Tuesday, September 14, 2010

REASONS I VOTE REPUBLICAN (and why you should too).

REASON #1 Civil Rights: Slavery, Segregation, and Abortion
Democrats made life A LIVING HELL for African-Americans in the U.S. by keeping slavery legal. However, in the 1850's when Abraham Lincoln founded the Republican party, they ran on an anti-slavery platform. The Democrats defended slavery til the bitter end.
Who's idea was Jim Crow Segregation in the South? You guessed it! Democrats. Who fought them every step of the way? The Republicans. Who fought for civil-rights legislation from the 1800's all the way into the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Republicans. Who resisted them every step of the way? Democrats. Democrats' civil rights record is horrendous. Republicans have a century-and-a-half legacy of fighting for Civil Rights.
That's why African-American abolitionist Frederick Douglass said,"I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intend to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress."
(more articles on history of Blacks and Republican party here --> http://www.nbra.info/ )
And just when you thought the Democrats' civil rights record couldn't get worse, it does. It is the most hypocritical nonsense when Democrats speak of defending the least among us, when Abortion for them is A NON-NEGOTIABLE tenet of their platform. Since 1972, about 50 million children have been legally killed in this nation and it is because of liberal Democrats. A HUGE percentage of those babies aborted happen to be black and Latino; a huge percentage of them happen to be girls. I thought the Democrats were the party of minority and women's rights...
The Republicans on the other hand have been consistently Pro-Life.
One should really consider the TOTALLY DIFFERENT Civil Rights record of each party before saying that "there's no difference between the parties." When it comes to Civil Rights, the Democrat party is a disgrace. The Republicans on the other hand, have much to be proud of in this department.

Democrat policies DESTROYED the inner city.
70% of African-American children are born out-of-wedlock. In other words, anytime you see a young black person, most likely they're being raised by a single mom. Why does that matter? Children (boys especially) raised in single-parent homes are more likely to not get a good education, more likely to be involved in criminal activity, and more likely to be poor. They're also more likely to be involved in riskier sexual behavior meaning that very likely, they're gonna get another young girl pregnant, repeating the cycle of the ghetto all over again. The numbers are similar for Latinos.
What caused this situation? African-American leaders like Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams, Star Parker, and many others lay the blame of the destruction of the black family on many factors, but one of the main ones is government dependence. So Franklin Roosevelt in the 1940's, Lyndon Johnson in the 1960's, and Jimmy Carter in the 1970's tried to "help poor blacks" by giving them government aid. I'm sure they meant well, but the result was that the State took the place of families and gave an incentive to minority families not to marry and to become dependent on the government.
In other words, big government DISEMPOWERED minorities by robbing them of the dignity to take care of themselves.
The old saying goes, "Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves. Franklin Roosevelt bought them all back."
What's the Republican solution? Unfortunately, they've never come up with a satisfactory one, but at least they recognize that when the government goes in to "help," most likely they're gonna screw it up worse. Conservatives like myself recognize that it is only through the empowering of marriages, families, communities, and churches that the inner city will improve. Not through government intervention.

Environmentalist Religion (and its effect on the poor).
Much of the hysteria about global warming, climate change, over-population, nuclear energy, oil drilling, endangered species is first of all based on inconclusive evidence. But sometimes, it's worse than that. Sometimes this type of religious fanaticism leads to destructive results for human beings. One example is the "Delta Smelt." A tiny fish which might be endangered, and because of this environmentalists have convinced California legislators to turn off certain sources of water in the Central Valley of California. Sounds like a good idea? Not for the poorest among us. Decisions like that cause the price of basic food like lettuce to go up, which ultimately hurts the poor. It also hurts poor Latino workers who are the ones that pick fruit in the Central Valley by causing more unemployment.
Another example is DDT. Liberal environmentalists fight against the spraying of DDT which is an insecticide that kills mosquitoes that carry Malaria in Africa. Instead they say we should give those in Africa mosquito nets because they're afraid of the consequences of DDT on crops. It sounds good, but as a result many thousands upon thousands of African people have died of Malaria.
Why not spray DDT? Because it "feels good" to be green. It gives us a nice warm feeling to "save the planet," never mind the disastrous effects on actual human lives.
Another example is oil drilling. We have tons of sources in the U.S. to drill oil, but liberal environmentalists always try to depict this as somehow evil. So because of restrictions on drilling in the U.S. we have to depend more on foreign oil, and prices of gasoline which could drop, stay high. (who is most affected by high gas prices? poor families, who else?).

Economics & Poverty
Since the Democrat Party has so much faith in the power of government to bring about equality, they have no problem taxing the prosperous in order to redistribute money to the neediest through government programs. Now, though sometimes this is necessary, it makes no sense to try to help the poor by making the nation less prosperous.
And this is exactly what happens when government over-taxes private business. Businesses aren't as profitable, which means there's less wealth to go around. Businesses then have to raise prices on their goods, which for the rich is not much of a problem, but which is a big deal for a family shopping for clothes, gas and groceries. What else happens when businesses are over-taxed? They stop hiring. Unemployment goes up. Who is hurt most by that? The poor.
The Republican party on the other hand understands that if we want the private economy to prosper, government needs to STAY OUT OF THE WAY. Now the Republicans don't always follow their own advice, but at least there's some among the party that understand this basic economic principle and actually try to stop over-taxation.
Many in the Democrat party sincerely believe that more taxation and regulation of the economy will end in good results. They fail to learn from history that the more you tax and regulate an economy, the more poor the nation becomes.

The elitism of the Democrat Party.
One of the worst pieces of misinformation out there is that the Democrat party is somehow the party of "the little guy." Now although there are wealthy people that make up both parties' leadership, there is nothing like the elite "noble" class that makes up the Democrat party. The Democrat party makes up the "cool crowd" so to speak.
The following groups are almost entirely Democrat:
1. Trial lawyers.
2. Wealthy union bosses.
3. The Journalist class, which controls the media.
4. Hollywood.
5. Academics (not only the intellectual class, but also University administrators)
6. Billionaires like George Soros, Bill Gates, T. Boone Pickens, etc.
As a matter of fact, what do the TEN WEALTHIEST Congressional districts in America have in common? You guessed it! They are all heavily Democrat. You know, those communities where the poor only see from afar. Places like San Francisco, Westwood, and quaint little neighborhoods in New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Connecticut. So much for the party of "the little guy!"
This is how LIBERAL scholar Camille Paglia describes HER OWN party,
"Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers (one reason for the hypocritical absence of tort reform in the healthcare bills). Weirdly, given their worship of highly individualistic, secularized self-actualization, such professionals are as a whole amazingly credulous these days about big-government solutions to every social problem. They see no danger in expanding government authority and intrusive, wasteful bureaucracy."

No comments: