The Problem We All Live With

Because of the damage wrought in the Black community by these people’s ideas, mentality and actions, I made a short list of men for whom it would take every ounce of Christian restraint to keep me from punching in the throat on sight if we ever met.

Dr. Marc Lamont Hill

The Rev. Dr. Michael Eric Dyson

The Rev. Alfred Charles "Al" Sharpton, Jr.

Dr. Cornel Ronald West

Broderick Steven "Steve" Harvey

Thomas "Tom" Joyner

Kanye Omari West

As these men prove, education and success are no measure or guarantee of wisdom. They are indeed the modern day Sambos and Quimbos, tirelessly wielding the whip for their racist liberal masters, keeping the coloreds inline on the Democrat plantation. Servile and ignorant, they look towards their masters in government to see to their needs.

They are happy to be in those nice servants quarters the masters done let them have in Compton, East St. Louis and the like. The Democrats of old forbade the education of their slaves, lest they become uppity and begin to question their station. The modern Democrats still don't want Black folks learning to read, so they resist any idea that might have the effect of improving education for urban youth.

School vouchers? “We don’t want them going to school with our children!” Charters? “What about the teacher’s unions?” The Democrats have even managed to have the more slack-jawed Black folks championing the failed urban school systems, telling their fellows “the Charter Schools really aren’t that great.”

The NAACP teamed up with the United Federation of Teachers in a lawsuit against the City of New York, alleging the charter schools took resources away from the public schools. As well they should–when you consider the charters put those resources to much better use.

President Obama, as his support begins to erode even in the Black community, in a gesture I am sure was aimed at assuring his more reactionary urban constituents that he is still “down”, hung Norman Rockwell’s painting “The Problem We All Live With” a few feet from the Oval Office.

This painting, one of Rockwell’s most famous, was inspired by the plight of Ruby Bridges. In 1960, at age 6, Ruby Bridges became the first student to be integrated into schools in New Orleans. The painting depicts a little Black girl dressed in white, escorted by a cadre of U.S. Marshals, errant tomatoes splattered behind her on a wall adorned with the word “NIGGER”.

I am sure it’s not lost on the President, but his adherents fail to see the irony in his hanging this particular painting. The left eschews a Rockwellian depiction of America in almost every way. Always quick to portray Rockwell’s conservative chronicling of American society in the last century as hopelessly idealized, they claim it has very little relation to reality.

Yet it was the conservatives who loved that romantic view of America as rendered by Rockwell that actually championed desegregation. It is forgotten that it was a Republican Dwight Eisenhower who ordered those U.S. Marshals  down to Nola to escort Ruby Bridges to school! The leftist Democrats also want it forgotten that it was Ike who got the Civil Rights ball rolling to begin with.

The painting is a dramatization of what was happening in the South at the dawn of the Civil Rights Movement. Adding to the irony, anyone in New Orleans who was opposed to Ruby Bridges or the “Little Rock Nine” attending school with all them good White children back then and likely to throw tomatoes and write “nigger” on the wall, would have been a staunch Democrat.

Democrats still champion separate but equal education for Black folks. How else do you explain their dogged encouragement of failed educational paradigms? The fewer Black folks in good school systems the more Black folks languishing in the ghettos for the Democrats to exploit. Keep them on the plantation; let master think for them.

“Pay no mind to them uppity conservative Black people, they forgot where they belong. We know how to control our coloreds. You got to make sure they understand they can never compete with the White man, unless we help them. And we only help the ones that know their place. You know the American dream ain’t for you, boy! You know the White man ain’t never gonna treat you like an equal.”

So why bother?

That is the question ruling the lives of far too many of the American Black youth of today. They feel like there is no hope. They had hope in Barrack Obama, he seems to be repaying that hope with indifference. Maxine Waters was absolutely correct to call Mr. Obama on his failure to even pretend to address Black issues. A stopped watch and all that...

It should be acknowledged that the hardest hit segment of the President’s constituency is the Black community, yet on his recent bus tour he did not stop in a single urban area to assure that community he is working on it.

The bottom line is that Mr. Obama knows despite the utter failure of leftist policies in urban America, Black folks are going to vote for him in huge numbers just because he is Black and more importantly, a Democrat. Because Black folks would still vote for a White Democrat, if the Republican candidate is Black, we saw that played out in the 2008 elections.

So why waste a trip to inner city Chicago? It is the White vote Obama needs and he knows it. So it is much more pragmatic to have a donut in Decorah, Iowa, than a Coney Dog in Detroit, Michigan.

The “problem we all live with” today, is an unengaged Black youth. Where the Black children like Ruby Bridges of the first half of the 20th century saw education as a means to better themselves, far too many of today’s Black youth have zero confidence in the school systems they are trapped in by liberal policy’s ability to make them viable. Along with a belief that the whole world is stacked against them, because that is what their heroes keep telling them.

And the left, despite the platitudes they spout to the media, do all they can to foster that attitude amongst urban youth. “Progressive” morality has decimated the Black community. Driven by urban entertainers (themselves motivated only by money and fame), our Black youth idolize and internalize some of the most unwholesome behavior and ideas that have ever existed in America.

With our Black children raising hell in public and flash mobs robbing people based on race, Blacks are participating in the most self destructive conduct imaginable. And the left fans these flames every time they portray Black youth as victims instead of responsible beings who control their own destinies.

The only people preying on Black folks today on a regular basis are other Black folks! The naked stupidity of Black youths attacking White people is proof positive of their complete detachment from all practical reasoning. Not only is it morally wrong to attack anyone of any race, it is beastly foolish to pick a fight with someone who has numerical superiority and a great deal more resources than you.

The leftist will say the establishment and corporate America is preying on Black youth, sucking the jobs out of the city and taking them overseas. They can say this with a straight face as they grant men like G.E. CEO Jeffrrey Immelt all access passes in fraudulent quasi-governmental positions like “The President's Council On Jobs And Competitiveness.” Meanwhile, General Electric continues to be one of our greatest exporters of American jobs.

When do we wake up? Perpetual idiot Janeane Garofalo accused Presidential candidate Herman Cain of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and being a paid shill for the Tea Party, acting as a beard covering inherent racism in the conservative movement. Yet men like Herman Cain represent and offer an alternative to failure, a break from the misery plantation as cultivated by the left that the Black community now finds itself yoked to.

How long must the Black community wax worse and worse before we stop listening to the modern day Sambos and Quimbos? Some are complicit in advancing the racist liberal urban agenda – men like Sharpton, Hill and Dyson, who know for whom they are working and what impact it has on urban America, but, it got them into the big house. Others are just plain dumb, like Harvey, Joyner and Kanye West; all they know is what they have been conditioned to know, but their bully pulpits make them terribly harmful as they spread that conditioning.

Black youth create havoc, often racist in nature, film it and post it on YouTube themselves in an unenlightened celebration of folly and madness. Then racist White folks see it on YouTube, call the videos of Black bad behavior “Chimp outs” and use it as a justification for their own hatred as they spew racial invective! All this under the presidency that was supposed to heal the nation?

The left cringes at the idea of one's faith playing a factor in governing. Most who hold to a liberal perspective have little regard for the things of the Holy Bible and the Bible’s God. They maintain the belief that man can restrain man, but never wonder why their endeavors bear so little fruit. You can change laws to protect man from his fellow, but you cannot legislate the attitudes of his heart.

Frankly, the left is only interested in persuading people to vote for them in elections; they don’t really care what happens to folks in their work-a-day lives. This is the primary reason they oppose a practical Christian faith. They are OK with faith on Sunday, but don’t bring it into your political and practical life.

They know that the only way to enact real “Change” is through Christian faith, but that goes against everything they work toward. They condition their henchmen like Sharpton and Cornell West to advocate for folks placing their faith in government, rather than God and themselves through Biblical truth. Why? Because the truth has the nasty habit of making men free!

“A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.”  Ezekiel 36:26-28

Digital Publius

Empty Gestures

To what end?

If you talk to me for any length of time, eventually you will hear me ask that question. I don’t ask it to be flippant or dismissive—I just hold empty gestures in low regard. To what end? This is a question too few of us ask; we are often too swept away by our passions, our fervor and emotions to pause and reflect...To what end?

Hence, so many were willing to overlook the obvious inadequacies, questionable associations and murky background to elect a certain junior Senator from Illinois President of the United States of America.

Some who did ask the question “To what end?” regarding then Senator Obama, still made the decision to vote for him despite his political shortcomings, because he represented something for them. Perhaps it was racial pride, a historical benchmark quelling the guilt of the past, or perchance simply an ideological fellow traveler.

The question can be asked and a person may understand what they are about to do is risky and potentially disastrous, yet emotional people will regularly ignore the latent danger of their choices and “hope” for the best, if the short term emotional pay off is substantial enough to make an empty gesture at least appear grand!

After all, as illustrated by his erstwhile political rival for President and future running mate: "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Joe Biden continued, "I mean, that's a storybook, man." Considering our current circumstances, Mr. Obama’s subsequent election to the highest office in the land seems more a “Grimm” fairytale.

Those most swept away in the grandeur of America’s empty gesture in electing an unprepared Barrack Obama are even now beginning to feel like they are sitting in the witch’s cauldron. The fire gets hotter and hotter and suddenly they feel duped. Unfortunately, those of us who recognized Mr. Obama for what he was, now find ourselves beside them in the soup.

We on the right are not immune; we, too, engage in our own brand of vacuous shenanigans! We, too, chase what we consider noble ideas without asking, “To what end?” The difference is, we tend to cloak our empty gestures in what the Holy Bible calls a “form of godliness.” Such a gesture is being offered now in Israel, brought to you by Glenn Beck.

“He also told them this parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?” Luke 6:39

Glenn Beck, as he stood in a theater built by Herod (Herod, who in an effort to kill Christ as a child, killed all the male children in Israel below the age of 2) in the city of Caesarea, making opening remarks at his “Restoring Courage” rally in Israel, informed his audience there were “Senators and Representatives from eleven of the United States.”

Beck told his enthusiastic crowd that among them were “religious leaders from 26 of the largest congregations in the U.S. alone”. No less than “four dignitaries from the E.U.” “Six members of Parliament from the E.U.” [sic] “eleven representatives of the largest ‘Tea Party’ groups”, the latter elicited a resounding yelp and thunderous applause.

Beck continued, “We have members from the 9/12 Project, we have 1400 viewing parties all around the world tonight” Beck told the audience: “People are watching this event tonight in Pakistan and in Egypt and in Brazil, in South Africa and 80 other countries around the globe.”

Beck informed the crowd: “tonight is going to concentrate on the ‘courage to love’. Tomorrow is the ‘courage to remember’ and it all ends at the throne of God on Wednesday, the ‘courage to stand’.”  But Beck never gets around to explaining to what end are they gathered in Israel to love, remember and stand?

Beck says: “We welcome you no matter what denomination or what faith you belong to tonight.” He then introduces a Rabbi to give an opening prayer, exclaiming at his ecumenical gathering, “People are not neutral here and neither is God”. Quite so, God is not neutral. Nor is He ecumenical, at least not the God revealed in the Holy Bible.

“There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism,  One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” Ephesians 4:4-6

Not a very ecumenical statement. Man quite often, in a misguided attempt to unite all men by being all things to all people, will try to drag God along for the ride through gestures like Beck’s rally in support of Israel.

My blog, Digital Publius, is very political, but it is also very Christian. I make an effort to distinguish my political and social views from my directive to spread the Gospel of Christ. It is my intent to always honor God by submitting my will to His, allowing my faith to inform my views on politics and society.

Honestly, it is impossible to operate in a spirit of ecumenicism and maintain a commitment to God—if He is your first priority—if you stand with Israel for temporal reasons like her being our only true and strategic American ally in the Middle East; or you just don’t want your supply of Israeli couscous to dry up. I can stand with Beck on that, I like Israeli couscous as much as the next guy.

But, as I explained in my article “Sweet or Bitter”, when he ventures into the spiritual, Beck and I have to part ways. Beck declares his faith as he introduces historian David Barton: “As many of you know, if you watch or listen to me, I have chosen a path that isn’t always the most popular with Christians. I am a member of the LDS faith.”

