BLACK OLDER DEMOCRATS HATE CHANGE - 2016 ELECTION:
(INSANITY POLITICS)
The late Scientist Albert Einstein once defined the word "INSANITY" as doing the same thing over and over again, while expecting DIFFERENT results.
The word "CHANGE" is defined as Being DIFFERENT.
However for most BLACK Democrat voters the word "CHANGE" is a dirty word especially as it relates to Politics.
Most older BLACK Democrats appear to be resistant to CHANGE and lack Objectivity in their thinking.
Perhaps this explains why Pres OBAMA targeted Younger voters in 2008 and 2012.
In fact most Older BLACK Democrats would rather DIE from a terrible disease then to consider supporting a REPUBLICAN candidate, even if voting for that GOP candidate is in the best interest of BLACK voters.
Will Older BLACK Democrat voters open their minds to CHANGE?
Or will they allow their Stubbornness to Silence and Devalue the voices of future BLACK Democrat voters?
Thomas Sowell discusses Black voters’ allegiance to the Democratic party and the failure of the GOP to make a robust case for black votes.
Blacks have been the Democrats’ most reliable voting bloc for the last 50 years.
And let’s face it, with Barack Obama in the White House, that’s not going to change in the near future.
On the national level, Democrats typically get around 90 percent of the black vote, even when a black man isn’t running for president as a Democrat.
Al Gore got 92 percent of the Black vote in 2000; John Kerry got 88 percent in 2004.
These percentages aren’t just impressive; for Democrats, they’re imperative.
Since 1980, the percentage of white votes received by the Democrats’ candidate for president has usually hovered around 39 percent.
Unless Democrats maintain a vise grip on at least 90 percent of the black vote, the party’s presidential prospects usually fade to oblivion. Both parties know this.
If the GOP peeled off just 5 or 10 percent of the black vote, Democrats would be in perpetual electoral jeopardy, and not just at the presidential level.
Dr. Sowell discusses a few of the reasons why blacks who support Democrats are voting against self- interest (and makes a more persuasive case than Thomas Frank did in What’s the Matter with Kansas? regarding Kansans’ support of the Republican party).
There are many more reasons. Consider just the following: Large, Arbitrary Minimum Wage Increases.
Milton Friedman once said that “We regard the minimum wage as one of the most, if not the most, anti-black laws on the statute books.” (A good argument can be made that the minimum wage vies for this title with the Davis-Bacon Act — uniformly supported by Democrats — mandating that prevailing wages be paid on government construction projects and passed for the express purpose of preventing blacks from competing with whites on public-works jobs.)
Sharp increases in the minimum wage price unskilled workers out of the labor market, a dislocation that falls most heavily on young black males.
Such increases impair the ability of unskilled workers to get the entry-level jobs that are the first rungs on the ladder of upward job mobility.
As someone once said, a wage, minimum or otherwise, presumes a job. Public Education and School Choice. Millions of black kids are trapped in medieval public schools that are insulated from competition and suffocated by union rules.
Yet Democrats resist meaningful choice, insisting instead on that infallible remedy, “full funding.” #more#They’re encouraged, apparently, by how well that solution has worked in places like Newark, which spends $18,000 per student — among the most of any major public school system — but where only 30 percent of 8th graders can pass the annual proficiency test in math.
Or perhaps they’re brightened by the example of the D.C. public-school system, which also has among the highest per-pupil expenditures in the nation yet perennially returns among the lowest test scores.
Less than 25 percent of black 17-year-olds can read as well as the average white 17-year-old.
Nearly 90 percent of black 17-year-olds score below the average white 17-year-old in math.
More than 90 percent of black 17-year-olds score below the average white 17-year-old in science.
The average black 17-year-old has the academic proficiency of the average white 8th grader.
These figures have proven impervious to increased spending. In fact, in some cases the gap has widened as public school spending — in constant dollars — has increased.
But Democrats, beholden to unions, continue to oppose school choice and meaningful reform, thereby consigning another generation of blacks to educational purgatory. Affirmative Action.
Democrats are champions of racial preferences (see Eric Holder’s directive to the Dayton Police Department).
Since racial preferences in, e.g., college admissions most heavily favor blacks, it would appear, at first blush, that black votes for Democrats are indeed self-interested.
But evidence continues to accumulate that affirmative action may be one of the greatest scams perpetrated on blacks.
