his front stoop during the summers when he grew up in the Philadelphia projects. Think about all the government programs that we’ve had to help the black community in the last 40 or 50 years. They have made things WORSE. The more money that is thrown at city schools, the worse they become. And 95% of blacks will vote again in November for the same people who have been promising to help them all these years. And the vast majority of them will consider black conservatives who want to emphasize self reliance and hard work to be Uncle Toms. White people can’t fix the problems that young black men have right now. They have to fix it themselves.

          • oksteelerfan says:

            Do you know they didn’t have a 911 tape? I didn’t state they did or didn’t. You don’t know because it never made national news. There was never the outrage there is now. The media and certain people jumped on this only because the kid was black, the shooter was white(although they kind of fudged that one) and the police didn’t care about a dead black kid being killed by their white friend(which once again this was fudged just a little).
            One of the many reasons I don’t watch the local news is because night after night it’s another shooting on the black side of town. It’s downright depressing, these kids have no value for life. I can’t fix their problems and the truth is the only people who have a shot are the people of their race, instead of the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world preaching to them about how they’re disenfranchised and the white man hates them, they should be preaching to them, quit playing the victim and instead become productive citizens. You don’t need the drugs, the gangs, the thug attire, the glock to be bad.

            I’m not saying people don’t judge black kids, but they judge them because of what they hear on the news every night. It’s natural when you hear again and again another black shot someone to be just a little leery of a black kid wearing a hoodie and sagging pants. It’s not because they’re black and it’s not just because they’re wearing a hoodie and sagging jeans, it’s because they fit the profile of the criminal they saw on the news last night.
            Not long ago, there was some guy raping breaking in and raping elderly women who lived alone. They released a sketch of him on tv, he was wearing a stocking cap, white with brown eyes, short and stocky. The cops were running ragged every time some little old lady saw a short white guy wearing a stocking cap walking down the sidewalk or seen going into a house.

            All of this though is beside the point I was trying to make, folks with an agenda wanted this to be a national story because the kid was black, if he had been white or it had been black on black it never would have been anything but on the local news.

          • Dan says:

            John, that’s a very intelligently written response and I appreciate the lengths you took to write it. I agree with you on many points.
            OK, it SHOULD be a national story. I don’t care about what’s ignored, that’s a soft point because there is only so much uncommon news that can be covered. This was uncommon. There is nothing wrong with the attention this story has received.

          • I have no problem with the quantity of attention. It’s the quality that I have a problem with. This is looking more and more like a typical, knee jerk rush to judgement.

          • oksteelerfan says:

            24 hours news Dan and they can only cover so many uncommon news stories? They choose to cover what they think can get the ratings and selling it as white on black crime gets the ratings up for awhile. However, it isn’t exactly true that it’s white on black, it’s a mixed race on black. It’s more about keeping the white man vs black man going. I thought some of this crap would cease once a black man was elected to office, but imho it has only made it worse. Now everything is about race.

  9. Chuck says:

    What Einstein said about the definition of insanity perfectly fits Pittsburgh and it’s succession of Democratic rule for decades and decades.

    • Dan says:

      Yea, Pittsburgh’s become a real shithole since the steel industry collapsed and took all the jobs. I can scantly tell the difference between Pittsburgh and Detroit.

      With the exception of the occasional nasty winter, there’s nowhere else I’d rather live.

      • People I know who have moved to the South are quick to tell me how nice it is there in the Winter. I don’t hear from them in July and August. There is no weather better than what we get in Western Pa. in October.

        • Mason says:

          I am a southern transplant from the north that loves the heat of the summer. I love jumping in the lake with 85 degree water – nice and refreshing, no shivering. I can ride a motorcycle and not get cold everytime I ride in a valley or in the shade. I can keep the top off a convertible after the sun goes down. I can sit out back with a drink at midnight without needing a fire to keep me warm. Southern summer is great.

          You guys can keep your 30 nice days per year. We get about 250 per year down here. We probably don’t have 20 days per year of the dark, dreary, overcast, rainy days that are prevelant up there.

