Hello Bill,   
      
    LL>>> You can find bad people in every neighborhood.  Right-wingers   
    LL>>> like to point out that Rev. Martin Luther King was a troublemaker,   
    LL>>> a black man who spoke for a violent people, all of whom happened   
    LL>>> to also be black.  No white minister would ever encourage white   
    LL>>> folks to disobey cops and other law enforcement officials.  There   
    LL>>> is a reason why no Republican spoke at the Lincoln Memorial on   
    LL>>> the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream"   
    LL>>> speech.  There is also a reason why no Republicans were invited   
    LL>>> by the organizers to speak.   
      
    BM>> Oh... none were invited?  Sounds like you jumped on the O'Reilly   
    BM>> ASSumed bandwagon.   
      
    LL>> Former Republican Party Chairman Michael Steel made that announcement   
    LL>> on MSNBC - not on FoxNews or Bill O'Reilly's show.   
      
   BM>   
    BM> But many members of the GOP WERE invited, including Sen. Scott and all the   
    BM> GOP members of Congress.  They all refused.  O'Rielly went on-air and   
    BM> stated there were no invites yet the next day he came with the "ASSumed"   
    BM> rhetoric that none were when in reality they were.  You see the way things   
    BM> are done, invites go out. If the invited accepts, then a spot is created   
    BM> for them to speak.  If they decline, then other arraingements are made.   
    BM> The spots guaranteed for the GOP were for the elite of the party, as it   
    BM> should be.   
      
   On MSNBC, Chris Matthews made a statement that no Republicans were   
   invited.  Michael Steel then corrected him, explaining how the   
   organizers of the event ran the show.  Steel's explanation was, in   
   effect, the same as what you wrote.   
      
   Because no Republicans spoke at the event, it gave the appearance   
   that Republicans do not care about black folks, or about MLK's "I   
   Have a Dream" speech.  Of course, appearances can be deceiving, as   
   it is silly to think that all/many/most Republicans are racist.   
      
    BK>> The reality has been it isn't white or black, but haves and have   
    BK>> nots. The haves have taken more from the poor black community   
    BK>> than the poor black community ever got back.   
      
    LL>>> For Republicans, it really is about white or black.  It wasn't always   
    LL>>> like that, but it is today.  For example, George Romney received 30%   
    LL>>> of the black vote as a candidate for governor of Michigan.  Mitt LL>   
    BM> Romney received 6% of the black vote as a candidate for president.   
    LL>> That is how much the Republican Party has changed over the years.   
      
    BK>>> Remember Mitt Romney's infamous 47%?   
      
    LL>>> George Romney marched with MLK and the blacks for freedom.   
    LL>>> Mitt Romney refused to speak at the Lincoln Memorial for the   
    LL>>> 50th anniversary of MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech.  What a   
    LL>>> tremendous opportunity that was missed by Mitt Romney and the   
    LL>>> Republican Party.  Even Michael Steel admitted the GOP goofed.   
      
    BM>> Agreed.... which only enhances their commitment to a segregated   
    BM>> America (My reference here is poor [black & white] vs. the affluent.)   
      
    LL>> Not all blacks are poor.  Not all whites are rich.  However, an   
    LL>> economic argument can be made, and strongly supported.  Bob Dole,   
    LL>> as a candidate for president, tried to make that argument in   
    LL>> reference to affirmative action, and actually had Bill Clinton   
    LL>> on the defensive (and on the ropes).  Dole's mistake was not   
    LL>> having a viable plan of his own to replace affirmative action.   
    LL>> Clinton managed to get up off the canvas, making a comeback   
    LL>> by suggesting affirmative action needed to be "fixed" rather   
    LL>> than "scrapped" - thus winning his bid for a second term.   
      
   BM>   
    BM> I wasn't talking about affirmative action. I am talking about the   
   alienation   
    BM> and divide that is occuring through the GOP's deep corporate pockets.    
   Yes,   
    BM> the Dems have them as well, but the Koch Bros/Norquist doctrine is alive   
    BM> and   
    BM> flourishing in the GOP.  These "platforms" are designed to increase the   
    BM> chasm   
    BM> between the elite and the serfs.  They speak of the Dems creating the rift   
    BM> but if you look at the entire picture, the reason most people think this   
    BM> icountry  s turning towards socialism/communism is very simply explained,   
    BM> AKorporate  merika wants it that way.   
      
   I was using affirmative action as an example.  For a deeper   
   understanding of how corporations interact among national security   
   and social welfare policy, you might want to read "Thinking Through   
   the Cold War", by David Jardin, free download from smashwords.com   
      
   Jardin shows the history of the RAND Corporation from the end of   
   WWII thgough the Cold War, and its interaction with government to   
   shape national security and social welfare policy making.  Beware   
   it is a long read, roughly 207,440 words.   
      
    BK>>> Well, since blacks make up only about 13% of the population   
    BK>>> of this country, That leaves 34% to be white.   
      
    LL>>> Cajuns make up a much smaller percentage of the population   
    LL>>> than blacks, hispanics, or asians.  Why this country wants to   
    LL>>> identify itself by race is beyond me, as it is language that   
    LL>>> defines a culture ...   
      
    BM>> Agreed....   
      
    LL>> Black folks are more discriminatory of their own than any other race.   
    LL>> There are dark-skinned blacks, light-skinned blacks, blacks who pass   
    LL>> for white ...   
      
   BM>   
    BM> It's turning into survival of the fittest anymore.  Wait, you'll see the   
    BM> same   
    BM> discrimination among whites when the jobs/wages don't keep up.  It's   
   already   
    BM> happened many years ago.  When the Irish immigrated here they were   
    BM> considered a lower species than the blacks.  Every race (and yes,   
    BM> nationality is considered a race, not just color) has had that issue.   
      
   Sure.  Discrimination exists among all races, both within and between.   
   Andrew Young once said, "We are all racists and bigots."  I tend to   
   agree with that view, with the caveat it is what we do (as individuals   
   and a people) to overcome that racism and bigotry that is important.   
   That was Andrew Young's real message, or what he was trying to convey   
   to others.   
      
    BK>>> Since even the 15% unemployment rate among blacks, or more   
    BK>>> like 25% real unemployment rather than the fake numbers the   
    BK>>> government uses, still means 25% of 13%. Or about 3 1/3% of   
    BK>>> the population. That leaves about 45% out of 47% Mitt Romney   
    BK>>> considers "takers" to be white.   
      
    LL>>> Cajuns are not exactly the wealthiest folks in the world.  And yet   
    LL>>> most of them voted for the man with the red face.  Probably because   
    LL>>> they thought he was a crawfish.   
      
    BM>> LOL.... irony as it's best... vote for the man who doesn't give a   
    BM>> rat's ass about you.   
      
    LL>> You have to remember - we boil our crawfish LIVE.  :)   
      
   BM>When is Jindal on the menu?   
      
   In the latest poll, Les Miles and Nick Saban are rated higher   
   than Bobby Jindal.  Les Miles I can understand.  But Nick Saban   
   is hated in these parts, pretty much on the same level as the   
   devil himself.  Jindal should consider himself blessed that he   
   cannot run for a third consecutive term for governor.  :)   
      
   --Lee   
      
   --- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb   
    * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)