Studies by, for example, the Center for Equal Opportunity show that the racial preferences employed by some college admissions offices boost a black applicant’s odds of admission over a similarly-situated white comparative by a factor of 200, often much more.
This results in what UCLA law professor Richard Sander calls the “mismatch effect” — i.e., black students being admitted at schools in which they’re poorly qualified to compete.
Consequently, black students are more likely to perform poorly and flunk out.
For example, Prof. Sander found that 50 percent of black law students settle in the bottom 10 percent of their respective classes.
Black law students are two and a half times more likely than whites not to graduate, four times more likely not to pass the bar exam. Welfare and the War on Poverty.
Were this a shooting war, the Democrats would have surrendered in 1965.
As it stands, after 45 years and several trillion dollars, misguided if well-intended liberal policies have contributed to a toxic culture of grievance and dependency that, while not confined to a particular race, has been especially damaging to the black underclass.
The list of issue conflicts between Democrats’ policy positions and the interests of black voters goes on and on: illegal immigration, abortion, Social Security reform, to name a few.
But don’t expect any noteworthy changes in black voter allegiance in the near term.
A comment made by a black law student after an affirmative-action debate in which I participated a few years ago illustrates just one of the many obstacles faced by Republicans.
The student acknowledged that affirmative action often harms its purported beneficiaries and that its proponents are, as he put it, “condescending and insulting.”
Even so, he asked. “How can we (blacks) support Republicans given the Republicans’ history toward blacks in this country?”
I pointed out that it wasn’t the GOP that had opposed Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.
Nor was it Republicans who opposed the Thirteenth Amendment prohibiting slavery or the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteeing equal protection or the Fifteenth Amendment guaranteeing voting rights.
It wasn’t Republicans who opposed Teddy Roosevelt’s anti-lynching legislation, or that filibustered or otherwise opposed more than a dozen anti-lynching bills in the last century.
Republicans didn’t institutionalize Jim Crow or implement school segregation, poll taxes, or literacy tests. Bull Connor, Lester Maddox, Orval Faubus, and George Wallace weren’t Republicans.
A higher percentage of Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act than did Democrats.
The student and the other black students gathered around looked surprised.
One confessed that she would’ve bet that “Democrats” should be substituted for “Republicans” in each of the examples.
The GOP’s record concerning blacks is far from unassailable, but that doesn’t explain Black allegiance to Democrats.
That allegiance won’t change — Allen West and Tim Scott notwithstanding — as long as President Obama is the Democrats’ standard bearer.
And as long as Republicans don’t make an effort for the vote.
Twenty-four people have applied for the Charlotte City Council seat vacated this week by Democratic Mayor Pro Tem Susan Burgess.
The list includes Burgess' son Jason as well as at least three people who ran unsuccessfully for council last fall.
Council members could appoint a replacement as early as Monday.
The application window closed at noon.
City spokeswoman Kim McMillan said clerks are analyzing the names to make sure applicants meet the criteria, including being registered Charlotte voters.
At least one applicant listed a Huntersville address.
Susan Burgess, wheelchair-bound with terminal cancer, made a dramatic appearance at Monday's council meeting. After resigning, she made an emotional pitch to council to name her son to her seat.
Several members said they would. Others have called the process rushed.
Council members must appoint a Democrat. By custom, they're expected to choose someone who promises not to run in the next city election in 2011.
On his application, Jason Burgess explained his interest.
"I would like to be considered for the vacant at-large position … as a tribute to my mother's long-standing service to her beloved city," he wrote. "If appointed, I would bring continuity to the Council as I share Susan's principles and values … In accordance with custom, I will not run for re-election."
Here are the 24 people who applied for Burgess' council seat:
Sherly Francois Bradley Jason Burgess Robert P. Caldwell Jr. Anthony Castrillon Svend Deal Ganyika Dixon Kendra P. Dotson Micah Elliott Jack Flynn Marc Friedland Trent M. Grissom Brion P. Lawler William Mark Mobley Joel Moore Donald B. Moye Lance Peterman Lucille Puckett Lisa Salomon Eddie Sanders Ruth Stevenson Owen Sutkowski David S. Thurston Nancy Bowen Wiggins Eric C. Zander
With all due respect to terminally ill, long time Public Servant and Charlotte Mayor Pro Tem Susan Burgess, if Mrs. Burgess were not stepping down and one of the Black Council members (i.e., Anthony Foxx) were seriously ill and had to resign, would she allow them to rush in one of their Inexperienced recommended friends or family members to fill their seat?