          • A matter of taste. I swim in Lake Erie in the summer. The water temperature is 76. I prefer that to 85 degree bath water. I’ve always owned a convertible and I like it best at night. Riding in a convertible on a summer day in the South is like having a hair dryer blown in your face. I have never felt the need for a fire in the summer time. Althought I do like them on the beach on a cool night in Canada. I would not want the same weather all the time –love the change of seasons. When you go to a high school football game in October, you should be able to see your breath.

          • Dan says:

            I think I’m with you, Mason. That sounds great. Although I enjoy the fall I don’t enjoy the wild swings in temperature from day to night. What state did you move to?

          • Mason says:

            North Carolina. There is a massive influx of northerners throughout the state. It makes it much easier to transition. Most people I run into are from PA, NY, NJ, OH and MI.

            The mountains of NC have very similar weather to PA, more mild and not near as much rain. Highs in the summer range in low to mid 80′s with a coolness in the air. That is the best place to golf in the summer. Golf is one thing that is no fun in the summer down here.

          • franji1 says:

            Upper East Tennessee – all 4 seasons – milder winters, but we still get a few accumulations of snow – and the sun does come out between November and March! Just when you get sick of winter, you’ll get a nice 50 degree sunny day! Spring and Fall are wonderful. Typical summer is 85 degrees – less humidity than Pittsburgh in the summer.

      • JimGott says:

        Yea,Pittsburgh’s become a real shithole since the steel industry collapsed and took all the jobs. I can scantly tell the difference between Pittsburgh and Detroit. ”

        -During the height of the thriving of the steel industry in Pittsburgh, The city had close to 3/4 of a million people living in the city limits. Pittsburgh now has just over 300,000 in city limits. That might not exactly define a shithole, but it is definitely a HUGE drop in population.

        ” With the exception of the occasional nasty winter,there’s nowhere else I’d rather live.”


  10. Karen says:

    If only Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell were the leaders of the Black community instead of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Victimhood and playing the race card would be down significantly.MLK must be rolling over in his grave watching those two clowns erase all his efforts.

    • franji1 says:

      Gotta add Condoleeza Rice to that list. Read her autobiography (or listen to it like I did on CD). She grew up in Birmingham Alabama during the height of Jim Crow laws. She is FOR affirmative action implemented PROPERLY. Smart woman. She put Boris Yeltzin in his place.

      Black – woman – intelligent – loves America – PRO PRO PRO 2nd Ammendment (as in NOT HAVING TO REGISTER YOUR FIRE-ARMS PRO 2nd ammendment). Oh, did I mention this – Republican

  11. bald guy says:

    Given that liberals and moderates were at the forefront of the Civil Rights movement, it’s not surprising that African Americans tend to vote Democratic.

    Sure there were liberal and moderate Republicans during the Civil Rights era, just as there were conservative Democrats at that same time. But the GOP is now a far right party, and the Democrats have moved to the left.

    Given how the GOP votes against issue after issue of importance to African Americans, the surprise would be if they didn’t vote Democratic.

    The GOP wants the black vote, but they’re unwilling to support issues of importance to blacks.

    • You’re completely missing the point. The liberal policies have NOT advanced the cause. They have made things worse. The teachers unions have kept blacks in schools where they have no chance to succeed and they have given millions to the Democratic party. It’s in the Democrat’s interest to maintain the myth that blacks need them to get what’s “fair.” The War on Poverty didn’t reduce poverty. It created a welfare state and led to an astronomical increase in the number of single balck mothers, which leads to more poverty, which leads to more welfare dependence, which give the Dems the opportunity to “save” them from the evil rich people who don’t care about them. The poverty rate for everybody declined tremendously under Ronald Reagan.

      • Mason says:

        The republicans feel that poverty is overcome by a strong economy. It has been proven true. Nancy Pelosi feels the economy is strengthened by more unemployment – her words, not mine.

        It is simple economics. The better off things are in business, the better off things are for everyone. Dems are more worried about saving 2inch smelt than helping the farmers of California. There are examples like that throughout the country. Dems tend to believe the economy just happens, no matter what obstacles they throw in front of it.

