Racism Pays Off for Democrats Again
It hasn’t been hard to notice that the Democrats have been pushing hard against the Dubai Ports deal. Now that they think it can be used as a hammer against President Bush, the Democrats have begun arguing that the UAE cannot be trusted to own a company that runs part of our country’s import/export infrastructure. Apparently, they noticed that the UAE is a middle-eastern country full of arabs and muslims, and have reached another point where it is politically advantageous to play racism for votes.
This may be a great move for the Democrats. They have seen some of their best support when they’ve used racism as the basis for their policies. They have a long history of success in this area.
In the pre-Civil War days, the Democrats fought long and hard to ensure that blacks in this country did not receive recognition as full citizens, or indeed as full human beings. They and the Whigs were united in one regard. They both believed that slavery was an institution worth saving, and that black people should be kept in their place. That place was on the plantation. It wasn’t until the rise of the Republican Party that real opposition to slavery began to take hold. The Republicans knew that the abolition of slavery would hurt them politically, primarily in the Southern states. Abolition turned the South into a major Democrat stronghold for decades, where laws continued to be passed by Democrats to limit the ability of blacks to take part in society as equals.
Over the next few decades, Democrats spent a lot of effort on keeping blacks in their places. This meant a multitude of laws requiring that they be restricted from eating near white people, using white-only bathrooms, drink from white-only water fountains, riding in the front of the bus, or generally having the same rights as white people. This was the norm in the Democrat-controlled Southern states for a long time.
In the 1960s, something changed. Although the Democrats were firmly in control of the federal government, a groundswell of popular support in the country began to see where Democrat racist policies were not such a good idea. The idea that black people should be seen as equals across the country began to gain ground. Although blacks still couldn’t vote in the Democrat-controlled Southern states, other areas of the country were beginning to see the light. In 1959, President Eisenhower had introduced what would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After years of work, the bill eventually became law. This could not occur, however, until legislative maneuvers were used to get past Democrat Representative Howard Smith of Virginia, chair of the House Rules Committee, and Democrat Senator James Eastland of Mississippi, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In 1960, Democrats actually filibustered the bill, succeeding in defeating the measure.
In more recent history, we’ve seen great advancement in the plight of blacks in America. Blacks have advanced in the arenas of education (Where Democrats once blocked the doors of the school to them), business, sports, and entertainment. Today, some of the highest paid entertainers and athletes in America are black, an indication that the PEOPLE of this country don’t care about race. Democrats, though, still play the race card, often arguing that standards in education, admissions, and hiring must be lowered in order to allow the supposedly inferior race to have a chance. Fact is, standards don’t need to be lowered. One day, the Democrats will realize that being black doesn’t mean being stupid, and stop treating them like they are.
Back to today, we’re seeing the Democrats up in arms, having finally decided that race, religion, and national origin are good reasons to oppose a business deal. They’ve gotten pretty adamant about it. Pretty soon, they’ll be standing in the doors of the shipping terminals, blocking arab access. It’s their way. They’re just standing up for the white people.
Previous Dubai Ports Deal coverage
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
I didn’t expose bob. He exposed himself.
That is, of course, if it really was bob.
I just love the way he referred to my work as revisionism. He didn’t exactly make any counterarguments to my points, and if his email (not shown in the post) is true, he’s a lawyer that is supposedly capable of making a counterargument.
This is some sexy hot revisionist lovin’! Suck it freak!
bob