As I look over the political horizon at potential future leaders of the Democrat party, I have to shake my head in disbelief. Is it any wonder that a radical like President Obama is leading that party? I do think Hillary Clinton was a much better choice as President that Obama. With 30% of companies cutting employee health care benefits due to Obamacare, 9.1% unemployment rate, home values down to 2002 levels, energy prices skyrocketing, iand a litany of other reasons, it’s becoming harder to deny that.
As bad of a job Obama has done as President, it’s hard to imagine that the Democrats could have made a worse choice. Looking around at the future of the Democrat party, Anthony Wiener, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and Caroline Fayard, you begin to realize that the Democrats have the best choice they could have made with President Obama. Fayard with her brown shirt rhetoric “I hate Republicans, they eat their young“, and she’s running for Secretary of State? I’ll bet George Soros is sending her money, because I won’t do business with anybody who gives her money. At least Fayard is easy on the eyes, what does Wasserman-Schultz have?
And Weiner? Two years into his marriage and he’s already… uh, sticking it into twitter pics? I’ve got 50 bucks that says twitter pics ain’t the only thing he’s sticking it into. Soon we’ll just accept corruption by Anthony Weiner. We’ll accept it like we accept it from Barney Franks. They get away with it the first time, and the next time, well what are you going to do about it? Less than you did the first time.
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz laid down the gauntlet when she said that Republicans “want to drag us all the way back to Jim Crow“. It’s bad enough that Wasserman-Schultz can’t offer people a real reason to vote for the Democratic party. It’s bad enough that every time she opens her mouth she demonizes Republicans, and it’s bad enough she’s not exactly easy to look at, but for Wasserman-Schultz to say the Republican party wants to take us back to Democrat passed laws is mind numbing to say the least.
Which party passed Jim Crow laws? You guessed it, Democrats.
Which party fought against the Republicans in order to keep slavery in existence? You guessed right, the Democrats.
Members of what party unleashed dogs against black protesters? You guessed right, the Democrats
Which party shot 200-300 black people in Opelousas, La over the defense of a Republican newspaper publisher? That’s right, the Democrats.
Which party wants to fund Planned Parenthood, an organization that still celebrates Margaret Sanger, a hard core racist that wanted to spread abortion as a means to eliminate black people (with African American women accounting for 40% of abortions in America, I’d say she was at least somewhat successful). That’s right, the Democrats.
Which party formed the KKK as a means of preventing blacks from voting for Republicans? You got it, the Democrat party.
President Andrew Johnson, who removed Union troops from occupying the South and thus removed the security African Americans had was a member of what party? You guessed right again, he was a Democrat.
What political party was formed in order to abolish slavery? That’s right, Republicans.
Which political party should be proud of their history for standing against racism? That’s right, the Republicans.
Which political party would rather blame an entire country for their own racist actions, rather than to own up and apologize for it? That’s right, the Democrats.
Which party still practices a natural segregation at their National Conventions?
Which party doesn’t practice a natural segregation at their National Conventions?
Chris Matthews has the answer to those two questions. That’s right, African Americans bunch up together at the Democrat National Convention, they mingle at the GOP conventions.
Perhaps Wasserman-Schultz doesn’t know the racist history of the Democrat party. Maybe Republicans shouldn’t be so afraid to have this debate on race. After all, I merely scratched the surface of the racist history of the Democrat party.