@Bob McBride...Which argument are you referring to, the political right or the political left?

The one you're making.

@Bob McBride...By the way Bob, I didn't introduce the issue. It was Noelle Lorraine and J.B. Schmidt that broached it. In four years racial denial has only gotten worse. As long as the political right can deny any injustices exist due to racial motivation, then it is easy to rationalize their immoral positions and make choices to further victimize already victimized people.

One of the definitive attributes of prejudice, of which racism is a subset, is the lumping of all people presumed to be of a like nature into a group and then ascribing a certain mindset or other characteristics to the group as a whole.

In that sense and within the context of this article (I won't make assumptions beyond that at this point) you are the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.

By doing so, you attempt (as was attempted 4 years ago) to preemptively negate any position proffered by the right that calls into question that of the President and the party you support. The need to do so is even greater at this point than it was 4 years ago because he now has a track record that can be examined and critiqued as a part of the campaign process leading up to the election. Hence your insistence that racial denial has gotten "worse". Other than your opinion that that's the case, you offer no evidence in that regard.

What president has been asked to produce his birth certificate? What president has been the subject of so many blatant racist attacks? What president has had is faith questioned and accused of being a Muslim? What president has been so disrespectfully confronted on a personal level? And the Secret Service is telling us that death threats against this president are at an all time high?

Yeah, you can have legitimate concerns about Obama's policies. But you should also be angry by the racist side shows on the right that distract from those criticisms.

Keith, as usual, you prove my point.

You don't seem to get Bob that we are criticizing the acts, not the people.

Keith, you've repeatedly made generalizations about racism on the part of those on the right, in fact you've done so right in this thread. From below:

********************

Moreover, the ones who have trouble with his race are a lot of Republicans, including people who appear on this blog. You know that the presence of a black man in the white house is driving them absolutely nuts.

*******************
That's not about acts, that's about people, Keith. It's an effort to negate any argument against your side by labeling anyone who does so as racist, and it's an attempt to lump everyone in a particular group into the same basket. It comes so naturally to you that you don't even notice it anymore. You can deny it all you want, but it's pretty much sitting there in plain sight.

Bob, you failed to answer any of my points so it looks like they stand.

So you have no argument except your usual cynicism, which doesn't cut it, and really proves my point.

This is a serious problem in this country for serious people. You don't fall into that category by any means, and your standard personal attacks again, prove my point.

Keith, you're deflecting. There's no personal attack above, just an accurate observation of how what you said regarding acts versus people doesn't stand and an offering up of evidence in that regard that exists in this very thread.

You can't deny it so you go on the attack. I've grown accustomed to it, Keith. I really don't expect any better from you.

@Bob McBride....I fully understand the nature of prejudice and in particular racism. Prejudice comes from two sources; 1) Nature, and 2) Nurture. The perpetuation of racism is entirely a feature of the nurture aspect of attitude acquisition, values and beliefs. It prevails in spite of all the evidence stacked against its legitimacy. I strongly think that racism gets in the way of effectively dealing with the problems in society.

I did not claim that all on the political right are racist. I have never found you or many others on the right to give any kind of indication of racial prejudice or racial motivation. You and I may disagree on policy and direction, but I have never seen you use the "race card" to support any of your positions.

I agree that the President must be judged on his policies and actions, not on his race or social status. We have the opportunity to make a decision based on performance and that's how it should be. When I wrote this article I wasn't even thinking about the president, but the cynicism of charges that the political left was actively supporting the continuation of government programs for the sake of keeping people dependent to sustain political power.

And as you've seen, Lyle, in this very thread, there are examples of how those on the left ascribe motivation to positions and actions by those on the right and attempt to broad brush that side of the political fence in its entirety in the same fashion you're attributing to those on the right.

I could easily draw up a laundry list of questionable accusations, attacks and offer examples of less than exemplary exchanges between those on the left during campaigns of the past and insist that, before any discussion ensues, those on the left must repudiate my list as we've seen Keith "Robo-call" Schmitz do here.

The point is that your side is no more willing to discuss topics seriously without first injecting an obstacle course of accusations those on the other side must navigate to your side's satisfaction than is the side you claim operates almost exclusively in that fashion.

I'm also going to have to take issue with the continual claim that your side expunged all its racists back via a mass conversion of Dixie-crats. You've had your share, up until very recently, of legislators and others who've offered up public disclaimers of their KKK past, to which your side has granted a a sort of amnesty in exchange for support of Democratic initiatives.

@Raymond Anthony...Yes, I am a social democrat and I live in Shorewood. What's your point?

@OneTermYesWeCan2012... What evidence do you have to support your conjecture. Do you think the white members of society have the higher moral ground? I would be interested to hear your arguments.

The things operate in this country is that if someone looks black as Obama does, despite his split, society pushes him in the direction of being black.

However, Obama seems to celebrate both sides of his heritage.

Moreover, the ones who have trouble with his race are a lot of Republicans, including people who appear on this blog. You know that the presence of a black man in the white house is driving them absolutely nuts.

@Jay Sykes...It is not exclusively a racial characteristic that is the problem with out of wedlock births and teens pregnancies. We can and should discuss it based on a symptom of a deeper problem; the culture of chronic poverty. When we cut funding to effective programs, such as Planned Parenthood, we are significantly making the problem worse. To change sex education to teach abstinence only, makes the situation worse. The programs and efforts directed toward the problem must be culturally relevant and significant, adequately funded, and supported by the community and society as a whole. Cynical campaigns that only point out the problem as evidence of a group's subhuman status is what is racism.

Jay, those are a symptom of a disease and product of the way this society treats black people.

Case in point. In this country Koreans are regarded as a "model ethnicity" and as a result, they function quite successfully in the country. On the other hand, in Japan, they are treated like outcasts as blacks are in this country and consequently they function much less successfully.

When you look at the horrible history of race relations in this country it is amazing that blacks that do work out their lives in a positive direction can do that.

It would interesting to see to what degree the client base of Planned Parenthood draws from those communities (black, white, or other) that have high teen pregnancy rates.

As far as sex education goes, one has to attend school and pay attention to benefit from those classes. Given the correlation between those communities exhibiting high teen pregnancy rates and, to the degree to which such figures are attainable, the effectiveness of our educational system as whole, I'm not so sure sex education has much of an effect. But if the argument is that it does, then hopefully such education focuses, heavily, on the life-changing effects of "unwanted" pregnancy. That needs to be hit repeatedly and hit hard if (again, assuming, education has any measurable effect in those communities) the prevailing attitude towards it is to change.

@Lyle... To confirm that it is the culture of poverty causing the disparity, can we see through an adjustment of the statistics, that the the unwed and teen birth rates are the same across race?
I'll not claim causality, but, there sure is a big correlation between the start of the 'War on Poverty' and out of wedlock births.

@Jay Sykes...The issues surrounding chronic poverty is like picking up a porcupine, no matter where you try your going to get some quills. That being said; not only was the out of wedlock births and teen pregnancies impacted by the period paralleled with the "War on Poverty", but all norms, morways and folkways. Over four decades the negative sanctions of out of wedlock births has subsided and the stain of illegitimacy forsaken. These attitudes have crossed all SES lines leading to redefining the nature of relationships and the treatment of individuals from out of wedlock births. I think most people from the middle class and upper classes have generally waited to begin having children, but out of wedlock births is also at an all time high. There is correlation between onset of first pregnancy with affluence and education levels, with the less affluent beginning childbirth earlier than the more affluent.

Bren, I know of several houses available for immediate occupancy at VERY reasonable prices in the area of 3rd and Keefe. If you wish to lead by example, have at it.

Yes Bren you are contributing. Are you going to be do something about it or just preach on your high horse?

@Bren, do you even have to ask this question “Why is southeastern Wisconsin one of the most, if not the most hyper-segregated communities in the U.S.?” Two words ‘Brown Deer’. I’m sorry but I don’t want WFB, Shorewood, Bayside, Fox Point, and River Hills to become what Brown Deer has become; segregation works for this voter. You’re all wrong on your summary of “good salaries leave, the tax base diminishes” I ask you what came first the ghetto or the black people?

We are not adding to the problem. The fact is that like minded people with like resources tend to gravitate towards each other and live in the same areas. I think you will find that minorities living in the north shore have much more in common with their non-minority neighbors than their minority brothers in the low income areas. Your attitude is a dangerous one, especially when the government has the same mindset. All you have to do is look at the Northridge area for your example. The people responsible for that disaster should have their you know whats hung from a wall. They took a middle class/affluent area and turned it into a ghetto. Destroying 10s of millions in property value in the process. Northridge is not an isolated example, it is the norm for this type of forced migration. It's been repeated 100s of times around the country. With the same type of results.

I really wish this was not a reality but it is. You are certainly free to move out of the North Shore Bren and start the migration yourself.

Here's your enlightened audience, Lyle. Embrace it.

Vicki:

I've heard somewhere that the problem is that we have too many regular "trolls" who are posting their political views constantly without consideration of others. Others are posting very bigoted and offensive remarks under the guise of a political point of view.

I thought your position was that posters that use their own name will actually write thoughtful remarks without offending others?

Making such charges against all those who do not support Obama is disrespectful at best and downright hateful at worst.

Personally, I can't wait to hear the 'Angry White' perspective on this issue and the reaction that such will undoubtedly generate :-)

Came and went already, I believe, JRH. You've got to check in early and often to beat the moderators to the punch these days.

@ J.B
Well stated .

@J.B. Schmidt...It's time for you to hit the history books and not the partisan ones currently published by the radical right in their attempts to revise history for their own purposes. The truth is that JFK was unwilling to become an advocate for civil rights and attempted to stay away from it as far as possible. FDR also didn't want to address civil rights for African Americans and attempted to minimize the racial inequalities. It was Harry Truman who was the first advocate for civil rights and he desegregated the US Military and the Federal Civil Service. LBJ took up the torch and when civil rights legislation finally passed it is when the Dixiecrats switched parties. Don't forget the last of the Dixiecrats to retire was Strom Thurmond who also ran as an independent candidate for president in 1948 on a segregationist platform. It has taken 60 years to break the institutional and structural racism in the South and it is true that the Republicans that emerged were dedicated to racial equality. But no one from that era or this era are seriously disclaiming that racism no longer exists. You are the one who has denied that racism is a problem and you were called out for it in Noelle Lorraine's blog. I wrote you then I would respond to your comment in a blog, which I have.

Your contention that the social safety net is no longer a social safety net, but a way of life, is proof positive that the racial and social inequality and injustice still exists.

(continued)

This curve breaks my heart:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_poverty_rate_timeline.gif

Look at the poverty rate plummeting and then the inflection right where the war on poverty begins...inflection upwards. We've institutionalized poverty in this country where it's become a career choice in families as much as becoming a cop in a family of cops or a teacher in a family of teachers. We've basically told the protected classes in this country that they are not the equal of the non-protected classes and we have to give them special benefits just so they can get by in life. You probably won't get a job, but if you do get a job then we'll make sure you can't be fired even though you may be incompetent. We've told the protected classes that they aren't responsible for their poor decisions; it's our fault, not theirs. We've essentially created spoiled children out of the protected classes. Should we be surprised when they've lived a responsibility free life that they decide to drop out of school, live in our basement, stay high 24/7 and eat out of our refrigerator for the rest of their lives?

