[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Senate Version Of Trump Tax Bill Adds $3.3 Trillion To Deficit, $500BN More Than The House; Debt Ceiling Raised By $5 Trillion

Iran Disables GPS, Joins China’s Beidou — The End of U.S. Satellite Dominance?

Ukraine's Withdrawal From Anti-Personnel Landmine Treaty Could Haunt Generations

71 killed in Israeli attack on Iran's Evin Prison

Practice Small, Daily Acts Of Sabotage Against The Imperial Machine

"EVERYONE'S BEEN SHOT UP HERE": Arsonists Set Wildfire In Northern Idaho, Open Fire On Firefighters, Police In Ambush

Trump has Putin trapped, and the Kremlin knows it

Kamala's comeback bid sparks Democrat donor meltdown amid fears she'll sink party in California

Russia's New Grom-A1 100 KM Range Guided Bomb- 600 Kilo

UKRAINIAN CONSULATE IN ITALY CAUGHT TRAFFICKING WEAPONS, ORGANS & CHILDREN WITH THE MAFIA

Andrew Cuomo to stay on ballot for NYC mayor in November general election

The life of the half-immortal who advised CCP (End of CCP in 2026?)

Millions Flee China’s Top Cities

Violence begets violence: IDF troops beaten, choked, rammed by Jewish settlers in West Bank

Netanyahu Says It's Antisemitic For Israeli Soldiers To Describe Their Own Atrocities

China's Economy Spirals With No End In Sight, Says Kyle Bass

American Bread Cannot Be Sold in Most Countries

Woman Spent Her Life To Prove 796 Babies were buried under Catholic Home

Japan Got Rich Without Getting Fat

US Spent $495.3 million to fire 39 THAAD Missiles

Private Mail Back Online

Senior Israeli officials tell Israeli media that they intend to attack Iran after ceasefire.

Palestinian Woman Nails Israeli

Tucker Carlson: Marjorie Taylor Greene:

Diverse Coney Island in New York looks unrecognizable after third world invasion

Corbett Report: Palantir at the Heart of Iran

Haifa, Israel Before and After

Nobody can hear you anymore.

Boattail Buick: The Bill Mitchell's Riviera Revival!

Pulitzer Winning Washington Post Journalist Busted For Child Porn


Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: How Can a 'Fellow Black American' Oppose Obama? (Larry Elder)
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jun 27, 2008
Author: Larry Elder
Post Date: 2008-06-27 12:04:01 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 533
Comments: 2

Mr. Elder,

I am shocked that you oppose Barack Obama and belong to the Republican Party. We must get over ourselves and realize there is room at the top for everyone and we must get there by helping each other — instead of agreeing with policies and old politics that are proven not to work.

To endorse John McCain, a person who will not make it easier for the underprivileged, is just too much. How can a fellow black American feel this way?

Your Former Supporter

Dear Former Supporter,

Do you have any Republican friends, let alone black ones? If so, how many of them want to make it harder "for the underprivileged"?

You also might want to familiarize yourself with the history of the Democratic and Republican parties, and see which party has stood up longer for the rights of people of color. Do you know that Democrats opposed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution — abolishing slavery, granting citizenship rights to newly freed slaves, and guaranteeing the right to vote (at least on paper) to blacks, respectively? Do you know that most of the politicians who stood for segregation were Southern Democrats? Do you know that the Ku Klux Klan was founded by Democrats, one of whose goals was to stop the spread of the Republican Party? Do you know that, as a percentage of the party, more Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Do you know that inner-city parents want vouchers — the right to determine where their children go to school? Do you know most Democrats, including Barack Obama, oppose this? Republicans, for the most part, support vouchers. Where vouchers have been tried, kids appear to perform better, with higher parental satisfaction. You tell me, how many things are more important than a child's education?

Do you know that 36 percent of babies aborted are black, while blacks make up 17 percent of live births? Do you know that polls show blacks are more pro-life than are whites? Yet the Democratic Party — to which over 90 percent of blacks belong — is the party of Roe v. Wade, requiring states to legalize abortion on demand. Do you know that Margaret Sanger, the founder of the organization that became Planned Parenthood, believed that poor blacks were inferior and that aborting their babies made our society better? Look it up.

Do you know that blacks stand to benefit more than whites through Social Security privatization, a position opposed by Obama but supported by McCain? Are you even familiar with the issue and what a powerful income-generating vehicle it would be for blacks? If not, take a look at the research done by the libertarian think tank Cato Institute and the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation.

Porous borders enable illegal aliens to enter our country and threaten the jobs and lower the wages of Americans, many of whom are unskilled people of color. Which party is more determined to deal with this — Republicans or Democrats? Obama called the foes of the House anti-illegal immigration bill "ugly and racist." I did not support the bill, but vehemently object to characterizing those who did as "ugly and racist."

You speak of policies that have "proven not to work." What about the "war on poverty" that began in the '60s, the policies that Obama and his party want to continue and expand? Do you know that today 70 percent of black children and over 50 percent of Hispanics are born outside of wedlock? The welfare state — which Democrats want to expand — has played a huge role in discouraging marriage and destabilizing families.

Speaking of helping the "underprivileged," I'd suggest you read a book called "Who Really Cares," by Arthur C. Brooks. A non-Republican professor raised by Democrats, he examined the charitable spending habits of Democrats and Republicans. The results surprised him. Brooks found that Republicans give far more of their money and time for charitable purposes than do Democrats. And the giving is not confined to their churches or other houses of worship. This, by the way, has nothing to do with income. Poor Republicans give more than poor Democrats.

Compassion is not about making people dependent on government. Compassion is about encouraging personal responsibility, and getting people to understand that life is about making choices. Poverty does not cause crime. Crime causes poverty. Poverty does not cause a child to have a child. A child having a child causes poverty. Finishing high school is a choice. Not joining a gang is a choice. Not having a child until you have the maturity and the means to raise that child is a choice.

You ask how can a "fellow black American feel this way"? Quite a statement. You may disagree, but it doesn't make me less caring and compassionate than you are. I'm sure you truly consider yourself open-minded and tolerant. But based on your letter, tolerance ends — especially with "fellow black Americans" — if someone has an opposing point of view.

Larry

Larry Elder is a syndicated radio talk show host and best-selling author. His latest book, "Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card — and Lose," is available now. To find out more about Larry Elder, visit his Web page at www.LarryElder.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: christine (#0)

Dear Mr. Elder:

So instead of the Democrat Barark Obama, you shall vote for the Democrat John McCain.

Well that's just great, brainiac.

wbales

I shall not vote for evil, lesser or otherwise.

wbales  posted on  2008-06-27   12:21:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: christine (#0)

Do you know that, as a percentage of the party, more Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Yes, but thanks for reminding me.

Where vouchers have been tried, kids appear to perform better, with higher parental satisfaction.

While black pupils who transferred to private schools under a voucher scheme showed "significant" improvements, researchers reported that there were no similar changes in the results of white and Hispanic pupils.

The difference has been attributed to black pupils coming from lower-achieving state schools than their white and Hispanic counterparts.

Source: BBC, circa 2000

"lower-achieving state schools", i.e. schools with lots of blacks and Mexicans. Smart children do better when separated from their duller cousins.

The verdict on vouchers: funded by the right and lent credence by the Harvard name, a series of studies were aimed at proving the worth of school-voucher programs. The irony? The numbers simply don't add up.

{snip}

To this end, and apparently motivated by the faith of a true believer, Peterson spent several years around the turn of the millennium conducting the best-designed experiments out there on the efficacy of school vouchers. Where liberals may have feared to tread, perhaps worrying that the results would undermine their case, Peterson stepped boldly into the breach. Programs in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Dayton, Ohio, that provided vouchers to low-income students via a lottery system create an ideal opportunity for study, similar to that used in random-assignment medical testing. By comparing outcomes for students who received vouchers with those of students who applied but lost in the lottery, one can obtain a truly valid comparison between two otherwise identical groups of low-income children.

These were, by all accounts, well-designed experiments, providing the right with its best opportunity to make its case. But unfortunately for Peterson, the data didn't come out right, so he had to spin instead. The best Peterson's team was able to claim in terms of academic achievement for the Dayton results was the presence of gains that fell just short of statistical significance. When the analysis of these data was completed in 2001, it was possible to portray these results as consistent with earlier, more robust findings, and to fudge their actual inconclusiveness.

The data from Washington, however, was a bit odder. The first two years of the study indicated some test-score gains for African American students, which were publicized in papers released by the PEPG in 2000 and 2001 and cited by many conservatives, including Undersecretary of Education Eugene Hickok in congressional testimony last May. The gains, however, disappeared, and, in fact, became declines in year three, a fact that's been little noted perhaps because Peterson pretty much buried the third-year results in a rather technical pro-vouchers 2002 book--The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban Schools--that he co-wrote with William Howell, rather than touting them to journalists and policy-makers.

Only in New York did his results support the notion that vouchers can improve educational performance, especially for African Americans. (This despite Peterson's claims, in The Education Gap, that he found "similar results" in all three cities studied.) The New York results first became known to the general public in the midst of the 2000 presidential campaign, as Peterson made a number of TV appearances and a barrage of conservative columnists claimed that the study proved that anti-voucher Al Gore was more interested in toadying to teachers' unions than helping black kids. Peterson was distinctly less interested in publicizing the survey's more important conclusion: that in the aggregate, students as a whole did no better with vouchers than without. Nor did he make much of the striking fact that Hispanic students, those among the sample who had even worse academic performance than African Americans, did somewhat worse with the vouchers.

At a news conference last summer, Peterson proclaimed the data on black performance "the most significant finding" in his research, and as a propaganda point it certainly is. But it's hard to see what the policy implication of the study taken as a whole is supposed to be. As David Myers of Mathematica Policy Research, a well-respected company that conducted the research in partnership with Peterson's group, points out, "[B]ecause we don't have a good explanation for why we would see [improvement with vouchers] for one group and not another, it's too soon to make policy out of it." Myers put out a statement to that effect in the wake of Peterson's release of the results, but his conclusion was largely lost in the ensuing media hype. The point, however, is an important one, as the federal government is not in a position to implement a racially discriminatory vouchers policy. What would be needed to turn Peterson's results into viable policy is a good theoretical explanation of why vouchers were especially useful to African Americans. If we knew that, we could target a program at anyone, of any race, for whom vouchers would likely prove useful.

{snip}

THERE'S A RATHER DELICIOUS IRONY IN ALL THIS. CONfident that the facts would support its case, the right boldly organized and financed a well-designed experiment to assess the impact of vouchers on student achievement only to discover that they didn't help. Even leaving aside questions about the integrity of Peterson's analysis, according to his own interpretation of the data, vouchers don't help poor children as a whole do better in school. This conclusion is also supported by a four year study commissioned by the state of Ohio of the Cleveland voucher program. At best, there is a positive impact on African Americans that is not strong enough to improve overall performance once all racial groups are taken into consideration. This result runs contrary to the intuitive idea that private schools must be better than public ones (or else no one would pay to send their children there). That's because not all private schools are elite institutions like Andover or St. Albans. As Richard Rothstein, a lecturer at Columbia University's Teachers College, points out, "It's not surprising that schools in low-income neighborhoods filled with disadvantaged kids get similar results whether they're public or private."

Emphasis added.

However, parental satisfaction alone is nothing to sneeze at.

Which party is more determined to deal with this — Republicans or Democrats?

Uhhh...

Do you know that today 70 percent of black children and over 50 percent of Hispanics are born outside of wedlock? The welfare state — which Democrats want to expand — has played a huge role in discouraging marriage and destabilizing families.

Point.

Keisha Brown, 21, from Chicago, whose mother has a nightgown with a picture of Obama on it, said, “Everything will be different now.”

Tauzero  posted on  2008-06-27   13:30:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]