He goes on to state David Barton loves him for who he is, demonstrating his love for Beck “in every way at all times.” “David is one of the finest examples of Christians, I think, and he has helped me put this event together so we could all be here for this historic night.” Again I ask, to what end? Why this historic night?

This was not a night about Israel and it certainly was not a night to honor God. You honor God the way He says He should be honored, first by offering Him Praise and Thanksgiving, before doing anything else. I don’t love Israel, I love God. I support Israel because God in His Word told me to. Any other reason to support Israel in the temporal sense may be expedient, but it is so because God arranged it that way.

“In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.” Amos 9;11,12

The very existence of Israel as a modern state is a testament to the sovereignty of God! Before 1948, the fact that the Holy Bible made statements like the one above, saying Israel would again be a nation after an almost two millennia long diaspora, was the number one reason people doubted the Bible was God’s Word.

Though the Romans finally succeeded in casting Israel out of their land, they were not able to destroy the Israeli Identity. It was utter madness to suggest Israel would ever rise again. Yet here we are. God declares, in the last days:

“The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.  Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it. ”  Zechariah 12: 1-3

A “burdensome stone” is there a more accurate description of Israel as seen in the world today by her enemies? In Psalms 83:2-8, we find this prophetic portrait of Israel’s plight in our time:

“For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head. They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee: The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assur also is joined with them...”

All those names at the end of these passages are the modern day Islamic and Arab states surrounding and arrayed against Israel today, constantly threatening and plotting to destroy her. Yet returning to Zechariah 12 verses 8-10, God promises Israel:

“In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. ”

The LORD is here saying that Christ, “me whom they have pierced” will destroy Israel’s enemies and “they” (the Jews) will finally look upon and recognize Christ for who He is. I like the great theologian Adam Clarke’s commentary on verse 10 describing the Jewish reaction to this:

“This shall produce deep and sincere repentance; they shall mourn, and be in bitterness of soul, to think that they had crucified the Lord of life and glory, and so long continued to contradict and blaspheme, since that time.”

This Christ is not the created being described by LDS ontological teachings on Christ. This is Christ the Creator as portrayed in the Holy Bible! His appearance will be a rude awakening for those who teach they themselves can become gods.

Belief in false gods or ill-formed messiahs always ends badly. Whether they be political ones calling for “hope and change”, or theological ones obscured by man’s desire to be accepting of everyone’s idea of “faith”. As I have said many times, we can all be wrong, but we cannot all be right.

This rally in Israel is unseemly, it seems more a device to drive the Glenn Beck machine helping to launch his new online network. When you read the comments of so many people on the Blaze articles depicting last night’s events, there is a cacophony of folks either praising the quality of the transmission from Israel or complaining that they can’t sign up for whatever reason.

To what end? If you are there in Israel, or zealously watching on the world wide web for any purpose other than praising the God who is that nation’s author, deliverer and sustainer, you may want to give some thought to believing what that God says.

Ironically, on the Blaze we find a link reading: “Slideshow: 19 Cool & Amazing Pictures From Night One of ‘Restoring Courage’” The photo used to illustrate this article is the one used to advertise the link. It is number 18 in the slideshow, In light of God’s injunction:

"Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD." Leviticus 19:28

The photo perfectly demonstrates how in ones zealousness to support an idea, one can lose track of the source of that idea. And in so doing, offer up yet another empty gesture!

Digital Publius

Rhetoric v. Substance

“States’ Rights!” How many concepts established in our Constitution have been more controversial and situationally pliable, perhaps even ephemeral than “States Rights?” It is at once (depending on one’s perspective) both noble concept and apex of licentiousness.

In a “more perfect union”, “States’ Rights” is perhaps second only to the recognition of an individual’s “unalienable rights,” endowed by the Creator, which is greatest of the great ideas inherent in our national identity. Yet due to the “inherent” fallen nature of man, this virtuous idea has been used on occasion as a tool of oppression.

This reality begs other questions: Is it the concept of states’ rights that is flawed, or the men who twist it to grant themselves powers over other men? Should we do away with the concept all together and cede all power to the federal government, or should we endeavor to curb our baser instincts and rise to the nobility of the concept?