We should hold everyone accountable for their actions regardless of their ethnicity, gender, whatever. Instead of making life easier for the protected classes we should put more responsibility on them. Guarantee this will make for more confidence and self worth in those classes.

@J.B. Schmidt...(continued) You claimed that because racism is not longer an issue, that all people remaining within poverty and government assistance is through choice, therefore undeserving of assistance. Talk about half truths and fallacious thinking, that's what you are perpetrating. I know that you and Noelle are self described Tea Party Patriots and your attitudes on race and the state of poverty is precisely what has made many attribute the Tea Party Movement with racism. The last time such a movement arose was during the 1920s and 1930s in Germany, Austria, Spain, Italy, France, and the Netherlands. The lower and middle classes felt they had been betrayed and sold out during the First World War, which led to extreme nationalism. They scapegoated minorities including the Roma, the disabled, the mentally infirm, those suffering birth defects, and the Jews. This corrupted nationalism fully supported eugenics. You know the rest of the story and I don't need to go further.

@Lyle
It is you and democrats that assume that a cut in welfare is an attack on a specific race. It is you and democrats that want us to believe that blacks cannot escape the inner city without the controlling hand of the Government Master. When you have 2nd and 3rd generations of people on welfare it becomes a lifestyle. So while you and Democrats continue to associate poverty as a black thing; the 'Tea Baggers' (as so kindly pointed out by Brian Carlson) and I will continue to ween all people of welfare in favor of the American Dream. No, that doesn't mean no safety net. It means limited help after the private charity institutions have been exhausted. It means making welfare taboo again. It means making people responsible for their own families. It means complete support only for those that cannot support themselves. If you wish to place blacks in that last category, then continue with the current system as Democrats have established.

As for Strom Thurmond, I would like to congratulate you on one. Let me just add Robert Byrd to my list.

I am not claiming racism is gone. That would be like removing murder from society, it is impossible. What I am saying is that mainstream racism is gone. The current act of affirmative action is to assume that minorities aren't good enough to make a living on their own. The 'Tea Baggers' believe that blacks can make it just as far as whites. I would use Obama as our example.

@J.B. Schmidt....I too want to ween people off of government assistance. Only questions I have for you are: Where are the ;jobs to employ all these people? Where is the capital to fund the entrepreneurs? Where are the private agencies to help those in need? Until those problems are solved, then the situation will remain static and you and your ilk can continue to blame the victims in this conditions of injustice.

@Lyle
Where is the almost $1 trillion that was supposed to solve that?

If we look over the last 3 years we see business unable to start business because of democratic control (ie keystone pipeline or mining). We see companies afraid to hire because they know Obamacare will take more profits, they don't know when the payroll tax will come back and they don't know when Obama will decide to undo the Bush tax cuts. The Obama administration halted Boeing from opening a plant because of union rules. If we can't provide stable government, how can we ask them to stick their necks out.

The democratic policy has created the situation. Now we want to change it and you start screaming about poor. So you suggest more spending, which only digs us a deeper hole. Only 50% of the US citizens pay taxes. That must change, before the country will. It may hurt some; but their is no other solution. The true injustice exists in the tax code; where people can take full advantage of service and pay nothing. That exists on both ends of the tax spectrum. I am not for increasing the tax rate, but equalizing the tax liability among the entire population.

@J.B. Schmidt....In answering my questions, you didn't answer them but went on a rant against the Democrats. The reality is that the economic system we have been following for over three decades has failed us. The economic system proposed and controlled by the political right has put us in this fiscal state. What part of this don't you get. We have been manipulated and abused by the power of the plutocracy, yet you turn around and spout the propaganda of support for the broken system.

The economy is growing and jobs are being added but the radical political right can't acknowledge such a thing. You forget this is the deepest and most extensive recession since the Great Depression. It took a war to get us out of that one. Give credit where credit is due.

@Lyle
You are right. Here are 6 things:

1)Repeal Obama Care

2)Make Bush tax cuts permanent

3)Make Corporate tax rate at 15%

4)No spending to exceed what the last budget (2009) established or prior years tax revenues, which ever comes first.

5)Drill baby drill, mine baby mine and keystone pipeline

6)Reinstall payroll tax, since we have no other way to fund social security

When the country's economy takes off in 6 months we can start to get rid of the socialist systems in place.

Six jagged pills for the economy JB and you really blew your credibility with the last sentence.

I can't speak for others, but I know that I would have preferred to see Condi Rice as our first Black president instead of Obama...

I am proud to say that we have a black president. Whether or not I make that claim has no effect on the fact that I hate his policy.

Let's say that Herman Cain were our first "person of color" elected to that high office. Would you have wished him well and hoped for the best - in the sense that he was able to pursue his policies effectively?

Actually, to me there's nothing unique that Obama brings to the office that any other male might not. I will find much more interesting our first female president when that happens, because I do believe that men and women are wired differently (based on having worked for both) and I think some of that difference might lead to more effective leadership in some regards. I still believe, given the option, Hillary would have made a much better president, and that, from the perspective of actually getting done what she was elected to do, probably would have taken advantage of the window of opportunity that Obama let slip by. I will say I'm basing that more on the impression I have of her as a person than as anything related to her sex. Substitute Nancy Pelosi for Hillary Clinton, and Obama's the better choice.

I think you're buying into a stereotype regarding conservatives yourself there, Brian.

I think I am in agreement with you on the Hillary thing. If she has won the nomination and were running against McCain, I would have voted for her. I still see her as someone who would have been a much more effective leader and president than either Obama or McCain.

Brain Carlson, you are obviously projecting your own inherent failures by trying to label millions of people the way you are.

You are a physical and mental coward, and if you said such insults to my face you'd find yourself on your back end.

Pointing out: I have seen many Walker supporters on here that have advised they are sick and tired of the free ride that "some " have, and are ecstatic Walker is cutting these benefits off like Medicaid. The fact is, as long as we have ghettos we will have poverty, crime and racism that is extreme. Racism also goes both ways. I have seen many blacks using terms like "uncle toms", when talking about white people which is just as wrong. Unfortunately, from reading some of the blogs here some Republicans are against things that have primarily been given to minorities such as medicaid and welfare. That may seem like a racist remark but it is fact. I have seen these racist remarks all over the place on here. I am starting to think that some Republicans are against any assisted benefits such as Badgercare. Well lets face it, as a society we will always have underpriviliged, uneducated Americans that we will have to help support. As Americans we should have top notch health care for all Americans. Some people have more advantages than others by where they grew up, parents, family and socioeconomic status. Some of us were given silver spoons and some worked their tails off like me to become advanced degreed and a small business owner through hard work, that I paid for with no assistance at all. I for one have no problem helping people in society that are down and out as long as it is equal for all. As we become more segregated with politics, our country will become more racist.

"Let's say that Herman Cain were our first "person of color" elected to that high office..."

Of course that is different because he is someone who is advocating policies that against the interests of his race (and a lot of other people). That same argument went for, well why aren't blacks thrilled about Clarence Thomas or why aren't women getting behind Sarah Palin or Michele Bachman?

Same argument for why didn't the French get behind Marshal Philippe Pétain or the Norwegians back Vidkun Quisling?

That's what's know in the trade as collaborators.

So I guess what you're saying, Keith, is you wouldn't be wishing him well and sincerely hope for the best just because he's black.

To set you straight Bob, I wouldn't support him because he would be a sell out.

Again, picture yourself in WWII France. I could. Bet you'd be a big Pétain fan.

I think you've missed the point of Brian's original post here and, subsequently, the point of my mentioning Cain. It has nothing to do with his policies, beliefs or whether or not you think he's a sell out.

Well said!!

Oak Creek resident. Name calling must be the height of your mental prowess. You seem to resort to it immediately. Skinny...I didnt recommend voting for someone because he or she is black. Cain was a great example of a man I would not vote for. I guess all of you folks seem to think that race has no factor in the anti-Obama rhetoric. I wont persuade you otherwise. I will say that, while I cant speak for millions of republicans, racism is very much alive and unfortunately well in this country. It isnt only a white to black issue, and world-wide, obviously includes many races or people's feeling superior to others. None of you admit to any of this factoring... I take it you are all white or is that a presumption here too?

Cowards? Where's your name pal?

No matter how much you claim something doesn't exist, it is the elephant in the room and ignoring it does us no good.

No white guilt. As a Christian I hate seeing people oppressed, and the oppressors oppressing themselves.

That's bad history pal and if you are going to post, better know what you are talking about.

... and thank you for reinforcing the points I made in my posting. People like you and Keith Shitz only blab about any white on black racism, whether real or imagined.

Let me ask you this: if and when whites are the minority, will they then get special rights and treatments? Will they get hired out of the need to fill a quota? Will it be all but impossible to fire them for fears of racism? You are digging yourself a hole you can't get out of, dimwit.

If it's truly the Tea and Republican parties that apparently picked-up the former Dixie-crat racists, and continue to harbor such racist sentiments to this day in the party platform/ideology, whether overt or subliminal, then could you please explain why we have all of the socially accepted 'minority' special interest groups, such as the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, etc, but the mere mention of a Congressional White Caucus would immediately draw the ire of leftist ready to cry racism? Isn't the mere existence of such groups symbolic and indicative of overt racist sentiments? And more often than not, what side of the modern political aisle do those groups tend to associate themselves with?

As others have noted on this board, 'reverse discrimination' has become the prevalent and overt form of racism being practiced in America today. If anything, it's this 'reverse discrimination' that's fueling an increased interest in the Aryan/White nationalist movement.

The bottom line is that laws can't and won't change a person's feelings - in fact, our Constitution permits us the freedom to hate, if we so choose to engage in such feelings, on whatever grounds we so desire. The interstate commerce clause and equal opportunity legislation won't act to effectively change those feelings. At this stage in the game, the best thing that government can do is initiate policy and law that treats everyone equally and fairly, instead of trying to promote certain groups out of feelings of guilt, restitution, and reparation.

At this point, the policies of affirmative action and reverse discrimination are actually starting to counter the progress that's already been made. The focus and emphasis should be on the equality of opportunity - not the equality of outcome.

So, if you could get your fellow lefties to stop unfairly labeling the right as being racists, I think that this would be a great place to start in actually combating the type of fixable racism that exists today. Don't you? But to continue with or even enlarge the scope of policies that are no longer relevant to the issue as it exits today, as suggested by you in your blog, would only continue to lead us backwards with divisiveness instead of forward with unity.

I believe that this was the underlying message of Ms. Lorraine, and I proudly stand with her in attempting to dispel the racist label from modern conservative ideology.

@JRH....I want to focus on the "reasonable man" argument. We don't gain a thing lobbing hand grenades at each other. The problem of poverty is a serious issue that must be addressed sooner rather than later. Our half-hearted attempts at solving the problems has not been good enough and to make the cynical claim that we now have a condition of equal opportunity is just not supported by the facts. Do I think you are a racist; absolutely not. Do I think that the radical right movement is the home of racists; absolutely yes. They take the arguments coming from the right to vent their spleens with the vile spouting of hate. Claims that the political left is holding the poor in penury conditions and dependency, just to continue a political power position, is just plain incorrect.

I am more concerned about reforming education, creating jobs available for all who will work and providing capital to entrepreneurs to create new business. This is what the community in poverty needs.

@Lyle -

"We don't gain a thing lobbing hand grenades at each other."

I whole heatedly agree with this sentiment, but then must question why you chose to open your current blog with a subtle jab at Ms. Lorraine and her blog, wherein she was merely trying to dispel the heated rhetoric that is constantly being espoused by the left towards the right on racial issues. Nothing like keeping the fire going while claiming to be trying to extinguish it, is there?

"Our half-hearted attempts at solving the problems has not been good enough and to make the cynical claim that we now have a condition of equal opportunity is just not supported by the facts."

How exactly do 'the facts' indicate that equal opportunity does not exist in the modern consensus reality?

Once again, I'm reminded of the example of the Chicago Housing Authority. The Chicago projects were originally intended as providing temporary subsidized housing to assist people in helping themselves get back on their feet as they worked towards a financially independent lifestyle. In other words, it was intended to be transitional, just as all poverty assistance programs funded by the government should be.

In the early years, the projects were largely inhabited by white Italian and Irish immigrants that used them as they were intended to be used. They respected the opportunities that society had provided for them by taking it upon themselves to take care of these projects, often times forming neighborhood cleanup and repair initiatives. In other words, these people treated the projects as most people that live in your neighborhood care for their homes. The time of residency in the projects for these people was as little as 7 months to an average mean of 1.65 years and certainly no longer than 3 years in the rarest circumstances.

Starting in the late '60's, the racial makeup of project residents transitioned from being a majority white to 99.8% African American by the mid '80's. While I know that those on left like to blame the city for allowing for the deterioration of the buildings and living conditions in the projects, the fact of the matter remains that these new residents literally trashed them because they didn't have the pride or respect towards the public property that their predecessors exhibited. 95% of these new residents were unemployed and listed public assistance as their sole source of income, despite the fact that tens of thousands of un-skilled entry level minimum wage jobs were going unfilled in and around the city until a wave of Latin and Pakistani/Indian immigration swept through the area in the early to mid '90's. And the time of residency in the projects for these people ranged from a low of 5 years to an average mean of 12 years with many such residents exceeding 30+ years, leading to generations of families being raised in such environment.

Forgive me for saying so, but when I see a certain group of people trashing the public property that I worked my butt off to help provide them opportunity, it disheartens and upsets me immensely. Those feelings naturally elevate when I hear arguments that they need or are deserving of even more of my money in order to help further 'balance' the equality of opportunity.

I can't help but to wonder why the Italians and Irish were able to make it work while taking care of the projects, while the African Americans failed miserably when given the same opportunity, and actually trashed the public property in the process? And you can't tell me that it was because racial discrimination kept them from finding gainful employment, as there were plenty of jobs available that were later filled by Latin American and Pakistani/Indian immigrants. So obviously, there's something else going on here, isn't there?

I'm all for providing a safety net, but only when it's used as such and respected by those that are receiving/reaping its benefits. But when people trash what I and others hard work has paid for and then have the gall to demand more from me and others in the name of 'fairness' and 'equality' - I'm sorry, but that just plain pisses me off!

@JRH....We could beat this horse until it's incapable to standing. I am fully familiar with Cabrini-Green and its status for everything wrong with government assistance. The story is deeper and more complex, but two issues remain; 1) The surrounding jobs around the "Green" closed or moved leaving a large population of unemployed. Just like what we have experienced in Milwaukee's Inner City. 2) The sociological variable of assimilation. The greatest physical obstruction to successful assimilation in the wider culture and society is race. Unlike other groups of Caucasians who have successfully assimilated into "American Culture", African Americans remain, as different and separate, because of their skin color. The long history of race continues to keep the doors closed to equal opportunity. Since a person of color cannot change their color at will, it is the responsibility of the majority to make every effort to compensate and create conditions unequal to the majority. For a lack of a better term; Affirmative Action, which leads to governmental discrimination of the racial majority. In my opinion, this is the only way to level the playing field. We who are dealing with the 'sins of our fathers" must understand and fully accept our duty to creating equal opportunity. This includes supporting those in need until they are fully capable of self support and the environment allows such.

But how long do we follow that path and fail, Lyle? Another 50 years (since the inception of Affirmative Action)? What real economic improvement have we seen for those it was designed to help in that amount of time, other than a few examples that probably owe their success as much to their own personal fortitude as anything else? Is it working, or is it something that makes us feel like we're doing something to assuage our guilt over the "sins of the father"? I don't ascribe to the notion that social programs such as these are some form of "political slavery", but if one is to go by the results achieved overtime, to a large extent it appears they have done more to benefit the self-image of those who promote them than they have to help those who are supposed to be their direct beneficiaries.

If I had my druthers Bob, I'd rather see these people in jobs. If they had their druthers, many of these people would rather be in jobs.

Why? Nothing provides a feeling of self-respect, especially as so many, as we have seen on this blog, are rabidly eager to tear them down.

@Bob McBride....If I had the answer to what we do to finally overcome the need for widespread assistance, I certainly wouldn't be sitting in Shorewood writing about the problem, but I would be out doing something about it. I hate the fact that we are continually beating our heads against brick walls. I also hate that we have a class of people that continue generation after generation living in chronic poverty without any apparent fix. Admittedly we have made some major blunders based on false assumptions. One that immediately comes to mind was under the Carter Administration where policy broke up intact families so that they could continue receiving AFDC. This complicated the family structure by pulling able bodies men away from their families further diminishing the influence of the male parent. The basic Southern Culture had intact families even though they began and remained pretty much of a matriarchal structure. The consequence has been the absentee male without employment and without ties to the family, only to participate and pursue the underground economy and take up the life of the gangs. What have we done to encourage the reintegration of the male parent back into the family? Nothing at all! This is only one issue compounded by many more. I think we all know that to finally break the cycle of poverty it will take education, but a different kind than we are now providing, but do we have the patience and public will to do so, waiting another 25 years.

Me too, Keith, but what we've been doing for at least 50 years hasn't really been working so I'm not sure doing more of the same is the solution. Last place I worked at in the city had a facility right in the middle of a blighted area. We had job openings. Almost no one in the area applied for any of them and the ones who did couldn't qualify because they had to be able to do simple math and exhibit a degree of reading comprehension. Qualified candidates from outside the area didn't want to come into the area. We had local kids who'd come bolting in in groups through the dock doors in the afternoon to steal stuff and run out the doors. Cars busted into to. Folk accosted on their way in and out of the place. Bringing customers in for a plant tour was out of the question. Ended up having to hire a security firm to provide someone to patrol the grounds (I suppose that created a job). Frankly, if the company hadn't been locked into the facility, it would have been in our best interest to get out of the area.

Got a solution for that one, Keith? I don't think it'll wait another 2 years if my hunch is correct, much less another 50.

@Lyle -

When your people were persecuted and discriminated against for their religious believes, they took it upon themselves to do something about it and ended up building a wonderful resort / vacation community in upstate New York's Sullivan and Ulster counties that became fondly known as the Borscht Belt. When the Pakistanis, Indians, and Latinos started migrating to American en mass between the late '80's to late '90's, not only were they 'people of color,' but many also chose to retain their traditional / religious clothing / garb, and yet they still managed to find gainful employment and survive independently, and in a majority of cases, without the use/need of any public assistance funding / programs. The same can be said for people of Asian descent. So, what makes African Americans and their struggles so very different, special, and/or unique vs other 'people of color,' as quite frankly I don't see how it's possible for these other less assimilated groups of people to flourish here without the need for your Affirmative Action programs if in fact white America is as racist and un-accepting of others as you seem to think it still is. How to you account for such discrepancies and disconnect between the various groups mentioned?

In fact, the only difference that comes to mind are the many governmental social programs that tend to target the African American community and that community's open embracing of those programs - almost like it's a deserved entitlement. Or is there something more that I'm just not seeing or don't get? Because based on the realities and experiences of other 'people of color,' there has to be some other explanation than your two tiered lack of jobs and racial discrimination by whites, and I think that you realize this to be true.

@JRH...The operative word is choice. Slaves and their descendents were never given the option of coming here. They were brought to our shores against their will.

@Lyle -

So, should we have offered all of the slave's descendents free passage back to Africa?

The 'choice' argument still doesn't show how 'slave mentality' racism is still alive and well in America today, does it? After all, many of the other groups of people of color came over during the '80's and '90's and were able to make it work without assistance. Meanwhile, we were dumping record sums of money into assistance directed at the African American community and it didn't really help at all, did it?

Again, what am I missing here?

@JRH...As a matter of fact, Lincoln wanted to create colonies in Africa to repatriate freedmen. He didn't think blacks and whites could liver together. In 1820 colonies of freed slaves colonized that area on the Pepper Coast of West Africa that would become the Republic of Liberia in 1847. There has been continued attempts and movements to offer colonization opportunities over the last couple centuries.

In truth, a parallel African American Culture developed within the greater society. the experience of slavery and then freedmen under penury created much of values, morality and folkways that few in the larger community understand. That culture continues and attempts to remold it has proved unsuccessful. The culture largely functions in extended family groups led by senior matriarchs. The assigned roles for women and men are adapted to the reality of absentee males. Under the Southern Penury System, where males were sentenced to work gangs for minor offenses, created conditions where families couldn't count on male presence. To fully understand the system, we should get together and talk about it. You being an attorney, take a look at that Southern Penury System, I think you'll be shocked. In short, the group has only about four decades of full integration and the culture is pretty pervasive.

Let's look at the facts.

What president has been asked to produce his birth certificate? What president has been the subject of so many blatant racist attacks? What president has had is faith questioned and accused of being a Muslim? What president has been so disrespectfully confronted on a personal level? And the Secret Service is telling us that death threats against this president are at an all time high? What president has been heckled during a State of the Union? What President has had a bony, nicotine finger stuck in his face on the tarmac?

Failed administration? GM revived, Bin Laden died. Sweeping health care reform. 24 straight months of job growth. The Dow busting 13000 today.

Pretty damed good for a "socialist" don't you think?

Keith Schmitz - Yes, Let's look at the facts.

What president has been asked to produce his birth certificate? All of them, it is a requirement. Mandatory. But, Obama has all of records sealed for some reason. First thing he did, imagine that. Hmmm.
What president has been the subject of so many blatant racist attacks? Bush comes to mind.
What president has had is faith questioned and accused of being a Muslim? Wait, what? I thought he spent 20 years with Rev. Wright? Oh you mean the time he told Stephanopolous he was Muslim? Only to be "reminded" by 'ol Steph boy he was Christian.
What president has been so disrespectfully confronted on a personal level? Ah, um Bush for $200 Keith.
And the Secret Service is telling us that death threats against this president are at an all time high? Telling who? That would not be a parto f that "secret" component.
What president has been heckled during a State of the Union? Millard Fillmore.
What President has had a bony, nicotine finger stuck in his face on the tarmac? Hillary Clinton smokes?

Failed administration? GM revived. Ask the bondholders.
Bin Laden died. I thought Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize?
Sweeping health care reform. What reform?
24 straight months of job growth. Wrong answer.
The Dow busting 13000 today. Wow. And the Bucks have lost 5 straight home games.

How much is a gallon of gas?

@Keith Schmitz
Facts are funny things:

Who was the racist that challenged McCain's birth certificate? (or the others mentioned in the article) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28mccain.html
I assume the attacks by people like Farrakhan, Spike Lee and other prominent blacks against Bush was not racism but just playful jeering.
He went to a muslim school growing up, what is racist about questioning it? Is the questioning of Santorum's Christianity by liberals racist also?
Name one candidate that has not be disrespectfully confronted? The glitter baths the occupy movement has been giving people on the right seems to be fairly disrespectful.
I bet that threats against Walker have increased by the same percentage. Who is the racist there? Black union members?
I will say that the heckling was wrong, but that was because of policy. I will say he is the only president to call out the Supreme Court (which is mostly white) does that make him racist?
Which male president attacked a female governor? Does that make him a sexist? Sounds more like tit for tat then racism.
GM would have been revived by a private equity firm. They would have restructured without the toxic union which got the tax payer money.
Bin Laden is dead, good.
Health care reform that has yet to take effect and has already driven up premium.
We have fewer jobs available today then we did in 2009, many economist are skeptical of our recovery.

Hippie, don't know if you are dumb or duplicitous.

So many howlers it is hard were to begin. Let's start with the most ridiculous.
Do you watch the news? Obama has been hounded endlessly on the birth certificate.

Billy Graham's cracker son just this morning questioned Obama's Christianity. Give the Rev. Wright thing a rest. What did you guys have what? Three YouTubes? And the most part he was right about his rants, besides the fact that he was the one of the most respected ministers in Chicago.

As far as the rest of your "points?" Your standard garbage.

As the signs say at the T-bagger rallies, you're a moran.

OK Keith, Obama was 'hounded' for his birth certificate. Perhaps he would not have been had he just come out with it rather than looking as if he had something to hide.

Obama has a father was a Kenyan citizen. He did not attend a school in the US until he was in the 5th grade. Considering that he spent to much of his early life outside the US, is it all that inconceivable that he might have been born outside of the US as well? It's not a 'racist attack' to ask the question, particularly since he had little to no record of his existence in the US for the first decade of his life...

Ahh Keith,

You can't handle the truth! Es verdad?

Why do you disparage, degrade and malign? As you know, when you lower yourself to that level, your argument goes wayward as well. Can't take you seriously.

Calling Rev. Graham's son a cracker? Really? Give the Rev. Wright thing a rest? Why - because he only spent 20 years going to his sermons? Although, Obama could be a Muslim since he has a Muslim father and Muslim uncle.

Oh, and the Teabagger comment? As mentioned, can't take you seriously.

Reverse racism is pure BS and one of the most intellectually weak arguments in America.

Patrick, your reading comprehension ain't so good. My 2nd to last sentence clearly pointed out the culture of poverty includes all races. And yes, there is certainly a black culture. These would be the same folk that toss the N word around, when I would be hung for using it. Let alone their poor treatment of bit... ah, I mean women.

And Keith, please save your vapid argument for someone else. What do you call the race hustlers like J. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton, other than jet setters who play the race card daily to shake down corporations.

Race hustlers? So what.

I happen to believe in results and the results of so-called reverse racism is piss poor. If it were working, there'd be more whites than blacks in prison, more blacks than whites in the suburbs and we'd all be working for black guys.

Shake down corporations? You're nuts.

Keith, there is plenty of opportunity and legitimate money to be made in the black community. But why does so much of it go to Asians, Hispanics and Middle Easterners who seize the opportunity and risk their own money? Most of which are first generation? Could it be because they have solid family values and backing? Your argument is what is intellectually weak, because it is proven wrong every day. Could this be why the race-hustlers are so invested in keeping the black community down (in exchange for votes/candy?) I think so. The truth is out there, your idealology blinds you to it.

Patrick, don't be a dope. My black friends are laughing at you. Nice try.

Good points Gregory, but it is the GOP that (lately) tends to work their bigotry into policy. In fact the act of pulling the ladder at this time is an act of racism.

Don't go by what people say, but what they do. Harry Truman led the effort to desegregate the armed forces, but used colored in his letters all the time. Johnson knew full well that signing the Civil Rights Act was going to doom the Democratic party in the south going forward.

As far as the assertion that slavery went out because of economics rather than morality, pay a visit to the museum before the boat ride over to Fort Sumter. There's a panel that points out that in Charleston, 65% of the property on the city was human property.

My father discouraged racism and homophobia in our family. And BTW -- he was an atheist.

Keith, Lyle hasn't smoked out anything, other than to do the obligatory guilty liberal trip about how bad the world is, and how it is conservative Republicans who are at fault. All while ignoring this country was founded on liberty and personal responsibility. Slavery was repealed over a hundred years ago. Crappy conditions were addressed decades ago. Get a grip! That the black community continues to fail is an internal problem, not my problem. Those who buck up and get real will find a path out of the bleakest of conditons. I know a lot of them. They are rejected by their own community for being Uncle Toms. What a pathetic way to embrace someone who is by all respects a shining success story. It's the culture, stupid!

@GearHead...You simply confirm the article and you and your ilk gives a bad name to all on the political right. Please keep commenting and continue to raise the specter of institutional and structural racism.

Wrong wrong wrong. The use of racial quotas in hiring, college campuses, etc, if evil and only promotes racial friction.

You are so naughty. At least you didn't use the more common term of old called mulatto, or the more recent term of "oreo". Either way, shame on you bad boy.

I didn't want to lose my love of oreos over it. Hope and change had brought nothing but further division economically and racially.

As if the GOP had absolutely nothing to do with the drag on the economy or racial rancor.

@Leaving Tosa Soon...Just out of curiosity, how many elected officials of color in the State of Wisconsin are members of the GOP?

@Lyle, just out of curiosity, how many elected officials of color in the MKE area are backing the mining bill, which will greatly add to the economic base up north, along with creating hundreds of jobs at places like Caterpiller and Joy Global? Aren't these the high-paying jobs everyone blathers about wanting? The willful selling out of their own constituents is breathtaking. Think about that the next time you drive through the wastelands of MKE. Couldn't that be a small step forward? I know, not while Walker is Governor (you don't want to give him credit). So the poverty-industrial complex is alive and well, thanks to these Democrat leaders you hold so dear.

Mr Ruble, 'people of color' ? I am Italian Mr Ruble, my skin is darker than Mr. Obama's, am I a person of color? If you mean people of African descent, they make up 6% of the population of Wisconsin http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55000.html

You are a tired old wilted flower child Mr Ruble, please get a job volunteering or something, you are embarrasing yourself and your family.

Signed,

A person of color

I am also a person of color. I even darken in the summer and lighten in the winter months but I have never been clear. I am very offended being placed in this "group" to fit some liberal guilt that only those that elect African decent citizens are not racist.

I am an American and my skin is a color.

@Leaving Tosa Soon...People of color are generally referred to as non-Caucasians. Last time I checked most Italians are Caucasians.

@Oak Creek Resident...You are confusing the question. If the political right's message is so all inclusive, then why aren't there more candidates of color running under the GOP banner? It can't be because of racial attitudes within the conservative political right and the GOP's general abandonment of people of color?

Of all the speeches I have sat through given by elected politicians of color, I have never once heard one advocate abandoning personal responsibility and in fact many of the messages were exactly the opposite.

Lyle your lack of reading comprehension is astounding. AS I SAID, inner city blacks avoid any personal responsibility and instead point the finger at everyone but themselves. GOP candidates don't preach such entitlement and dependency BS.

This is due to 40 years of liberal policies that paid women to sit home and get paid X dollars per baby. No more need for a father figure or family. Sigh....

@Lyle

Remember when bill cosby came out and said the black community needs to take responsibility and help itself? Remember the hate Cosby received from black officials? Take your lies elsewhere.

@Oak Creek Resident...You need to update. The era of "welfare queen" ended in 1996.

@Oak Creek Resident...Your weak attempt to justify your position proves exactly what you are. Accusations of extremism are easily disproved by any reasonable person. From what you have written, you seem to be attracted to the propaganda of white supremacists.

Lyle, as usual you try to minimize true evil because its on YOUR side of the fence. These are not accusations - these are facts.

@Oak Creek Resident...No minimization of evil. Just because I am currently a social democrat, don't think for a minute that I ever supported people like Jacobs, Hoffman or Ayers. During the worst of their activity I was serving my nation in the military. How about you; were you even born yet?

No luckily I wasn't born in the decade that basically ruined America. Thank you for your service but no thank you for your 60's ideology.

@oak creek resident -- "They are cut from the same cloth as the white libs in the 1960's who pondered whether all white babies needed to be executed. Sounds extreme? Well it was discussed."

Really? I was alive during the sixties (unlike you) and don't recall any such discussion among reputable liberal people. I think you're pulling that assertion out of thin air. Or some other less printable place.

@Oak Creek Resident...Sorry didn't get along with the Weathermen or Black Panthers. I used to argue with members on a regular basis. I supported MLK's and Gandhi's approach and still do. White supremacists like yourself represent a true threat to a stable society and civil society. Something you need to remember, the radical groups of the left didn't survive, better sense prevailed.

White supremacist? Typical cowardly liberal thing to do, try to use the race card to quiet any opposition. Well, it's not going to work, Hitler... err Lyle.

@Oak Creek Resident....If you aren't a white supremacist it sure is difficult to tell. I imagined you in my mind's eye as a skinhead with prison tattoos of swastikas covering your body from foot to head. I'm not trying to quiet you, that would be impossible. Pretty good disparaging remark calling me Hitler, especially since I'm a Jew who lost family members in the Holocaust. By the way, are you going to deny that happened too?

It's funny that you see things that way. To claim one party is more or less racist than the other is due to being uninformed. Remove politics all together and ask the question, "who is more racist, middle class or the poor"? We typically view racism as white vs black, but in reality it is much more than that.
Sure there are more than too many people throwing the N word around. But I have also heard 'Cracker' and 'Whitebread' used a lot.

You should hear the names I call my black dog.

February is his favorite month so much history to celebrate.

Ron, Democrats have been proven in a widely known study to be 100x more racist than a person with republican political ideology. Everybody knows it. Admit it, is that so hard, and let's just go on to the next topic.

Craig, we cry gushing tears for you that your feelings are hurt. But at the end of the day, you are benefiting from white privilege.

In an operational way, it's who wins and who loses. The boneheaded ploy of the right is always to deny proportionality. Sure it is white vs black, but it is the dominant side that is obliged to call the truce.

Keith: Are you certain that I am white? I have more variety in me than Heintz 57.
To claim I am a benefactor of white privelege would assume I am of white descent.
I can tell you that in the Summer months I often am darker than some of my black friends- so what does that make me? Tan?
I was pissed off at the Dr.s office last month when they asked me if I was white, black, hispanic, asian, or other. Truth is; unless you have done extensive research on your family tree, there is no way to know. Even those who have done that research, sometimes can't be certain because of other circumstances. If a medical facility needs that information to properly treat and diagnose me, then they should do a DNA analysis.
Anyway...racism exists even within the race. White people look down on trailer trash, etc. The same goes for other races as well.
Regardless, party affiliation does not define a person's racial bias. Unfortunately, it exists in both parties.
A real truce will not happen unless it is at the willingness of all sides, all classes, all races.

LOL Ok well everybody knows that liberals are inherently dummer, weaker, and more scared than conservatives. Wow sure is easy to make blanket statements, huh p*ssy?

@Eugene...Guess where all those Democrats went when the Civil Rights Act passed; right into the Republican Party. The GOP has been blessed with their legacy every since.

Exactly right, Eugene. Lyle of course doesn't have the balls or intelligence to argue against your point, so like a good liberal he tries to redirect the issue. Deep down inside he knows he is wrong, and has such white liberal guilt I'm surprised he doesn't offer free HJs to any minority who wants one.

Per Ron:

"The point to the blog you are commenting on was that Republicans as a whole are more inherently racist than Democrats as a whole."

*********************

Is that the point of the "blog", Lyle? Does Ron have that right?

@Bob McBride...I was not directing the article specifically at Republicans but at the covert racism of those who deny the continuation of racism, primarily the radical political right. Denying the existence of racism as a reason to declare that equal opportunity exists and those that remain in poverty are doing so by choice.

Once someone launches a blog post the comments take on a life on their own.

The point is racism, and if GOP policies institutionalize it, that discussion is germane.

What Ron writes about is totally true.

Apparently you're wrong, Lyle. Next time check with Keith first before answering.

@Lyle: Can we agree that the problem exists on both sides of the aisle? If so, I can agree with your last statement completely.

@Ron -

The first sentence of this post has to be the BIGGEST crock of crap that I've ever read here on Patch!

Where's Angry White Dude when you really need him?

@Keith Schmitz -

You really do live in your own little world, don't you?

@Hoffa - Can not let your "crock of crap" comment go. You put yourself down the conservative spectrum several further steps with your vulgarity. If you are disagreeing that Republicans are more racist than Democrats, good god man, where have you been the last fifty years!? Were you a bubble boy? Just open your eyes and look around, and listen to the campaign speeches.. Your denial that Republicans are more racist than Democrats is just supporting Lyle's contention that the more conservative right (code name Tea Party Republicans, Libertarians, skinheads, etc.) are playing the race card. And well they should from a pure political standpoint, not moral of course, They are fighting for the nomination of the more racist party.
As a small example, have close relatives that live in a gated community way out where Jesus lost his shoes, just to avoid contact with minoriites as much as possible. Every single person in that community I have met is a Republican, and they are actually afraid of meeting a liberal. Let's stop arguing that Democrats also retain racist attitudes at times. They do of course, but they are not the most racist party.

@Ron -

I find your equating of skinheads with legitimate ideological political movements such as the Tea Party Republicans and Libertarians as being completely vulgar and greatly diminishing of your credibility on these boards. If you can link me to a legitimate Libertarian or Tea Party website showing that 'the oppression of colored people' is a part of their official ideological platforms, I'll buy you dinner! But it's not gonna happen because your assertion in such regard is nothing more than a giant load and you know it!

Also, your premise that not very many white Republicans voted for Obama and is therefor indicative of their racism is highly illogical and completely unsupported by any kind of independently verifiable fact. Did you ever stop to think, even for just a single second, that anyone who considers themselves as being a Republican probably didn't vote for Obama because they disagreed with him on policy position and that such positions had absolutely nothing to do with race? They just wanted the best guy for the job, irregardless of skin color. I know that's probably a shocking revelation for you, but if you breathe deeply and give it some time to sink in, someday, you just may be able to comprehend this reality.

As to which party is more racist - which is the party that has more members of racially divided groups such as the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, etc.? I'll help you out a little here - it's not the Republicans. How do these racially divided groups at all help in promoting unity and equality amongst all Americans?

Wake up Ron. Your race baiting here is extremely sad and shows that it is you and not I that have been 'living in a bubble.'

@Hoffa - Like I am going to a Libertarian, Tea Party, etc. website and they are going to officially state they are racists. Right, oh yeah. The point you missed as big as a bus is that they will not say it directly. Its in dog-whistle code,and its mostly not official, like state's rights, welfare queens, uppity, Kenya, birth certificate, muslim, busing, food stamps, entitlements, amnesty, illegal immigrant, urban anything, For whites who have seen their incomes decline and jobs lost because of global corporations shifting jobs to below-poverty wage nations, the Siren song of right wing hate radio using code words-- financed by the very corporations fleecing the economically stretched white person of limited education and means -- is alluring. Hopefully Hoffa, you can say you are coming at this from a nober perspective, but you have not demonstrated it. Republicans are the more inherently racist party, accept it and work within it to change that perspective you are denying and almost everyone else knows and believes. And I would not expect a Republican to vote for any Democrat, period. But I would expect them to send pictures to each other of Obama in a Zulu outfit, talk about his Kenyan relatives, and try to get ecomomically disadvantaged whites to blame other races for all their woes, not the corporationists that moved the jobs.

RON: Ummm maybe because conservatives work hard, get good jobs, and want the best for their familys... hence they move out of the crime and bad schools and into the suburbs.

HOW DARE THEY! WAHHHH THET ARE RACIST!!

You are a waste of skin, brainwashed, and good for nothing other than organ donations.

@Nate...C'mon Nate, you can't do that because you are an inside outside Oreo.

I'd love to take a whole pack of Oreos and scrape all the filling into a cup and eat it like ice cream. Is that racist?

Imagine that. A cracker eating a cookie.

@Bradley - The parties morphed over the years. The Dixiecrats joined the Republicans. Liberal and moderate Republicans are essentially gone for now. The South, now mostly Republican, secretly despise Lincoln, Sheridan, Sherman, Grant, and all those other Republicans. No argument that there is racism on both sides. Pretty sure, though, that very few Republicans voted for our first Black President, and they do not like that Black Man living in that White House. The argument as to which party is MORE racist IS NOT crazy, and if you are indeed Black, you are considering that in your voting. Even white people consider racism one way or another, right here on this blog!, we just cannot get a single Republican to admit they are in the more racist party. What does that tell you?

@Ron
You keep perpetrating this lie of the dixiecrats. While yes, Thurmond did join the Republicans, most retired as Democrats (Fulbright, Gore, Wallace, Byrd etc). After those dixiecrats retired, the new generation of GOP, lead by Nixon were overtly pro-integration. (I am not supporting Nixon other then to point out that he lead the integrationist GOP during the late 60's and early 70's) The GOP did not come to power because of their segregationist views but because they were about small government, private property rights and integration.

As for not voting for Obama, when Herman Cain was being destroyed by the white media, did you come to his rescue? While we watched Clarence Thomas being lambasted by the white Democratic party, were you questioning their racism? Every time Allen West gets up to talk and liberals call him a nut job, are they doing so because he is black? OF COURSE NOT!!!! It is about the policy those people are trying to put forth. The liberals hate Thomas, Cain and West not because they are black; but because they are conservative. Trying make an attempt to prove racism because conservatives don't accept a socialist president who also happens to be black; is nothing more then an act of bullying.

@J.B. Schmidt...What you fail to grasp is that there was enough moderate Republicans during the time of Nixon and Ford that they blunted much of the extreme social conservancy of the Dixiecrats. However, by the time Reagan was elected the radical Republican right was in control of the South, that's who tipped the balance to elect Reagan. The South's continued support of pre Civil War states rights has been one of the foundation stones of the current radical right. Denial that racist attitudes are not a part of this GOP Dixiecrat legacy is simply denying an existing reality.

@Lyle
I was unaware that states rights was a racist position.

Aside from Thurmond, please list the dixiecrats that were absorbed into the Repbulican party. I listed a quick four that continued to be democrats. If states rights is your only accusation of the republican racism; then it would appear that you are in denial of history. Oddly enough Carter drew the some Democratic support during his presidency under the same 'states rights' platform.

@DJ Bradley -- No one likes to acknowledge this, but, while some abolitionists were true social progressives, their movement was also joined by wealthy northern industrialists who wanted to blunt the economic clout of the southern planters. Putting an end to their 'free' labor source was one way of doing it.

For those people, it wasn't about the plight of the poor black slave, because in reality, the situation of the northern person working in a textile mill for pennies a day was not that much better than the southern slave picking the cotton -- EXCEPT for the right of self determination.

What did we get when we botched (or maybe it was planned that way all along) Reconstruction? Just another large and powerless pool of workers ripe for the economic exploitation.

@JBSchmidt - Oh come on. People that may have been Dixiecrat voters back when Dixecrats existed to any extent are mostly Republcan voters today. I am not talking about the final remnants of the Dixiecrat politicians, now deceased or retired. And Nixon was very pro-integration! Give me a break. And your use of the words "small government, private property rights", etc . are simply code words for racism. And I did not support Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas. Both were involved in sex scandals and their minority targets spoke out in a courageous manner. Are those your conservative black heroes? If they were liberals, I would still not support them. Do not know anything about Allen West. As to the liberal media bias, last I looked, most of the media is now run by conservatives.
I still stand behind my statement that many people are voting against Obama simply because he is Black. To deny that, you just help make more holes in the veil of racial denial inherent more in Republicans than Democrats.

@Ron
Please provide any actual proof for anything you just posted. I will not accept your opinion on the politics of the south as truth.

Also, you and Lyle both seem to agree that 'states rights' is a racist political stance. That would appear to be an easy way to demonize your opposition without requiring proof. I must be a racist then for opposing Obamacare for the same reasons. Oh, wait.... I am a racist because Obama is black, not because I disagree with is policy.

@DJ Bradley...When I drafted this article it was in response to charges from the radical political right that racism no longer existed and that the liberal left was manipulating the racial minorities with conscious effort to keep them dependent so that they would vote in support of the Democratic Party. I felt obliged to take on this issue, since it is so obvious that racism is still part of the warp and weft of American Society, influencing public policy in ways that many remain in a state of unawareness.

As you so eloquently state, the black experience is so much more than just poverty and racism. I could not agree with you more. I didn’t want this to become an exercise of who is a bigger racist or an expression of white guilt motivated by past and current social sins. The “Black Culture” is something that all Americans should be proud of and wholeheartedly embrace. I couldn’t agree with you more that we shouldn’t accept crime and antisocial behavior from anyone, whether poor or not. I find disturbing that for those people of color who have striven to better themselves and succeeded, somehow was given an unfair advantage and a boost up the ladder of success just because of their race. (continued)

@DJ
While I do agree that some good came out of Affirmative Action by encouraging minorities to get into the workforce and forcing those business owners with racist intentions to come to terms with our integrated country. I think that over time it has caused a bigger problem. The affirmative action movement, instead of asking minorities to step up and take the jobs from whites, it has allowed minorities to demand jobs or university entrances when the abilities are not the same. This then creates animosity between the races. While this only happens with a small percentage and I am not trying to lay this claim on all minorities, the truth is we have sacrificed the quality for quotas.

This fall the Supreme Court will be hearing a case, brought by a women in Texas, with regards to affirmative action and university applications. the complaint is that the University takes the top 10% of applicants based solely on test scores and the rest are acquired based on affirmative action requirements first and scores second. She is claiming that not being in the top 10%, is was unconstitutional for someone with a lower test score to be chosen above her based on that person's race. It will be interesting to see how the Court rules.

I fully expect liberals to charge that racist conservatives on the Supreme Court will rule in favor of the white girl. Whatever.

@DJ Bradley...(continued) This not only diminishes their effort and success, but is a cynical attempt to dehumanize such individuals. The “Black Culture” has given this nation much and for well over one and half centuries. Men and women of color have produced professionals, scientists, engineers, artists, writers, poets, performing artists, academics, great social leaders, etc. That is also part of the “Black Culture”, which I would like to reclassify to the “American Experience”. We must also acknowledge that through people of color that a considerable portion of this nation was built on their blood, sweat and tears.

For a significant portion of our nation to diminish, dehumanize and marginalize such an important group; diminishes us all and brings into question whether we can count ourselves as a civilized society.

@Lyle
As a liberal it becomes a right of passage to opine about 'black culture' as if it is some sort of identity outside the American experience. That only black people have a cause for which their cultural identity must be celebrated. The proof for this is with a statement you made above that chastised someone for questioning where the exceptions were for his Italian culture, to which you pointed out that he was part of the larger Caucasian culture. By your own words you assumed that a distinction existed between Americans.

By seperating a people by race, you are doing more to create racism. Most conservatives wish to end this and assume we are all part of the American culture. We all have histories and experiences that lend themselves differently to the overall greatness of America. I am not down playing the importance of Black history, no more then I am praising the importance of Irish/Italian/German/Hispanic/Greek/Arab/Chinese history. If we want an equal society, at some point we must make everyone equal. Let the racists/homophobes/anti-Semites come out into the light and expose them for the evil they are. If we don't the imbalance will always exist.

@J.B. Schmidt....Your analysis of the liberal left's attitude toward Justice Thomas, Caine and other prominent black politicians does not have anything to do with their race, but the content of their beliefs and world view. Our nation has not yet progressed to a place where we can drop Affirmative Action, there is still a proper place for it.

@Lyle
In my post I explained that it was about policy and not racism. I was drawing out Ron's illogical conclusion that a white conservative not happy with a policy of a black man is a racist, while the white liberal not happy with the policy of black man is somehow not racist.

The point is, Lyle, that you have people here who want it both ways. When it's a Democrat not supporting Hermain Cain, for instance, it's because they object to his policies (or in Keith's case, the "fact" that he's a sell out). Yet if a Republican doesn't support Obama or his policies, more times than not the first suggestion that comes up from many on your side is that what's really being objected to is having a black man in the office of TPOTUS.

Tonto, I won't gag you, but I will say this: its of no consequence at this point if anyone feels guilty over slavery and votes a certain way. The damage of slavery is done, and the bell cannot be un-rung. I expect us to vote for whomever the SuperPAC money has convinced us is the best candidate.

@Tonto -- Happily. What sort of gag would you prefer -- cloth or rubber ball? Anything to stop the stream of nonsense that issues from your keyboard.

I would hope that all of us that post on these boards would be above allowing the SuperPACs to influence our votes.

@DJ
Please explain 'tangible benefits'.

@DJ
To 'share' tax money, is not being charitable. It is buying votes with other peoples money. If Daley had taken money out of his own pocket I could except your premise; however, raising taxes on others to redistributes to the poor is not charity. In fact, some consider it legal theft. As for Daley, he lined his own pockets fairly well himself, there was nothing altruistic about his stint in political office. He used the minority to make himself wealthy. If that is the political system you are hoping to exhibit, then please keep it in Chicago. We all know the sad state of affairs that IL is in.

Unfortunately, Thomas appears to not think for himself, instead following the lead of Scalia.

@Ron -

"I sympathize with the Republicans, it is extremely hard to find a qualified black conservative, they are rare for good reason."

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Your continued race baiting on this board is getting old fast!

@Ron
So, we are supposed to support the white Bill Clinton, the country's first black president's, and not get into his bedroom business. However, you wish to demonize to black man for the same offense. Sounds a bit racist.

@Hoffa and Schmidt - Well, where are the qualified black conservatives, if there are so many? The key work here is conservative, not black or qualified. Why would a black person that identifies with his race's progression through all those hardships want to be in the party that is most racist. I was not that impressed with Condoleeza Rice, but she had a loser boss (Cheney). Conservatives now need to look to people with Cuban heritage, like Rubio, They suffered horribly under totalitarianistic Communism and went right wing as a result. As to Clinton's sex problems, I never said I supported him, now did I? See, you are in danger of just posting crap and no one bothers to even comment on it. It is sociopathic to put words into people's mouths, and twist things around 180 degrees and accuse the opponent of your transgressions. And more name calling. Really poor debaters when cornered. And if you did not know states rights was a racist code word, you are seriously uninformed. At least we got through to you on that.
And your gay and cross-dressing chatter kind of sets you up to be right wing hypocrites, just as I suspected. Santorum is against it.

@Ron -

Wow - you definitely got us on that one! Thank you so much for exposing us as the hypocrites that we truly are. From now on, I'll never doubt you ever again, but only seek out your infinite race baiting wisdom!

Per your request, here are some names for you: Michael Steele, Bill Cosby, Tim Scott, J.C. Watts, Gary Franks, Thomas Sowell, Condi Rice, Alan Keyes, Wesley Snipes, … the list goes on!

Now then, let's see, as far as notable black leftist are concerned the first name that comes to mind is Idi Amin - doesn't look very good for your side straight off the bat, does it?

If you really want to go around constantly hunting out racism, you'll undoubtedly find it - but only because it's being perpetuated by those who share in your ridiculous race baiting ideology.

Try again.

Ron you are a racist, you are insulting a black man's oral and written communications... how dare you, racist pig!

You might be right Hoffa, however I'll leave visiting Mississippi to someone else!

@DJ -

I thought you were taking me to see Chrisette Michele at the IP casino/resort/spa in Biloxi next month. Darn it, you never want to take me anywhere anymore - I guess it must be those pants that make me look fat :-)

@Lyle
By who?? Radical Libs? I have seen the term states rights thrown around every where and until you and Ron; had never heard it was some racially charged term. During the 1960's it was used by Goldwater and other integrationists, not to justify segregation, but to fight the federal government when it came to the rights of a private citizen to operate his own business. If a racist wishes to only allow whites in to his business, it is disgusting and socially backward; however, constitutionally he has the right. The Federal government should not have the power to control private property within the states. (I do not include working conditions within this context)

I fail to see how today the term still holds the same racial context. My guess it only does so within the old guard of the Democratic party.

@J.B. Schmidt...I strongly encourage you to start reading history and not just the propaganda put out by the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation. Google States Rights and see what pops up. You are doing yourself a disservice by not expanding your reading, awareness and knowledge.

You always know how to put a smile on my face DJ! :-)

You two - GET - A - ROOM!!!

Could you 3 go integrate some where else. They have chat rooms for this sort of thing.

Well I've got a choice here. Either yoga tights or Hammer-style harem pants. You pick.

@J.B. -

I'm with DJ - lighten up a little my friend. We've been beating this topic to death since Monday for the lack of any new major political stories or blogs here on the Patch. If that's not enough to bring out a little silly foolishness, then I don't know what is.

We're just trying to have a little fun - it takes the edge off!

Hell, one time a guy wanted to shave my pits - I'm sure that Bob probably remembers that one.

Yikes...yuck...yeah, I'd pretty much forgotten that up 'til you mentioned it, JRH.

@Hoffa
I was trying.

The two stories I have been posting on have evolved in passion parties and a dance off.

@J.B. -

Just goes to show that we all know how to have a good time here on the Patch :-)

@Lyle
I am hoping to skip that phase. While not as mountain man as I once was, I refuse to shave my face completely. Having drawn the genetic short straw for hair growth on the top of my head, I tend to embrace it everywhere else. With 5 kids, it must not bother my wife to much.

@Bob McBride...They told me that all the copies of that were destroyed. It's a good thing i got a haircut before we shot that. : +)

@J.B. Schmidt...I can understand your wife. It gets so cold in the winter in Wisconsin that in a dark room, a warm body is a warm body. :)

Hmmm.....I'll try it again here (so people know what you're referencing Lyle)...maybe it was judged too annoying or something...

Anyways....long lost footage of Mr. Ruble on keyboards in a very early music video..under an assumed name!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6tnj7IEI0E&feature=g-hist&context=G27c097fAHT0Y30gAMAA

I knew I recognized Lyle from somewhere - thanks for connecting the dots for us Bob!

Jump on it!

Honestly, McBride, haven't the poor Native Americans suffered enough at the hand of the White Man? LOL

Makes you wonder how something like that gets from concept to finished product - even back in those days. I'm guessing a lot of nose candy and someone looking for an excuse to get 3 disco dollies out on location. Interesting to recall what women looked like before upper region enhancement became the norm.

I think I'm still high from having merely watched it!

I don't think I've ever seen so much suede fringed clothing all in one place all at the same time before.

Yes, I think he's getting warmed up over in the Voter ID thread...everyone back in your places....

Re: Keith:He is missing in action today.....
Must be out in the garage looking for his leisure suit....

....or he found a baggie in the pocket of that suit...

LOL
I wonder what kind of spin they can put on the leftist militant OCCUPIERS and the militant New Black Panther Party.

@Born Free...The two groups you mention will have their 15 minutes of fame, 30 minutes at the most. Just like the leftest radicals of the past, they'll go away too. Everybody has skeletons in their closets, including the left. Unfortunately the radical right has their skeletons still hanging around, after all these years. Can't seem to rid yourselves of the KKK, Neo-Nazis, White Supremacists, Jim Sensenbrenner, etc. Even the Tea Party Movement will eventually go away. It will dissolve after all the 30 and 40 somethings are tired of using the rallies and get togethers as a speed dating or hook-up opportunity. The older members will lose interest as soon as they are assured that no one is going to mess with their social security and medicare. Given enough time, everything changes.

J.B.: Your choice of words were perfect for making your point.
I got chills reading your post.

@J.B. Schmidt....Thanks for your kind words. I haven't heard anyone say it better. If you ever get a chance to go to Europe, tour some concentration camps. It impressed my children with the lost part of their heritage.

@Born Free....They have all moved on now and don't represent a threat to anyone.

@Born Free....Sorry you don't know history. The radical leftest groups never really got much traction. Of course, there were a lot of protests, but the vast majority of protestors were against the war. Once the war was over they took up very middle class lives and have been doing so every since. The fact that the radical left could never get a widespread following was extremely frustrating for them. Their high point was during the 1968 Democratic Convention and the "Chicago Eight". Even now the Progressive Movement could only be characterized as slightly left of center. However, with the political right now so far to the right of center, it seems that the slightly left orientation is more extreme. The protests seen earlier in 2011 in Wisconsin are nothing when compared to forty years ago. Students just aren't as motivated now and aren't anti-establishment, but are protesting because they feel like they are being denied the ability to join the establishment.

I'm now retired and pursuing my avocations. The only time I worked for the government was my nine years in the military, some teaching at university and the decade I spent as a therapist working for a county mental health system. Other than that I spent my career as a business executive and entrepreneur. I do teach adolescents part time for a private religious school on the North Shore in Milwaukee. I teach morality and ethics, does that count?

@Ron
The difference between you and I is simple. I don't believe the left is filled with hate.

What irritates me the most regarding your post is that you show as much ignorance about history as oak creek. If you had gone into Germany right after WWI and asked the people if in 30 years they would be killing 6 million Jews, they would have said no. They would have said, "At least we can be content that something like Hitler, his ultra right wing radicalism, and genocide have little chance of happening in this country". Hitler, whether you want to believe he had left or right political tendencies, was an abomination of the human character and will, I pray to God, have no equal.

Your attempt to call the right a form of neutered Hitler ideology because we have "superb government controls in place that would stop race/class warfare right away", is also historically ignorant. It assumes that Germany was lacking a 'Don't kill Jews and cripples' amendment to their constitution. There were a multitude of factors that led to the rise of Hitler and his evil reign. It would be like me drawing the conclusion that since most liberals favor socialism and socialism can lead to communism; then if not for our current laws Obama would be shipping millions of Americans to gulags.

Maybe you just had to much PBR when you wrote your post.

@J..B. Schmidt...You are right that judgement of position is relative to placement. I think we can generally agree that the center has steadily moved right for the last 35 years. During the 60s and 70s the mid-point was much further to the left. But as people genuinely became disillusioned with the leftest rhetoric and views, they naturally drifted toward the right. It swings like a pendulum and transits back and forth always seeking a mean. However, it's probably gone as far right as it's going to get and it will start drifting back to the left. The cycle appears to be about every thirty to forty years.

I don't think the kids in the Occupy Movement are the children of the 60s radicals. Most of those kids are the sons and daughters of the younger boomers and older Gen-Xers. The younger boomers never got involved with the 60s radical movements and the Gen-Xers were just were being born or shortly thereafter. After this election year, I don't think the Occupy Movement will hang around in its current form. Also, I see the Tea Party Patriot Movement subsiding, not going away, but it will withdraw more into the background. Just a practical analysis.

@Alfred Kell...I was part of that period and I know for a fact what the radical left was able to do and not do. Of course they had quite a few sympathizers, but their membership was never more than a very small fraction of one percent. The last of the groups of any note was the SLA and never had more than 25 people, which most died in the fire fight in LA. Patty Hearst would have been killed also, but she was out of the house when it was attacked. Most of the surviving radicals moved into environmentalism and other diverse movements.

If you knew what you were talking about and not just conjecture, you would know that liberal arts colleges and universities have always been bastions of liberalism. Of course a few of the leaders like Bill Ayers wound up in academia, but in general they faded away. Due to the secular requirements of public education, it would appear that they are teaching a liberal agenda, by and large that's untrue. Don't confuse union membership with liberal activism. Curriculum is controlled pretty much for content and people get over concerned for the secular content.

NO, Alfred. I'm just starting to fill with white guilt and realizing I must vote for Obama or someone will think I'm a racist bigot. So what if he is a communist :)

Ah-Baloney, Lincoln a good Republican is twirling in his grave watching liberals glorifying the new United Greece States of America while rehashing communism once again. Hail Nobama :(

@Ron
Please keep you blood pressure down. I don't want to be responsible for your death.

I never Hitler said was a lefty. I never acknowledged his as being right either. It is you and oak creek that have given him a current American political party affiliation. I am attempting to point out that the kind of evil that was Hitler exists in neither party. If you wish to continue to resurrect that man, go for it. Interestingly enough, that while oak creek brought this topic to light and I properly chastised him for it; it is you that wishes to continue with the Hitler name calling. While he may have been under the influence of PBR, it appears your basis for reality is that we on the right actually wish to implement the horrors of 1930's and 40's Germany.

As a point of fact, I am 12 year old brat and in sharpening my debate skills should take on your name calling as one of the principals of debating? If you could make your response snappy, my daily brainwashing class starts at 12pm.

I didnt call you a draft dodger, I called the tenured leftists in academia and government 'draft dodgers' Acts of Genocide from me, no sir, your adoration of King Barack Hussein will be a giant act of genocide when he tells you take a pill and not burden the system because of Obamacare....

Too bad Obama's mama didn't get some free birth control pills. We could have saved 20 trillion dollars :)

Red meat, cheese fries, and hate radio? Sounds like you are spewing your own brand of 'not so veiled hate'...

@Ron
Thanks. Everything is perfectly clear now. I hadn't realized it was my cheese fries.

@Born Free...I don't know where you live, but the village I live in is integrated and I have neighbors of color. My house sits right across the Milwaukee River from the eastern edge of the inner city of Milwaukee.

One of the problems with people moving back into the inner cities is "gentrification". Affluent whites from the suburbs are moving back after the become "empty nesters" sucking up property, rehabbing it and causing property taxes to sky rocket, forcing people who have been living in the area for decades out. Then more affluent people move in. It's kind of like "white flight" in reverse. This causing residents to move into areas with already high density areas seeking affordable housing, which is becoming in even shorter supply.

Rather than moving people into the blighted areas, I would rather they were able to move into better communities with more stability. That's a better choice than gentrify the inner cities and create more pain.

@Ron -

A few blocks from Cabrini and you're in the Gold Coast, in case you forgot!

Also, Cabrini was like Club Med compared to Robert Taylor, Stateway Gardens, Rockwell Gardens, Ida B. Wells, Harold Ickes, etc. Trust me, I know the CHA projects extremely well!

Hell, I bet I've stayed more nights in one of the Cabrini 'whites' (near Division and Larrabee) than Jane Byrne did!

Its the white guilt liberal scam dude wake up think straight just chill and think :)

Thanks for the complement! I'm sure you are savvy enough to understand when the race card is brought out, the argument is over. Which is what the race hustlers and guilty white liberals want, because that is far easier than taking responsibility for what has become a very self-destructive culture. Poverty doesn't cause crime. Crime causes poverty. It's an attitude thing. Pointing that out irritates liberals, because they'd rather point the figure at "society" or some other abstract entity (like Republicans).

@GearHead...Sorry to disagree, but the preponderance of evidence supports that crime is directly cause by increased poverty. This is not a racial issue. Crime is a symptom of impoverishment. High population density also increases incidences of crime. Crime is also strongly associated with the lack of meaningful employment expectations and opportunities, directly leading to the participation in the underground economy. You are correct concerning attitude, but attitude is translated from other values. In this case it is the values surrounding delay of gratification verses values of immediate gratification. These values are deeply impacted by cultural variables. In communities that have strong cultural values of delay of gratification and centralized cultural control of its members, crime is very low and not normally associated with the community. An example that comes to mind is the Islamic communities. They don't necessarily live in impoverished areas, but they do represent the kind of cultural control I am speaking to.

@TJ Monday -

Your subtle inference that it was Ms. Lorraine and her "rather weak attempt at disproving the Republicans and conservatives as disserving of the racist label," quoting Lyle, as instigating the first throwing of the 'race card,' is incorrect. See my posts above clarifying this issue to Lyle.

In all reality, Lyle's blog on this subject was more or so inspired by a comment left on Noelle's blog by J.B. Schmidt that was completely taken out of context by the liberals commenting on both boards.

You'd know this if you were following the boards as closely as you claim to be.

Mr. Hoffa - On further examination of the debate record, I see Loraine's original blog clearly "playing the race card" first. Lyle did respond to one of Schmidt's comments by creating his own blog here, but Schmidt's comments were little more than merely supportive of Loraine's contentions about race and the parties. I do not discern any of Schmidt's comments taken out of context. She does not hesitate to state the Republicans are not racists, and the Democrats are. She laid her cards out on the table, and there it was, the race card, starkly naked..

@T J Monday..... The defense that JRH provides for Noelle Lorraine is nothing more that has been derived from a Patch flirtation. He can't come out and criticize her without risking any future relationship with her. We have to give the guy a break, he needs a little joy and recreation in his life.

@TJ -

As far as modern political party dynamics are concerned, Ms. Lorraine only had this to say:

"See the correlation? So, racist Republicans? I don’t think so. The Democrats may have that all backwards. Are they loyal to a party that’s deceiving them? That seems more like reality."

She's merely reversing the argument of the MSM and leftists that continually play the racist card against conservative ideology in order to score political points with their 'base' constituency, in order to emphasize the spirit of her message. The fact that the left and MSM see fit to continue these finger pointing allegations of racism against their ideological/political opponents serves nothing as far as promoting/championing equality goes at this point in the game, does it? So then why do we continue to hear crap such as "the Tea Party wants to see blacks hanging from trees," and the like from the left, and perpetuated by the MSM, if it's not being done to score political points and gain votes from certain segments of our community?

I believe that this is the 'deception' that Ms. Lorraine was speaking to with her commentary.

Yes, J.B.'s comment took the notion of that deception and further exemplified it, but did so from the perspective of a mindset. Only those that are looking so hard to find racism in every little thing that they end up seeing nothing more would have interpreted J.B.'s comment in a literal, as opposed to figurative sense.

Also, one must consider that which compelled Noelle to compose such a blog in the first place? If the right wasn't constantly and unfairly being accused of racism, we probably wouldn't have seen such a dissertation from her, would we have?

So, what side is truly responsible for first playing the 'race card' here? If you can't see the truth of the matter by now, there's nothing more that I can say to help you discover it except to ask you to fully consider all variables in an impartial light.

@Lyle -

Thanks for giving me a break and the big laugh that I just had :-)

But for the record, my defense of Noelle is sincere - especially when one takes into consideration the 'nurture' of the situation that she's had to contend with, which has been filled with rampant 'reverse discrimination.'

@JRH...At some point we all have to stop being apologetic for others, no matter what led to the issue. It's like when I used to treat clients who continually blamed their mother, father or family for their inappropriate behavior. Once the person is aware then they have a responsibility to move on and not continue blaming others for their actions. I think I have heard you make the same sort of statement in the past.

@Lyle -

I'm going to put you at 300 comments with this post - congrats!

While I absolutely agree with you, I would hardly say that I was being "apologetic" on Ms. Lorraine's behalf, but rather defending the spirit of the message contained within her blog. Just as I believe your blog on the subject to carry a noble spirit, for the most part, but condone how many turned into a question of which political party is more racist, as you've indicate that was never your intent and I realize that to be true.