Or....
Would Mayor Pro Tem Susan Burgess object to that recommendation by suggesting every Charlotte citizen have the right to apply and than select a qualified member from the community?
Considering the fact that Jason has NO real Political experience other than working on his mother's campaign committee, do you think its fair to specially appoint him to hold his mother's At-Large seat until November 2011?
I don't think it is fair or right.
Let's be real (NOT Fake!) for a moment shall we?
Why is it that as it relates to any position of Leadership Black citizens have to be Experienced in some way or another but White citizens don't?
Sounds like something Charlotte is famously recognized for: Its Double Standards!
Its NOT Susan Burgess' seat. It belongs to the people of Charlotte! If Foxx gives this At-Large seat to Susan's son it will just be another reason NOT to vote for him or his buddies next general election in 2011.
Hey I'm just saying.
Check out the video and article below regarding Susan Burgess' appeal to let her son Jason hold her seat until next Fall when the next General Election for Charlotte City council will take place.
City Councilwoman Susan Burgess, who has been battling cancer for more than three years, announced her resignation Monday, leaving a vacant seat that must be filled for the remainder of the term.
She put forth her son, Jason, as a candidate for the empty seat.
“He shares my ideals and values completely and I am confident that he will be able to serve in my place,” Burgess said at the meeting.
Charlotte residents have expressed mixed emotions about Jason, who is a surgeon, taking over the position for the remaining 18 months of his mother’s term.
“Her son has the same values and principles that she stands for, so yes, I would [agree with the decision,]” Vincent Stewart said.
“She has a legitimate reason and there's no reason for them to be against her and what she's asking,” Erin Wessinger said.
Others said council members, who will have the final say in the matter, need to pick the most qualified person, regardless of other factors. With more than a year left in Burgess’ term and the city under unusually tight financial conditions, there’s a lot at stake.
“I think they do have to look at other candidates and they need to be thoughtful to Jason -- and to her -- but consider all their options,” Pat Jackson said.
Council members are similarly split on the issue. While some are already backing Jason Burgess, others have promised to give all applicants a look. Councilman Edwin Peacock said Jason Burgess is “very qualified,” but added that he'll “await the review of the full candidate pool.”
The deadline to apply for the vacant seat is noon on Friday. To be eligible, applicants must be registered Democrat voters and live within Charlotte city limits.
Interested applicants can click here to submit statements of interest.
Council members could vote on Burgess’ replacement as soon as Monday.
The City of Charlotte kicked off an abbreviated process of choosing Susan Burgess's City Council successor Tuesday, even as her son emerged as the favorite of several members.
Burgess, a Democrat suffering from terminal cancer, made a dramatic appeal to her colleagues Monday night on behalf of her son Jason.
She urged his appointment after reading her own letter of resignation at the emotion-laden meeting. The council could name a replacement as early as Monday.
It's the seventh time in four decades the council has had to fill a vacancy. But it's the first time in memory that a departing member has sought to steer their seat toward a particular individual.
By law, the council must pick a registered Democrat who lives in Charlotte. By custom, it's expected to choose someone who won't run for the seat in the next council election in 2011.
The city posted an application on its website Tuesday. The deadline is noon Friday.
"I don't think you can replace Susan Burgess," Mayor Anthony Foxx said Tuesday. "But we've got a lot of things in the hopper, and the sooner we can fill the seat the better."
Democratic council member James Mitchell has said he'll recommend Jason Burgess's selection on Monday.
"This," he said, "is a tribute to Susan."
Democrat Nancy Carter Tuesday called the younger Burgess "a brilliant young man."
"He respects his mother's ideals and will carry them on," she said. "Unless there is somebody who is absolutely astonishing and brings more to the table than he does, I am committed."
Democrat David Howard said, "I need a real good reason not to honor his mother's request."
Democrat Patrick Cannon said he expects to add his support "given the (request) of Mayor Pro Tem Burgess."
Patsy Kinsey, a Democrat, said she'll follow the process. But, she added, "I have a lot of respect for Susan and her wishes."
Of 10 council members who would vote on a replacement, seven are Democrats.
