Action Point Radio 7-13-2008

I am not an ultra liberal person.  I am more of a centrist, and actully like, (or understand, but disagree with) the move by Barak Obama since he has been the presumptive nominee.  I think he is understanding the reality in his recent stances toward the war in Iraq, dealing with Iran, and yes (though I hate that it happend) the FISA vote.

I think that reality is playing out all by itself on the posistions of candidate Obama.  The Iraqis are openly saying that they want the Americans on a timetable to be out of thier country, and this supposed "status of forces" agreement has been effectivly tossed out of the window.  What we have been trying with Iran by putting a condition on negotiation has not stopped them from pursuing ther nuclear programme, and the economy is not in the incumbents favor right now, and for the forseable future.

The only thing I actually worried about with candidate Obama was that he was too appeling to the "far left".  People like Jessie Jackson represent the "far left" to me, and they do not effectivly speak for the minority community.  I personally think that candidate Obama should kick Jackson to the curb...make him a non issue right now.

Surprising, coming from me?

I am sorry, that I missed most of your show....

It is a difficult postion for both Obama and Jackson.

Jackson's point is that Obama is focusing on telling people to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, when it has been the Democratic Party historically, that worked so hard to deny blacks their own boots.

Slavery, Jim Crow, Drug War and Welfare Plantations..

Those things that generationaly denied and limited blacks EQUAL opportunity participation in the system.

Obama has no real recourse, he can hardly justify pass sin's of the PARTY, that would alienate his minority support, he cant advocate more quotas and more welfare withouth alienating his Nascar and white supporters.

He can only dump Jackson, like he did with his 20 year relationship with his Pastor.

Obama must move farther to the right politically and reveal his support for Israel and Corporate America if he is to defeat John McCain's support of Israel and Corporate America....

Sorry Moron,

I forgot that LIBERTARIANS were responsible for Democratic Slavery in the South, for Democratic Jim Crow Laws, War on Drugs and incarceration....

IN YOUR WORLD.....

This is the Democratic oppression that Jackson wants FOREFRONT, exposed and FORMALLY condemned, so that the bastards will NOT use the Democratic PARTY to DO IT AGAIN....or as they do now with the Drug War and incarceration....CONTINUE to do....

Continue with your Orwellian approach to try and REWRITE history......

Sieg Heil......Blue TEAM and Blue Shirters...

Yep, Senators Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, both were apart of what party, and then switched to the Libertarians?...

Oh wait, what did the Libertarians do on Civil Rights or Voting rights in the 1960's?

Oh, and Thurmond and Helms were Democartic senators, who swithced parties, because they couldn't stand to remain in a party that opposed lynching blacks.

So you are now going to join Moron and Proudly NOT Liberal,

In trying to rewrite history....and Blame Libertarians for Democratic Slavery, Jim Crow laws and generalized Black suppression...

When suppression and oppression is diametrically opposed to all of that?

Not surprising given YOUR Orwellian rewritting of the dictionary, why not rewrite history like Fascists do....

So NOW tell us all what YOU think about Jesse Jackson's criticism of Obama?

As I recall Moronic hypocrite,

It was you and your shill buddie who brought up Jim Crow and how the Democrats historically treated black.

It is you and YOUR buddies who keep going back to 1800's claiming government endowed robber barons epitomize the whole concept of FREE TRADE, by exploiting people and doing damage without any responsibility.....

You know how YOU, and Proud NOT-Liberal and Phaedus keep LYING to divert attention and RESPONIBILIATY for the evils of the Democratic Party....

It is YOU who has gone back in history and justified DEMOCRATIC slavery, saying "well, they were better off under Democratic rule than they would have been under Liberty and Freedom....

You should follow your own advice and stop being such a hypocrite before you attack, attack, attack others....

Tell Karl Rove I said hi, you guys MUST be in daily contact, with the kind of Orwellian Propaganda you are spewing....

Oh, so now Adam, you oppose the freedoms and liberties of employers to enter into agreements with employees without government interferrence?

I'd really like an honest, libertarian answer to that question.

Does an Average Businessman have the right to treat people like serfs, work them in dangerous conditions, and discard their bodies in landfills?

Next, as to US history, and black history within that context, and the positions of American political parties over our 230 year history, here is a quick primer

Both Federalists and Anti-Federalists were pro-slavery

Then Democratic Republicans (Democrats) and Federalists were pro-slavery

Then the Federalists died, and the Whigs replaced them, who were also pro-slavery

Then along came the Republicans, who were anti-slavery and anti-hourly wages (they called it wage slaves) - but they were still rabidly anti- Negro

The Civil War split the Dems - who were all pro-slavery, but not all pro-secession

Then, after the Civil War, Congresional Republicans remained anti-negro/black although also anti- southerner and for awhile with reconstruction protected blacks, while Southern Democrats were really anti black - Northern Dems were few on the ground in the late 19th cent

This status held, until FDR, whose New Deal expanded work and educational opportunities for blacks.

Then LBJ pushed thru the end of Jim Crow, with the Civil Rights and Voting Rights acts.

However, there were no Libertarians until the 1970's. So for anyone to sit here in the 21st Cent, and claim to judge the distant past by today's morals and sensibilities is an impossible one to engage in honestly.

• Was Thomas Jefferson an evil man for owning slaves, which he inheritted, and couldn't free because he was so deep in debt that he hardly owned anything after 1788.
• Was Ghengis Khan a madman, war criminal? In his day and age hardly. The only distinction between him and his contemporaries was the level of sucess, and the butchery it allowed. Killing and raping everyone in a vanquished town was the norm, Ghengis just kept taking bigger towns.
• Were Taft and Wilson horrible, bigotted monsters for supporting Dred Scott and Jim Crow laws? It was all they ever knew.
• Was Jackson a monster for his anti- Indian / native American stance? In his era, his views were universal among Americans, and Canadians, and colonists trhoughout the Americas.