Come on Republican Dawgs...

[PawDawg]

"It just so happens that most of them are Democrats. And, I would venture to say that the reason most of them are Democrats is because of the percieved characteristic of the Republican party that Trent Lott has demonstrated." - Dirtydawg

Wrong again my confused friend. They are dems. because of the "perceived characteristic" of the reps.?? You are too funny. :lol: You know as well as I do why most of them are dems. The dems know it too. There is a class of people who have been held back for twenty plus years (three generations) by the very people who they embrace. The dems. embrace them because they are a power base. They keep making promises to them but the dem. plan never works and never will. I'm sure you have read some of LBJ's quotes. If not, do a little research. His plan is working like a charm.

[Champ967]

Time out, maddawg. Something's been eating me lately.

Your assertion that (Dem-backed) social programs have addicted the underprivledged into submission reminds me alot of my insistence that large corporate employers similarly abuse bottom-level workers.

You (maybe it wasnt YOU specifically, but right-wing thinking in general) defends the corporation by maintaining that the disgruntled worker has the choice to seek another job.

Do not minorities (and other beneficiaries of social programs) not have the similar option to NOT TAKE THE CHECK? NOT SIGN UP FOR THE BENEFITS? NOT STAND IN THE LINE?

Why do (allegedly abusive) employers enjoy immunity from charges of oppression, but not govt?

Why is it when a corporation gives you a pitiful check , that's creating an opportunity, but when it comes from the govt, that's feeding an addiction?

[PawDawg]

Look Champ, I'm having a hard enough time dealing with Dirty. I can't take on both of you at once. You are waaaaaaaay over thinking this thing. Just relax and believe me when I tell you and Dirty that I am right and you are wrong. :shock:

[dawg80]

I suppose, Champ, in some cases, people don't really have much of a choice. Here's an example. A low-wager working for some corporation in a small town, say a paper mill in a rural setting, would have to pack up, sell his house, and leave for an area where he'd have more employment options. Yes, he could do that, but having the wherewithall to make that leap is beyond most people who accept their mediocre roles in society. So, in that respect, I agree his options are limited.

But, that corporation did not create his lack of ambition. That's a trait he already had and embraces. The federal government, thanks to the democrats, by contrast, did willfully create the underclass of welfare recipients. It was done purposely to create a base of dependent voters to keep them, the demos, in power.

I know this to be a fact and am pleased there is a growing, grassroots movements among blacks to alter that distructive course. Right now, this focus is to attempt to change how the national demo party takes for granted the black vote. So, this will be a slow process, taking many years to accomplish. But, if you speak with many black voters, they KNOW the truth and DESPISE the democratic party because of it.

Unfortunately, idiots like Lott continue to keep the Republican Party from becoming a viable alternative for them.

[NTXDawg]

As they say, actions speak louder than words.

Your exactly right. And Lott has consistently had hire minority college students to be interns in his office. He has consistently fought for money to go to traditional black colleges. He helped to bring a Nissan auto plant to a poor mostly black county in Mississippi. He has consistently recieved 20%+ of the black vote in Mississippi in elections. Actions do speak louder than words

[markay714]

Sorry - think you're wrong, Dirty. And, the Democratic senator from West Virginia is the best case in point. He made an ugly racist comment last year and NOTHING except on Fox News (perhaps thats why you didn't know about it). And, as has also been stated - Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are WAY bigger racists than anybody I can think of. Unfortunately as I said initially, they are given a free pass. Jesse Jackson has acknowledged spitting in white people's food when he worked as a waiter - unbelievable.

I certainly don't think racism is at all acceptable from either direction.

[Champ967]

A couple of thoughts:

1. First and foremost - i think it is sad that we have created a society where lack of greed (you call it "ambition") is a liablity.

But we dont have to play that game right now ........

that corporation did not create his lack of ambition

2. But that worker's (and other workers' like him) lack of ambition DID CREATE the corporation. That is ... the corporation is dependent on those folks for their labor. Not unlike how Dems are dependent on minorities for their votes.

So I pose the question again ... how is the low-wage paying corporation any different from the Democratic Party? The corporation pays its workers just enough to keep them "hooked" in the same way the Dems give black precincts just enough to maintain their votes.

Even the long arduous process of wresting the Black vote from the Democratic party that you cite mirrors your archetypal worker's lack of wherewithal to change his locale.

Thanks for joining the fray D80 ............. I miss this. :wink:

.........................................

Let me take this opportunity clarify my stance on the central issue of this thread:

Lott was a dumbass. But he was more the victim of a slow newsweek. He shouldnt have had to resign his post. But I'm not surprised that he did either. Like someone else posted: Republicans eat their own. (Kinda reminds me of their economic model.)


Merry Christmas everyone!!!!

[PawDawg]

Champ, I think I have finally gotten inside your head on this issue and it is scaaaaary. :shock: I don't know if I can explain, but I'll try...........

You see the evil corporation as those who give their workers the mimimum of benefits and wages because they know that the workers don't have any other choices. I'll agree with you up to a point on this and a PRIME example of a corporation that we can agree on is WalMart. I despise them for what they do to communities and their workforce and have for years.

I see the corporation as a group that was formed by folks who put up their own hard earned money (perhaps earned from working for one of the evil corps), signed their name to a bank note, while risking everything they have on an idea. Yes they want to make money, but the person/people I have in mind wants to provide jobs and good benefits and really do have the best interest of the community in mind. Yes Champ, those types do exist and many more will pop up in this great country we live in.

There are so many factors that come in that cause this debate..........Labor Unions, Large Corps/Small Corps., Government intervention,.........the list goes on and on.

Merry Christmas Bro!

[Champ967]

Thanks for the reply maddawg.

I am happy to support the kind of business you describe. I had the pleasure of boycotting Wal-mart and other "big box" retailers this Christmas. I was pleasantly surprised to find everything I wanted at family owned and operated shops around the LR area. And I was happy to pay 10-15% more to support those folks who risked their livelihoods to enhance their community's economy.

I guess the underlying question concerning corporations is where to draw the line between benefitting a community and exploiting it. I suppose I draw that line a short ways ahead of where you and D80 do.

To be fair, I acknowledge that the same question must be asked of any political party.

Hope Santa was good to you and your family!

[markay714]

I also try to buy from the local community places in SE Baton Rouge rather than the big boy stores - I think it gives my little area of town a nice feel to have a local hardware store, bike shop, etc. Hate hearing when these big places only let people work enough hours to not qualify for benefits. Though, I doubt the local businesses I support have much in the way of benefits either.