Jason Burgess, 39, is a vascular surgeon who graduated from Myers Park High and UNC Chapel Hill, where he was a walk-on basketball player for Hall of Fame coach Dean Smith.
Monday night, his mother called him "a bridge-builder" who "embodies the qualities that I have worked towards as a public servant."
Even in her illness, Susan Burgess sought to orchestrate her son's appointment, beginning with a conversation on Friday.
"I'd like for you to finish out my term on city council," he recalled his mother telling him. "At first I wasn't 100 percent sure she was serious, but she was."
Burgess said that it was at his mother's suggestion that he began calling council members over the weekend expressing his interest.
"We decided that I should call them and tell them I don't have much experience in this, and if they decided to appoint me I'll need help," he said.
One Republican called the process rushed.
"We literally advertise for committees and commissions and boards longer than this, and we're talking about an at-large seat on the city council," said Andy Dulin. "I'm not comfortable being this rushed."
Foxx doesn't have a vote. But he called Jason Burgess "a good choice."
"There's a lot of sentimental value to having someone who is very closely (tied to) Susan," he said. "But you know, there are lots of people in our community who probably want to take a look at it ...
"I don't think you can make it just on sentimentality, that's for sure."
Interested in the council seat?
Anyone interested in applying for Susan Burgess's city council seat can find an application here.
Huffington Post---- NEW YORK — Sarah Palin's decision to step down as Alaska governor was driven in part by her wish to help Republican candidates across the country, associates say.
But in New Jersey and Virginia, both of which have competitive governors' races this year, the prospect of a visit from the party's 2008 vice presidential nominee has so far drawn a muted response from the GOP contenders in both states.
In Virginia, a historically conservative state where Obama became the first Democratic presidential candidate since 1964 to win, Republican Bob McDonnell said Tuesday his campaign had had conversations with the Palin camp but stopped short of saying whether he wanted her help.
In an interview with ABCNews.com, McDonnell called Palin a "good spokesman" and said he would welcome anyone who wanted to come to Virginia on his behalf. McDonnell, a former state attorney general, is in a tight race with Democrat Creigh Deeds to succeed outgoing Gov. Tim Kaine, a moderate who now chairs the Democratic National Committee.
But McDonnell also predicted the contest would not be affected by any high-profile endorsements on either side and professed confusion about Palin's abrupt decision to leave office with 18 months left in her term.
"I don't know how this recent announcement _ which I still don't fully understand, I only know what I've read in the media _ how that fully plays out and whether she's going to prefer a private life or whether she still wants to stay actively involved," McDonnell said.
In New Jersey, where President Barack Obama trounced the McCain-Palin ticket by 15 percentage points last November, state Republican Chairman Jay Webber said he'd had no contact with Palin or her team about a campaign visit on behalf of GOP candidate Chris Christie.
Several statewide polls have shown Christie, a former U.S. attorney, leading Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine, who is running for re-election.
"We don't have any plans on having her in," Webber said. "We're busy working to get Chris Christie elected and telling people about the failed record of Gov. Corzine."
The Virginia and New Jersey races are the only major statewide electoral contests in 2009, and strategists for both parties are studying them for clues as to whether the Republican Party can rebound from its devastating losses in the 2006 and 2008 elections.
Obama already has written a fundraising e-mail for Deeds in Virginia and will campaign with Corzine in New Jersey next week.
With few nationally recognized stars of their own, Republicans are trying to assess the impact _ both positive and negative _ Palin might have in both governors' races.
After Palin announced she would give up the governorship in Alaska, Nick Ayers, director of the Republican Governors Association, and Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, both indicated she was eager to begin campaigning for GOP candidates.
"She is an important and galvanizing voice in the Republican Party. I believe she will be very helpful to the party this year as we wage critical campaigns in Virginia and New Jersey," Steele said.
To be sure, Palin has shown strength as a campaign surrogate.
Last fall, in a runoff election between Georgia GOP Sen. Saxby Chambliss and Democratic challenger Jim Martin, Palin visited the state on Chambliss' behalf. Chambliss ended up defeating Martin by 15 percentage points in the December runoff, after winning by just three points a few weeks earlier in the November general election.
"I can't overstate the impact she had down here," Chambliss told Fox News the day after the runoff. "When she walks in a room, folks just explode."