Besides, what would lead you to believe that Ms. Lorraine would even be interested in me on a personal level? :-)

@JRH....You know there's a little yenta in every Jew. I just picked up on a spark of interest in the exchange. I know her background on facebook she has a boyfriend, but things change. I take her to be quite of a "Queen Bee" and very gregarious, but what do I know.

Noelle Lorraine is becoming our very own version of Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann!

@TJ -

There's no doubt that Noelle is one incredible woman, although I'd personally rank her above both Bachmann and Palin as far as overall awesomeness is concerned.

I'm sure that she'd appreciate the compliment, so thank you very much for your kind words!

@oak creek resident -

Give it a rest already - you're making our side look bad!

With a last name like Hoffa, you might want to think to STFU. Most americans are sick of liberal race baiting, so you've ALREADY made your side look bad.

@Oak Creek Resident --Oh no you didn't!

No one tells Hoffa to STFU, and you might want to do a little reading before you assume whose side anyone is on.

@JRH, Everywhere I see you getting under their skins :)

Frank Sinatra - I've Got You Under My Skin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yqGujr2-Jw&ob=av2e

Wow - that's comically rich, isn't it!?! :-)

@oak creek resident -

Please, don't confuse/mistake me premised solely upon the somewhat misguided ways of James P. Hoffa.

I'm James R., the real deal Holyfield baby! I was fighting the evil Kennedy's before you were born.

Oh, and you're still making an @ss of yourself here!

@Elizabeth Hennigan...What you are addressing are the issues of social justice and injustice.

So much for successful bidness man Lyle Ruble...

Google the other aged flower child Keith Schmitz and you will find another trail of unpaid bills and people swindled.

Typical liberals, always looking for a free lunch.

oh and the icing on the cake, Mrs Ubber Lefty Ruble works for the County....surprise.

@Alfred Kell...I don't know where you are getting your information from, but I do not nor have I ever worked for any government agency in the State of Wisconsin. All I can say about court and credit history, entrepreneurs risk big and often fail big. I've been up and down that roller coaster. I don't claim to be a role model for anyone and let me just say; I have a current and long love affair with the IRS affecting my personal and past business life. Even so, the personal attacks designed to bring question to my credibility are meaningless. What is important is credibility of what I write and the views that I put forward. Ad Hominem, Ad Hominem, Ad Hominem

Lyle, I said Mrs. Uber Lefty Ruble. It is very clear to me and the rest of the truth seeking adults where you come from. Good Day sir.

Signed,
Mortgage free, no debt, pay all bills Conservative.

@Alfred Kell...Sorry I missed the "Mrs", but she doesn't work for the county. She is employed by the state as a Child Protection Social Worker working in Milwaukee County.

Alfred Kell -- You are out of line, sir. You'd be surprised at the names you would find on CCAP for issues involving credit in these financially trying times. They come from both sides of the 'aisle' so don't go there.

Signed,
Mortgage free, no debt, pay all bills Liberal. You won't find me on CCAP either, not even for a traffic ticket.

Why doesn't anyone bring up the question "Is there a moderate Democrat anymore?" Compromise should be a two way street. Unfortunately, the first step taken seems to involve recall petitions instead of an attempt to compromise...

@AlfredKell...What is the agenda? I think everyone needs to know, including me.

Lyle are you obtuse? What is the agenda? Ask yourself why you have this blog, what is the purpose of you screaming to the world your views on life? Why do you do it now that I know where you are coming from....I know why you do it, but why not tell the class?

@AlfredKell -

Your conclusions about Lyle are highly illogical and your personal attacks against him are disgraceful. Lyle is a highly respected member of the Patch community and a personal friend.

Remember - small weak minds talk about other people, while large strong minds talk about ideas.

Please grow up and get a life!

@J.B. -

Those are the points that I've been making here on Patch for a long time now. Thanks for the reinforcement!

@J.B. Schmidt...Nice piece of work and good argument. I'll give you a pass on your sources who are extremely conservative partisans since so much of the rhetoric on the left come from equally extreme liberal partisans such as the Daily-Kos. However, that being said; I think, what I read and heard is different than what you read and heard. Much of it is based on perspective and experience.

I didn't hear or see Obama playing the "race card" as much as appealing to a group of base supporters, who he desperately needs during this election cycle. It is well known that he must overwhelming garner the support of African-Americans and Hispanics if he is to overcome the fall in support from students that he enjoyed during the 2008 campaign. Hope and Change is no longer an effective appeal.

I don't share the perspective of the "melting pot" as a valid description of the American experience for a number of minority groups. it turns out to be an invalid myth. Where most white Americans see themselves as Americans first and a member of an ethnic group second, certain minorities think of themselves and identify with the minority first and nation second. My perspective on this is heavily influenced by my own minority status. It is difficult when you are a member of an overwhelming majority to understand the minority experience. (continued)

@J.B. Schmidt...(continued) Whether we like it or not, that minority experience is just below the surface and with African-Americans it's not below the surface but right out there for everyone to see. I remember having to get two passports, one for general travel and another when I traveled to certain parts of the Mid-East. I'm lucky that I am not a racial minority because I can pass for a member of the majority if I so choose.

Your, sources are right in pointing out this is a specific appeal to the minority, but I don't draw the same conclusions as you and they do. I didn't hear or see a promise of wealth distribution from the majority to the minority, unlike ole Huey Long's appeal of a chicken in every pot and two on Sunday.

So, is it playing the "race card" when the president differentiates because of his race; the answer to that is only answerable from perspective. I think, it is desirable to appeal to being an American fist, but until the prefix can be legitimately dropped, it will remain a myth and a convenient counter argument for minority identity and experience.

@Lyle -

Very nice response! However, I believe that you're missing the overall point that J.B. was trying to make, which is that until those minority groups start identifying themselves as Americans first and foremost, then there will always be mainstream racial tensions that exist in this country, no matter how well hidden, irregardless of what the extremists are doing because they, however unfortunate, will always be there no matter what government does, as a law cannot change the heart and rational of a person, as you well know.

The fact that any political party panders to a specific group based solely upon racial identification/make-up continues to promote the individual internal divide of self-identification and actually hinders unity as opposed to promoting it. And that's exactly what Obama is doing here. You can call it "appealing to a group of base supporters," as much as you want, but deep down inside, you know what's really going on here and the fact that it's not a positive as far as the overall goal of achieving a mass consensus unity under country is concerned, which is always an altruistic goal of all political affiliations.

@Alfie...I really don't think it is playing the "race card" when he is directly addressing members of the black population. Even though he's of mixed ethnicity, in the U.S. he's considered black or a person of color. Your point of being a mix of Caucasian and Luo is nothing but a "red herring" and has no relevance. Since he was born in the U.S. he's an American citizen and that's all that matters.

@J.B. Schmidt -- 'Fair share' would actually mean that people pay the same proportion of their disposable income (or even 'need to survive' income) in taxes of all kinds.

Between federal and state income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes, I pay 33% of my gross income in taxes. I haven't calculated how much of my disposable income goes to taxes, but it's the majority of it. Mitt Romney, who makes $57,000 a day, an amount of money on which my family could subsist comfortably for a year, pays his flat tax of 15%. Is the majority of his disposable income going to taxes? I really doubt it.

@Randy
I am in favor of a flat tax with no exemptions. 15% of what you earn (everybody from $1 per year to the billionaires).

@J.B. Schmidt -- that must be because you have never tried to live on $15,000 a year. Actually, someone living on $15,000 a year of earned income already pays 7% in payroll taxes, and I'm assuming you'd so away with the EIC as well.

So you would severely affect the quality of life for those who are unfortunate to be low-wage earners, so that someone earning several million dollars a year could keep more of it? Will they go hungry or unable to clothe themselves? Will they be unable to provide for themselves in old age the way a low-earner will be if s/he has even less money left over to put aside?

@Randy
As I had suspected, you are not after equality. You want the rich to pay for the poor out of some morally legislated compassion. Why then don't make everyone salary $75K? Then no one would be poor and no one would be wealthy. We would be equal.

Who cares for the poor, the sick, the lame, the stupid? Those that want to. There are people in our society that care for those not 'rich' out of true compassion. Not because they have their wages stolen via the IRS. There are also those that could care less about the poor. That is freedom. The ability to succeed, fail and help people do both. If you want to give to the poor, do it. Don't get up on your soap box and tell me that I must because of my success. What makes your authority of morality?

JB - I am having a blast collecting real or purported "code words", and hope to publish them, perhaps on Patch, someday. They may or may not not be truly code words, but someone has interpreted them to be so. The two latest, inspired by you JB, are:
Everybody does their fair share = tax the rich more and give more to the blacks.
Flat tax = In effect, tax the poor more and the rich less, without exception (according to some conservatives, but with some exceptions, according to Herman Cain) .
Revenues = taxes
Do I have this right? Let me know if not. Perhaps there are alternate meanings.
Folks should send in their favorite code words and phrases from either side. I will send each a secret decoder ring, and "two chickens in every pot."

@J.B. Schmidt -- The ones with the compassion are the legislators who set up the progressive tax system, which recognizes the fact that not everyone is at all generous. Not everyone is law-abiding either, which is why we have laws against burglary and mugging. I don't know why it is that some people need a nudge from the law to do the right thing.

@Randy
Compassion cannot be legislated. To compare charity to burglary is an illogical step. We have laws that protect people from others. Laws that prevent people from impeding on the freedoms of others. We don't have laws that require to care for the poor. Instead, we have a wasteful top heavy government that picks the winners and losers. If you really want to legislate compassion, then lets make a law that says any person without children under the age of 18 must take in 1 homeless person. It think that would be very compassionate.

Those that instituted the progressive system also started the top rate out at about 7%. I am good with that.

Your assumption is that compassion can only come from the government. If that is the case, we are all damned.

@TJ (the political whisperer)
Flat tax means same percentage for all. Unless a wealthy person has total income under that of a poor person they would not pay less then the poor. While many wealth men in America have no income, their capitals gains is much higher then many in the middle class.

JB - Of course I am not implying that a rich person realistically could pay a lesser gross tax amount than a poor, perhaps black person under a flat tax. Come on, if you believe in it, stop obfuscating and evading what it is. It has merits, like the promise of utter simplicity, and that could save billions, and essentially eliminate the IRS as we know it.

I of course meant that the flat tax would forces poorer people to pay more than they do today, which is little, nothing or even an EIC, and the rich would be at your 15% rate, which is lower than the progressive bracket they are in today, but they can get that low through exceptions eve today, which are now out with your plan?.
In your example of a person making $1, they would be left with $0.85, and the billionaire, if that were indeed his income, with $850,000,000.00. Agree?
You mentioned capital gains received by the rich. Are these in your definition of income? Are you just talking about wages, the first income line on the 1040, or all the other income items below it? What about taxes on business? What would a 1040 look like under your plan?
Are you obfuscating and twisting when I just want to understand? Inquiring minds want to know more. It is a fascinating idea, which candidates are proposing a flat tax?