        • oksteelerfan says:

          Democrats cut off their nose to spite their face. They’ve taken an anti-farmer stance all in the guise of the environment. Where do they plan on getting their food if they run all the farmers out of business? They like to through around the term “factory farmer” but they’re putting a lot of family farmers out of business.
          I was at a farm bureau meeting last year and a lot that was being discussed was the Obama administration’s anti-farmer proposed and/or instigated regulations. From the insane dust proposal to the now children can’t work on your farm.
          Democrats once upon a time had all farmers in their corner but they’ve lost the majority of their votes and the few that remained have left since Obama came into office.

          • Dan says:

            Yes, they sat around the table and said “We hate farmers, we are anti-farmers, let’s put them out of business. We’ll just word it weird to mask our secret agenda. By the way, we’re not killing enough third trimester fetuses so let’s step up the effort.” That’s how they work. You’ve got it all figured out.

          • oksteelerfan says:

            No, but they do have liberal views and those views have them backed by environmentalists, animal rights groups, you know all those people who are against farms and ranches.
            Now a consumer probably would have a problem (I know an AR activist would) with say the owner/CEO of Tyson or Smithfield working for the USDA, would you not agree? I guess though farmers/ranchers and really anyone involved with animals should have no problem with a former employee of HSUS working for USDA though.
            Just a little information:
            Ms. Conant was employed by the HSUS as a Litigation Attorney immediately before she was hired by the USDA.
            In 2007 Ms. Conant was featured and quoted in a Virginia Law Publication entitled “Humane Society Lawyers Fight Culture of Cruelty, Government Bureaucracy.” One of her quotes included the statement that “Humane Society lawyers are working with legislatures and in the courts to change laws that affect the lives of farm animals,” and that “they are forced to go state by state in this effort because there are very few federal laws regarding farm animals.”
            Ms. Conant’s “Name” has appeared as Counsel of Record for the HSUS on Lawsuits and Complaints filed against Federal Agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission and the U. S. Department of Agriculture, which now is her current employer. (Here it is significant to note that on at least one Lawsuit document that may be found on the HSUS Website, the name of “Sarah L. Conant” was no longer listed as one of the Counsel of Record, even though the originally filed document filed listed her name. Surely the HSUS would not engage in a “COVER-UP!” Or would it?!?!?!?!?!?)
            Ms. Conant worked in the same HSUS Litigation Office that sued the USDA under the Freedom of Information Act last October. This Lawsuit seeks personal, confidential and business sensitive information on every USDA Licensed Breeder in Missouri.

            More information:
            The issue involves a memo issued by the Department of Agriculture last month, on October the 6th, authorizing the Department of Agriculture Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to conduct an animal welfare scientific forum. This forum approved by Undersecretary Edward Avalos on October the 12th. I’d ask unanimous consent to submit the USDA’s memo for the record.

            Mr. President, thank you. The ironic thing about this forum is that there’s little science involved. It is nothing more than, in my view, the Department of Agriculture spending taxpayer dollars on a forum to provide the Human Society of the United States [HSUS] a public forum to espouse its anti-agricultural views. The document speaks for itself in this regard, and on page two the document states that APHIS, the Animal Plant Health Inspection Service, Representatives believe that the Humane Society’s intent is to promote and position the organization to be recognized nationally as influencing APHIS policy on critical and sensitive welfare issues.

            No reason at all though for ag folks to not trust democrats or a democratic administration is there? I’m sure the democratic administration means no harm to farmers and ranchers. I’m sure this meeting and hiring this woman is all about looking out for the best interests of farmers and ranchers.

          • oksteelerfan says:

            Dan, do you have nothing to say about the Obama USDA?

            I would love to see what liberals would have to say if a republican administration put Rick Berman in the USDA.

          • oksteelerfan says:

            Dan, here is another example of the Obama administration not being farmer friendly.


    • Blasto says:

      It’s been my experience that most of the yinzers I know that wouldn’t want to live anywhere else have really never been anywhere else…just an observation.

      • It’s been my experience that a lot of people who want to move to the South have never been there in the Summer.

        • Nate says:

          I’m a former Pittsburgher living in Richmond and I’ll say its a trade off. Yes, the summers are hotter here and can be brutal at times, but the winters are mild and much better than Pittsburgh. Also, spring starts earlier and fall lasts longer, and those are the 2 best seasons anyway.

    • Forbes St. Clair says:

      Bald Guy, do you do any research before making outrageous statements? See the article below. Republicans had a higher percentage of voting for the Civil Rights Act than dems. Your forefathers, Al Gore senior and the ultimate blowhard hypocrite Bob Byrd would have nixed this if they had their way. But by all means, keep blaming the republicans for not supporting civil rights. Republicans trying to reign in an outrageous deficit by limiting government handouts isn’t a race thing it’s a fiscally responsible thing. All races mooch from the government tit, why is this racist?

      • franji1 says:

        Abraham Lincoln – Republican (freed the slaves)
        Dr. Martin Luther King – Republican (father of the Civil Rights movement)
        Name 2 democrats that have done more for African Americans than those 2 men.

        • Dan says:

          Today’s Republicans are so similar to those guys in every way it’s impossible to tell them apart.

          • franji1 says:

            I note the sarcasm.

            Hmm, first black Secretary of State was appointed by A REPUBLICAN IN 2001. Hmm, first black woman to head NSA (National Security Advisor) was appointed by A REPUBLICAN in 2001. First black woman to be Secretary of State was appointed by A REPUBLICAN in 2005.

            BTW, that president was WHITE who JUDGED HIS APPOINTEES by the CONTENT OF THEIR CHARACTER, NOT by the color of their skin.

            But, then again, you’re right, all republicans are white racist bastards.

          • Dan says:

            While I was generalizing much more than addressing the race factor, I’m not going to dispute the facts you just listed. I also don’t think there are very many racist Republican politicians. The claim that most racists are Republicans comes from what Republican VOTERS do and say. All of those first you just listed were appointees placed in power by one individual. When the red state VOTERS nominate a black candidate you’ll have a point. Herman Cain doesn’t count, he didn’t even get close to the nomination, he just decided he was going to run and had a week in the sun like all the rest of them did until now. The difference between Democrats electing Obama and GWB appointing Condoleeza Rice is vast. And that’s not to take anything away from the nobility that Bush displayed in appointing Rice.

          • They never “count” when they’re Republicans. He was leading in the polls in every state until his female problem surfaced.

          • franji1 says:

            If Obama was white, would he have gotten as many votes? If McCain were black, would he have gotten as many votes? I’m gonna say “no” to both, implying that there are just as many racists in both camps.

            But I’d bet that if McCain were conservative and black, he would have gotten more votes than what he got. If Obama were more liberal and white, he still would not have gotten more votes. He would have been Jimmy Carter :-D

          • oksteelerfan says:

            Do you really think Jimmy Carter was that liberal? Jimmy Carter was a horrible President and he was liberal for his time, but I have to admit I’d take a 70′s and 80′s liberal any day over a liberal today as imo they’re way more left now.

  12. Mike V says:

    There are a lot of really good reasons for why blacks should not vote for Democrats. Dr. Williams outlines the economic reasons very well.

    My guess is the main reason they don’t vote Republican is they aren’t very welcome in the Republican Party. With Rush Limbaugh as leader of the Republican Party, it is no wonder it is a party of racists. Yes, I just called Rush a racist because I think he is. Do I know what is in his heart? No. I can figure out what is in his head though and in his head, he doesn’t like black people. Connect enough dots and the picture of a racist comes to light.

    The Republican Party is on the brink of saving itself from the likes of Rick Santorum. It was on the brink of insanity. Why would blacks want to be part of an insane party? Maybe they aren’t as irrational as Dr. Williams points out, but he is only looking at economics.

    • The guy who wrote the piece is Rush’s fill in host. Do you have any examples of the things that Rush has said or done that convince you that he is a racist?( A racist being someone who believes his race to be superior to another.)

    • JimGott says:

      ” My guess is the main reason they don’t vote Republican is they aren’t very welcome in the Republican Party.”

      -Yeah, tell that to Condaleeza Rice, Herman Cain, Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Lynn Swann, and lots of other blacks who have been embraced by the republican party.

      ” With Rush Limbaugh as leader of the Republican Party,it is no wonder it is a party of racists. Yes,I just called Rush a racist because I think he is. Do I know what is in his heart? No. I can figure out what is in his head though and in his head,he doesn’t like black people. Connect enough dots and the picture of a racist comes to light.”

      -Very intelligent thought. Based on absolutely nothing but a liberal’s gut feeling. Typical left-wing nonsense.
      -The moment the race card comes out, you lose all credibility.

      • Mike says:

        “…Condaleeza Rice, Herman Cain, Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Lynn Swann, and lots of other blacks who have been embraced by the republican party.”

        I notice a common thread here. They’re all RICH. If you’re poor, or even middle class, as far as the Republicans are concerned you might as well go fuck yourself.

        • Walter Williams grew up in the Philadelphia projects. Thomas Sowell is the son of a sharecropper and Clarence Thomas also grew up poor. You can’t qualify as a racist unless you believe that you belong to a race that is superior to another. And you don’t get to be a racist unless you hat ALL memebers of a race. You don’t qualify if you pick and choose. The word racists has lost all its meaning. Your statements about about the Republicans caring only about the rich is moronic and juvenile. Not to mention annoyingly predictable.

        • JimGott says:

          -Can you name me some equally prominent democrats, as the republicans that I mentioned, that are currently poor?

          • Paul says:

            You probably won’t hear from Mike again, I hear they cut internet access at Zucotti Park.

        • franji1 says:

          Condee grew up as a Preacher’s Kid in Birmingham, Alabama during the 50′s and 60′s. Ever heard of 16th St. Baptist Church BOMBING? 4 girls died. She knew them. She saw racism BY DEMOCRATS first-hand. Read her autobiography to find out how her father became a Republican. It’s sad.

      • Mike V says:

        I’m a real conservative. I also think Limbaugh is a racist. Mostly, his audience is a bunch of racists because they are the people listening and giggling at his little slights against black public officials. Rush Limbaugh is his audience. Lots of bitter old white guys who grew up in a different era and don’t think much of blacks listen to him. Rush is one of them. I have no respect for him or those who listen to his nonsense and like it.

      • Mike V says:

        Dear Dr. Rice, Mr. Cain, Justice Thomas, Dr. Williams, Dr. Sowell, Mr. Swann, et al,

        You may be a Republican, but the people who smile at you and shake your hand are not as welcoming as you think.

        Best wishes,

        Mike V.

        • You’re generalizing a little there, aren’t you Mike? Could that be construed as a racist remark? Are you black? I sure hope not. because, if you are, saying that white republicans don’t like black people might get you called a racist. If you’re white, you might be revealing your true feelings about black people and assigning them to others.

    • Heisenberg says:

      Mike, you obviously don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh. If you did, you’d know he’s not a racist. Statements like that just show your ignorance. You can agree with the Democrats’ Socialist agenda if you want. This is America, you have the right to be wrong. But don’t call El Rushbo a racist.
      Also, on a previous blog you called intelligient design a lie. Hitler justified his hatred of some races on the idea that they were less “evolved”. This idea was all over the early Darwinist writings. Isn’t society much more civil now that kids are indoctrinated into believing they’re nothing but animals higher on the evolutionary scale.

      • Ned Twyman (formerly known as Chad Farthouse) says:

        Here you are Heisenberg, let the excuse-making commence:


          Debunked. And other than the bone in your nose comment, I don’t see where the alleged comments indicate anything close to racism. He actually used the bone comment when he was working for KQV in Pittsburgh as a dj whose routine was to insult callers. He was about 20 years old.

          • Ned Twyman (formerly known as Chad Farthouse) says:

            The Snopes article really only debunked 2 of the quotes that my article listed, and the article that I linked to also said they were questionable. The rest are NOT debunked. People that are bigots are usually brought up that way, and they also usually retain that attitude but try to keep it hidden. Although, when your on the radio for 15 hours a week, these negative attitudes find ways to slip out. 20 years old is an adult in my book.

          • The quotes –even if they are true –are not indications of racism. That word obviously lost its meaning a long time ago.

          • Mitch says:

            First you tried to say that Rush never said such things and now you’re saying that the statements aren’t racist. You have a pretty high standard for racism if you will defend a person that would make the statements on that list. I guess by your standard you would say George Zimmerman is not a racist. All he did was profile a black kid say “F—ing coons” and then shoot him. That wouldn’t meet your strict standard for racism. Nowhere did he say blacks are inferior he was just name calling. Apologizing for racists is just as bad as being a racist.

          • I said Snopes debunked most of the quotes and I said –even if they are true — I don’t think they qualify as racist. Killing someone because they’re black qualifies. I don’t think what a person says –unless he says, “Blacks are inferior to whites.” can qualify him as a racist. There are serious people out there who are saying that anybody who criticizes Obama is a racist. The overuse of the word has caused it to lose its effectiveness.

            Forget my definition. Here’s Webster’s definition of racism: Belief that some races of men are by nature superior to others, also: discrimination based on such a belief.

            Feel free to show me how any of the supposed statements by Limbaugh qualify.

          • Mitch says:

            I think they all qualify as racist and if you don’t think so you’re a racist. Feel free to pick out any the quotes on that list and defend it as acceptable discourse.

          • We disagree. I think George Wallace was a racist. So was Abraham Lincoln, who believed, along with virtually every white person in the country, that blacks were inferior to whites. I think Robert Byrd, who was a KKK grand dragon was a reformed (cough, cough) racist. There’s sterotyping, there’s prejudice and there’s racism. You like to lump them all together. I don’t. You attempt to exalt yourself by pointing out all the racists among us and how they offend your sense of inclusion and tolerance. It’s a steaming pile of horse shit. Nothing destroys your argument more than you calling me a racist.

        • Heisenberg says:

          I still think your too quick to play the race card. Sometimes he might be a little insensitive while exaggerating to make a point. No excuses. He’s entertaining, I agree with him 99% of the time, and he’s not a racist.

          • Dan says:

            Even if he is exaggerating to make a point, there’s never a need to use that kind of language to do it. It’s the language of a mental midget which is why people who don’t agree with him don’t even give him the satisfaction of arguing him – they just totally ignore him. It’s probably too far to call him a racist but he should be able to do a serious talk show without talking like a 9th grader.

          • You lose all credibility when you call someone who has been able to accomplish what he has a mental midget. Same as calling Palin stupid. Stupid people just don’t accomplish what they’ve accomplished. Misguided in your opinion, maybe. Not stupid. I think Barney Frank is a total idiot when it comes to government policy but I don’t think he’s stupid. I think it’s stupid to believe that what we need now is more government regulation and higher taxes, less drilling and fewer pipelines. But don’t think Obama is a mental midget.

          • Dan says:

            I don’t think Limbaugh is a mental midget, I said he uses the language of one. There’s no need for it. Does Walter Williams need to talk like that to make his points? George Will? Why does Limbaugh? I understand he’s just a radio host – not exactly splitting the atom every day – but smarter language could command him more respect than getting ignored.

      • franji1 says:

        Charles Darwin was a huge racist, but nobody ever points that fact out. He was out to prove that blacks where not human. Here’s the FULL title of “Origin of the Species”
        OR THE

        So all you evolutionists out there, do you believe in multiple genetic races? Or is there just 1 race, the human race? Do you think a black male, genetically speaking, has more in common with
        a black female OR
        a white male?

        A white male (yes, this is science, not religeon).

      • Mike V says:

        I don’t think there is anything wrong with teaching kids the truth. Intelligent Design should be taught in Theology class, not Earth Science. People who want to force public schools to teach ID as scientific fact are trying to establish religion in a government institution. The Constitution gives us freedom from a government sponsored religion, among other things. I believe in the Constitution. If parents want to lie to their kids about the origins of the Universe, they should do it at home.

        • The word education isn’t mentioned in the Constitution and the federal government should have NOTHING to do with it.

          • Mike V says:

            Schools are a local issue. The Constitution allows for states and localities to decide issues on their own. There hasn’t been an ID issue yet that has been on the Federal level.

          • We agree. Schools should be a local issue and the federal Dept of Education should disappear.

        • franji1 says:

          Yeah, like the Oort cloud that “supposedly” is the origin of comets cuz bing bangers can’t explain the existence of these cyclical little balls of ice that have been around for “billions and billions of years”, so they MAKE THINGS LIKE THIS UP OUT OF THE CLEAR BLUE.

          “Although no confirmed direct observations of the Oort cloud have been made, astronomers believe that it is the source of all long-period and Halley-type comets entering the inner Solar System…”

          I really like that phrase “astronomoers believe” – yeah, pure science there. You tell me, which is more fathomable, a 5th dimensional Intelligent Designer (in mathematics, dimensions beyond the 4th dimension are common place), or (this is just ONE example) the “scientific” Oort cloud? Which ones should be taught in science class as theory? I say BOTH (as theory).

          • Mike V says:

            Scientists used to believe lots of things until scientific discovery allowed them to believe the facts. For example, everyone used to believe the world was flat. People went to prison proclaiming it was round and displayed their scientific findings to prove it. They had a theory that the world was round and proved it.

            There are a lot of strange things in the Universe. Over time, we gain better ideas as to how they happened. One day, we will have a better understanding as to how this cloud came to be.

            ID is asking people to believe science based on faith. ID can never be proven. It’s a matter of Theology. If people want to study ID in theology classes, then they should knock themselves out. Keep it out of the hard sciences though.

          • Heisenberg says:

            Mike V. , you seem like a reasonable, intelligient guy. But the THEORY of evolution is not science, it is a religion. You have to have “faith” to believe that billions of years ago, nothing exploded, and created everything. Or that a one celled organism evolved into a human. Where did the DNA come from? Like you, I do not want any religion taught taught in the public school my kids attend. I don’t want some unelected judge telling the school they have to give Islam equal time. I’m not posting a link, but if you have time, goggle an article called “Aliens cause global warming”. It’s a speech given by Michael Creighton at Cal Tech. He doesn’t claim to be a religious person and he’s brillient. He gives some very good arguments on what is called science today really is in no way scientific.

          • Dan says:

            A theory is as close to fact as you can get. It is based on lots of evidence and has gained common acceptance as true. Religion is nothing like a theory.

  13. Mike from Monroeville says:

    You’re right, John. They should vote for the Republicans. Go to the Hill District and tell them that. Right now.

  14. Mitch says:

    Etch-a-Sketch= Toast.

    • Mason says:

      One of the most overblown snippets in media history.

      It might have meant something if Romney said it – he didnt. The only people that think it means anything are dems and anti-Romney’s looking for a foothold.

      Romney is a couple weeks from wrapping up the nomination. Once that happens, All coverage goes to Obama – that is not good for him.

      Any president that was able to get the high profile legislation that he got thru, and is reduced to making his re-election campaign about Catholic institutions providing birth control for free, is in major trouble.

      • Mitch says:

        John Kerry was defined by the statement, “I was for it before I was against it.” He never recovered from it. This is worse. I was going to buy stock in the company that makes Etch-a-Sketches but it is private. They will be handed out at campaign stops all summer with Romney’s face on them. You’re kidding yourself if you don’t think this is devastating.

        • Mason says:

          You do understand that Romney never said it, right?

          Kerry actually made his comment. In 2004, clips of Kerry making the statement were played perpetually. I repeat – Romney did not make this statement.

          On the other hand – there will be literally hundreds of comments Obama has made over the last 4 years being played in a loop that will make him look like the incompetent boob that he is. You did notice that his special 17 minute video was blasted by fact check. The entire thing was lies. What a joke.

          • Mitch says:

            I was under the impression that Willard Mitt Romney’s “Chief Communications Officer” made the statement. Is that right or was it some guy off the street? Clips of Mitt Romney’s “Chief Communications Officer” making the Etch-a-Sketch comment will be on repeat played in between clips of Romney taking both sides of every issue throughout his 30 years in politics. Those ads will be brutal.

          • Won’t matter. This election is going to be about Obama and his record. Not Romney’s.

          • Dan says:

            I think you’re wrong. This election is actually going to be about how many conservatives leave the house on election day to vote for Romney, and issues like this hurt him more every day. If Mitt can’t get enough people out of the house then Obama wins again.

            Who does Obama have to defend his record to? All the same people that voted for him before will vote for him again. All those indoctrinated college kids will get out the vote just like before. The people that don’t like his record, like you, are the people who wouldn’t vote for him if he personally cured cancer tomorrow so what does he care about campaigning to them? Obama’s record is fine to the people who are actually going to vote for him or are seriously considering voting for him..

          • Independents make the difference. I saw some college kids on spring break who were interviewed about the campaign and their ignorance was terrifying. Small sample, I know, but still scary. I hope they stay home until they have their first real job and seen how much they have to pay in taxes. They will not turn out in the numbers they turned out in 2008. The novelty of the first black president has worn off.

          • Dan says:

            All I’ll say John is that if all anybody should care about when voting for a president is taxes then we would call it the office of the Tax President. Just because they aren’t paying income taxes doesn’t mean there aren’t a thousand other things things that a president does that they can vote for or against in a candidate. It’s not all about voting with your wallet.

          • It’s about freedom more than it’s about money. And it’s about an understanding of the role of the federal government. The President should have NOTHING to say or do about how much of my money I get to keep. It all starts with the government confiscating our money. Without it there are no stupid, wasteful, unconstitutional federal government programs. There is no federal involvement in education. I’ve come across plenty of black athletes whose opinions on politicians have changed after they’ve seen their paychecks. What’s more personal than the money that you have earned? What’s more anti-freedom than having the government confiscate it before you even get it in your hands?

    • Won’t affect the election by one vote.

      • Mason says:

        This is an example of why Obama will lose. He cannot tell the truth and with the new media, people know it. It makes him look pathetic.

        • Shecky says:

          The one thing I’ve never…ever…been able to figure out is why A-A voters don’t play one party against the other. To me, that makes zero sense. It’s called leverage and everyone wants to have it . Even if you have no intention of voting Republican, can’t hurt to ask what they’re offering and what they have on the table.
          All that aside, in the end, as Christine Todd Whitman slipped up by saying on Meet The Press years ago, you get the black vote by going through the churches. To the surprise of absolutely no one, support from The Rhyming Reverends can be bought.

    • Shecky says:

      Won’t matter near as much as Obama’s off-the-mike conversation w/ Medvedev. Arrogant, totalitarianism comments; that’s a LONG way from being played out….as much as the networks, the NY Times and the rest of the shills will downplay it. That’ll be played plenty before November.

  15. oksteelerfan says:

    Obama is in Oklahoma, I even thought about risking the flooding to drive to Cushing and ask him questions the media never seems to ask. Then I found out it’s not open to the public. My tax dollars are paying for it at over an estimate of $1.5 million but it’s not open to the public? My state has to protect him but it’s not open to the public?
    Why is he trying to use a state that won’t vote for him as a political stunt anyway? He might get some to buy his bs but not Oklahomans.

    Here are some quotes from a few Oklahomans that I agree with.
    “I hope that while President Obama is in Oklahoma he takes some time to listen to our citizens, many of whom work for the energy industry, which he claims to support. I think they will tell him that – far from supporting the responsible domestic production of American-made energy, his administration has undermined it at every turn. … The president and his party in Washington continue to support an aggressively anti-energy agenda that will severely hamper the American economy and put the United States at a competitive disadvantage to the rest of the world.”

    - Gov. Mary Fallin

    “Even though President Obama has no authority over whether the Cushing portion of the Keystone XL Pipeline is built, he is taking credit for its construction. He continues to champion an energy policy that promotes high gas prices and overbearing and illegal regulations on the energy industry. … As attorney general, it is my job to protect Oklahoma ratepayers and defend our state interests against an administration that unfortunately continues its quest to throw up every road block possible – whether it’s legal or not – to kill the oil industry and naively claim the nation can be sustained on renewable energy alone.”

    - Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt

Leave a Reply