In answer to the last question, the modern left would surely prefer the former. Particularly that segment on the left that derives its power from race baiting. Indeed “race” has been at the vanguard of the states’ rights question from the very beginning of our American experience.

Historically, it has been the Democrat party that has made best use of the perceived mercurial nature of the states’ rights idea. Democrats are for states’ rights when it suits them and against the idea when it encumbers their agenda.

The Democrats were for states’ rights and in full support of the Tenth Amendment when it allowed them to maintain their use of chattel slavery in the American South. But Democrats were all too eager to infringe upon the sovereignty of Northern states when it came to decisions like the Dred Scott ruling and the Fugitive Slave Act.

It was Infringements like Dred Scott and the Fugitive Slave Act that incensed the Northern states and abolitionists in particular as exemplified by Harriet Beecher Stowe penning the pivotal novel “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” and the subsequent founding of the modern Republican Party.

At the time of the American Civil War, you were a rare creature indeed if you were a member of the Republican Party and you were not also a staunch abolitionist, as this was the stated purpose of the party’s founding in 1854. The far left in America has done a very good job of expunging this fact from the American consciousness!

Liberal Democrats have been very successful at recasting the history of the Democrat Party. One of the best tactics of oppression is to convince the oppressed that the oppressor is in fact their benefactor while demonizing and recasting the true liberator.

“And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” II Corinthians 11:14

We see this very clearly in modern discourse as it pertains to slavery. The modern left works tirelessly to downplay the Republican Party’s roll in the abolition of slavery. Even recasting Abraham Lincoln as someone impartial to slavery, a goal most often accomplished by the use of a sentence fragment taken out of context from a letter written by President Lincoln in response to an editorial by Horace Greeley: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it...” It is completely ignored that Mr. Lincoln in the same sentence continued: 

“...and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”



Lincoln summed up the letter: “I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.”

This does not suggest a person who is indifferent to slavery, but rather someone who holds out hope for the noble purpose of the Tenth Amendment and the Constitution as a whole - a person desirous to see men live up to that noble idea and cease oppressing their brothers because it is the right thing to do.

Lincoln makes clear this point in a letter written to Albert Hodges, the editor of the Frankfort Commonwealth, a Kentucky Newspaper”

: “I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I can not remember when I did not so think, and feel. And yet I have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an unrestricted right to act officially upon this judgment and feeling.”

Though Mr. Lincoln ultimately acted to end slavery by force, he never liked having to do so.  President Lincoln was a staunch believer in states’ rights. He was loath to inflict the weight of the Federal government on the South. Yet he did so for a greater moral good. Lincoln sums up the Hodges letter:



“In telling this tale I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me. Now, at the end of three years struggle the nation's condition is not what either party, or any man devised, or expected. God alone can claim it. Whither it is tending seems plain. If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God.”

The Democrat party contemporaneously has all but abandoned the idea of “States’ Rights” after using it so effectively, in recent history, to strengthen the party’s despotic Jim Crow Laws.

Now that states’ rights no longer serve the Democrat Party’s ends, they have given themselves over to the idea that the Federal government should in all instances supersede States’ Rights if the citizens of those states have the temerity to oppose the left’s idea of “social justice;” if your citizenry stands for the defense of traditional marriage; enforcing the immigration laws already on the books; or are in favor of limiting the power of Federal government.



Jesse Jackson illustrates this truth clearly in a recent speech in support of big activist government.
The Democrat party, in an effort to reshape history to reflect favorably on them, has used the Nixon era’s so-called “Southern Strategy” to mask their party’s less than stellar history on civil rights. The liberal narrative is that the racist Democrats of the Civil Rights era now infect the Republican Party.

Democrats say racist Southern politicians, infuriated by Northern Democrat support of Civil Rights legislation, jumped to the other party. This is in spite of the fact that the modern Civil Rights struggle began with Republican President Eisenhower desegregating southern schools.

Is America supposed to accept that even though the Republican Party was overwhelmingly in support of Civil Rights, racists felt comfortable, even compelled to join the Republican Party? Richard Nixon himself, the beneficiary of the so-called Southern Strategy, opposed bussing, but gave teeth to the feckless and unenforced Civil Rights Act that passed during the Lyndon Johnson Presidency.

It was the Nixon administration that forced through Congress the Philadelphia Plan long abandoned by the Johnson administration for black quota-hiring in construction in 1969. During his early time in office, President Nixon created the Office of Minority Business Enterprise (OMBE) in the Department of Commerce that earmarked funds for minority contractors.

President Nixon raised the budgets and staffs of all the leading civil rights enforcement agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Office of Federal Contract Compliance (OFCC) in the Department of Labor; the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; and the Civil Rights division (most notably, the Voting Rights section) in the Department of Justice.

To preserve citizen’s health and safety, Mr. Nixon oversaw the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in 1970, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in 1972. Proving  that all throughout our history, Democrats spout rhetoric while Republicans actually implement real “Change”.

On the campaign trail Democrat President Woodrow Wilson courted the Black vote by promising: "Should I become President of the United States they may count upon me for absolute fair dealing for everything by which I could assist in advancing their interests of the race." Upon election, Mr. Wilson set back Civil Rights by decades as he fired key black supervisors working in the government, replaced them with whites and completely segregated federal workers. He followed that action by giving the ambassadorships traditionally held by Black Americans to countries like Haiti and Santa Domingo to whites.



Franklin Roosevelt similarly promised much to garner black votes, only to renege once elected. When the Black press excoriated Mr. Roosevelt for not being an honest broker, President Roosevelt barred the Black newspapers from being distributed to America’s Black troops serving overseas.



With all the talk of the “Southern Strategy”, there are precious few examples of segregationists switching parties. Of the so-called “Dixiecrats”: Ross Barnett, Robert Byrd, Bull Connor, Orval Fabus, Mills Godwin ,Al Gore, Sr., James Eastland, Allen Ellender, Benjamin Travis Laney, Russell Long, Lester Maddox, John McClellan, John Rarick, Richard Russell, John Sparkman, John Stennis, Herman Talmadge and George Wallace, Only two, Mills Godwin and Strom Thurmond ever changed parties.

That these two changed parties for political expedience is absolutely true, though these two, above all the other racist segregationists like Vice President Al Gore’s Father Al, Sr., who remained Democrats until their deaths, had mitigating circumstances in their lives that may have caused them to soften on race over time.

Godwin had sought out and enjoyed the Black vote during his career and actually enjoyed the NAACP’s endorsement during his 1965 bid for the Virginia Governor’s office. Godwin also supported Lyndon Johnson’s candidacy for President thereby losing his Democrat base which despised Johnson’s Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act enjoyed support from the vast majority of Republicans yet we are to believe that racist joined the party most responsible for the Act. 



Back in 1925 Strom Thurmond had a daughter with one of his black servants.  Thurmond paid for his daughter’s college education and supported her financially. In a display of liberal tactics, it is interesting to note that in Thurmond’s Wikipedia entry, he is not referred to as a “Conservative” until after it is recorded that he had become a Republican. The entry avoids calling him a conservative, while it talks about his years as a Democrat, even though this was the time he was most ardently racist.

This is a very subtle piece of propaganda which fits the leftist polemic against the Tea Party and Conservatism in general. Simply stated “To be a Conservative, is to be a racist.” That is a lie the weak-minded and unaware accept as gospel truth and is also why the left fights passionately to cultivate and maintain weak-minds.

The left has proven powerfully adept at selling the rhetorical over the substantial, so adept that the average liberal is completely uninterested in truth. None are more unaware of the realities of true racial history in America beyond the legacy of slavery than American Black folks. Even though we, more than any others, have felt its sting and should remember. Through entitlements and welfare, the Democrats have succeeded in clouding Black folks minds, to the point that we are oblivious to the true “Southern Strategy”.

The one where the Democrats, upon recognizing they could not win the Civil Rights battle with clubs, fire hoses and attack dogs, changed tactics and began rotting the country, primarily the minority communities, from within. We Black folks are now slaves to entitlements, the leftist idea of big government now our masters.

“When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy.” (sic) – Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Joshua Speed

Digital Publius