But for all her charisma, Palin remains a decidedly mixed bag politically. While she remains wildly popular with many conservatives, she's held in contempt by many Democrats and has had little success winning over independents, who make up a growing share of voters in many states.
"She's a very polarizing figure. A lot of people love her, a lot of people just as strongly dislike her. Nobody's neutral about her," said Merle Black, a political science professor at Emory University in Atlanta.
For their part, Democrats in both New Jersey and Virginia were eager to link their rival GOP contenders to Palin.
"Her positions are certainly consistent with where Christie's been," Corzine spokesman Sean Darcy said. "They would both deny a woman the right to choose and they oppose new gun control legislation. And like Palin, Christie's staked out conservative right-wing positions on rejecting the federal stimulus money, which would create thousands of jobs."
In Virginia, Jared Leopold, a spokesman for Deeds, said, "If what Bob McDonnell wants to do is to bring in Sarah Palin and advocate for the same Republican policies that would take Virginia backward, I think Virginians would say, 'Thanks but no thanks.'"
A Public Policy Polling survey of Virginia voters taken in October found that by a margin of 44 to 36 percentage points, Palin's selection as vice president made independents less likely to vote for the Republican ticket.
Welcome to the BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog. (Established 2008)
My name is Laurel. (Author & Publisher)
I Blog with a focus on POLITICS, Business, and occasionally Entertainment.
FACTS ABOUT LAUREL:
Wife,
Mother of a U.S. Soldier,
Sister,
Woman of GOD,
Loyal Friend,
Creative,
Blood-related to a nationally known Charlotte Politician.
Black Female, Intelligent,
Married,
Love to Travel,
Credentialed by the RNC and DNC.
Political Blogger/ Commentator
Grassroots Activist,
PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Credential Political Blogger/ Commentator,
Registered Independent Voter
Original Native of BROOKLYN, NY
Currently reside in CHARLOTTE, NC
I’m Nice but don’t get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Since You’ve Chosen to Visit and Read the Contents of this Blog by Personal Choice, and of Your Own Free Will,
Please don’t ask me to Compensate you for Expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Expression.
No Intentionally Malicious Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character content will be published and I will always Credit all Sources.
NOTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, APPOINTED OFFICIALS & PUBLIC FIGURES:
Per the Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case: 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan………
The Public has a Right to Criticize the People who Govern them, so the least Protection from Defamation is given to Public Officials. When officials are accused of something that involves their behavior in office, they have to prove all of the above elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” (For a definition of actual malice, see the “History of Defamation and the First Amendment, below.”)
People who aren’t Elected but who are Still Public Figures because they are influential or famous — like Actors, Actresses, Movie Stars, Singers & Entertainers, Journalists, TV Hosts, Bloggers, etc., — also have to Prove that Defamatory statements were made with Actual Malice, in most cases.
To the Associated Press and other Media Organizations:
When I use your Content Links., I’m also citing the Fair Use Doctrine (Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission.
Posts and Links published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel’s Employer, nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Links, Posts and Comments posted on Black Political Buzz’s Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are Independently-Owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel’s Employer.)
(No Personal Offense intended) Please know that Black Political Buzz is not responsible for nor do I endorse Requests for Donations from Third Parties on this Blog.
I will Only Endorse Requests for Donations made on behalf of BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog for Business Purposes & Operating Expenses.
I will also Only Endorse Requests for Donations on behalf of Legitimate Politicians and Legitimate Political Candidates. PERIOD!!
If anyone else or another Organization wishes to post a link to Request Donations, I am NOT endorsing ANY of those Requests!
Unless I receive a personal Request to do so and I have Professionally Confirmed that the Third Party Organization or Charity is indeed a Legitimate Entity.
NOTE: Anyone who chooses to give to any Third Party Organization NOT Endorsed by BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ is doing so at his or her own risk.
BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ does NOT Discriminate against Politicians, Political Candidates, Organizations or Charities based on Race, Color, Nationality, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Faith, Disability, Political Affiliation, Creed, Education, Social Status, Age.
This disclaimer applies to ANY and All requests for Donations on this Blog. Thanks for understanding. Again No Personal Offense intended.
For Story Tips….Corrections…….. or Requests for Endorsements:
Please contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com
or via my Facebook page: facebook.com/blackpoliticalbuzz
Thanks for stopping by
God Bless
Laurel @BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES