U. S. Senate A Lock For Democrats? I’m Not So Sure.

U. S. Senate A Lock For Democrats? I’m Not So Sure.
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

I continue to read, hear, and see reports by the Mainstream Media that Christine O’Donnell’s win Tuesday, in Delaware, insures the Democrats will maintain control of the Senate. Well, I’m not so sure -- and I think the liberal-socialists in the media, in the Republican Party, and in the Democratic Party are fooling themselves if they choose to believe the race in Delaware will determine control of the US Senate.

Mark Tapscott has an article titled “Two initial lessons to be gleaned from O'Donnell victory” at The Washington Examiner in which he, too, explains his reservations about control of the senate being insured by the O’Donnell Victory.

In his article, Mr. Tapscott says the following:

“There are at least two lessons here.

First, the anger among Republican voters is not limited to the far right reaches of its "base." Castle was one of the most popular political figures in the state, yet his support in Congress for TARP bailouts, the radical House version of Cap-and-Trade, and the DISCLOSE Act marked him back home among his fellow Republicans as more a representative of the Washington Establishment to Delaware than Delaware's representative to Washington.

Lesson: The days of "moderate" Republicans in Congress being able to talk the talk of reform in Washington without actually walking it are rapidly coming to an end everywhere except perhaps in the deepest, darkest reaches of the Northeast.

Second, right or wrong, there is no more divisive figure on the Right, for the moment, than O'Donnell. On the issues, she portrays herself as a solid conservative and of course touted her endorsement by Sarah Palin. The problem with O'Donnell is thus not with her ideological orientation, it is strictly because there are serious questions about her financial record and ethical code.”

Tapscott goes on to say: “Still, I question the conventional wisdom that Delaware is now a lock for the Democrats. Despite Scott Brown, Rand Paul, Sharon Angle, and Joe Miller, the talking heads in Washington and New York obviously still cannot comprehend the depth or intensity of anger among voters or the fact that anger is far from limited to conservatives." (The emphasis here is my own.)

We think Mr. Tapscott’s comments are very insightful and right on the money. You may read the entire article by Mark Tapscott (HERE).

The depth and intensity of the voter’s anger is just ignored by the political elite in both parties. The Mainstream Media just sniffs and looks the other way.

Plus, they both fail to understand that the Tea Party Movement is NOT A REPUBLICAN Movement. It is a CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT, which embraces voters from the Democratic Party, The Republican Party, The Libertarian Party, and a host of Independents and others!

To sum up: They haven’t a clue!

The Tea Party is not about much of what the Elite Media and politicians and all the political science egghead’s claim it is. Plain and simple, the Tea Party Movement is about stopping Obama’s “Fundamental Transformation” of America. It is about taking America back from the Socialists, the Marxists, the Progressives, the Socialist-Liberals, and returning it to the status of a constitutional republic as the Founders intended. That is the purpose and the goal of the Tea Party Movement in America.

Along the way we intend to insure that our radical-socialist president is shown the door in 2012.

I just don’t buy it -- and I don’t think America’s intensely outraged voters will either. Frankly, it smacks of a pre-planned effort by the democrats/mainstream media to demoralize conservative voters before the showdown in November. But it is doomed to failure.

The only thing concerning me about the outcome in November is the democrat’s “October Surprise,” which I am reasonably sure will be forthcoming next month. I have no idea what it will be -- but since the democrats are big on fear expect it to something designed to strike fear in the hearts of all who even dare to consider voting against them. Come to think of it, fear is about al the democrats have left, now. Isn’t it?

One thing I’ like to address before I close this rant: For those of you insistent on supporting the Democratic Party -- just as your parents and grandparents did -- and as you have done so faithfully over your lifetime, please understand -- this Democratic Party is NOT, I repeat, IS NOT, the Democratic Party of your forefathers and not even the Democratic Party of your earlier years. The Democratic Party today is a polyglot of Socialists, Marxists, Progressives, Communist, and what we have come to know as “socialist-liberals.” It has shown itself to be the enemy of freedom, of liberty, indeed, of the Constitution, and it (the Democratic Party), we believe, is determined to transform America into a socialist dictatorship. They have already begun the process.

They must be stopped -- else America, the bastion of freedom and liberty, will be no more. It is as simple and as frightening as that.

Today’s Democratic Party is, in my opinion, determined to collapse the American government and drive Americans into the embrace of a socialist dictatorship, which they have already designed and have waiting in the wings.

America needs all her children to, once again, man the barricades and stop the encroachment on our freedom and destroy the evil attempt to destroy our constitutional republic.

J. D. Longstreet

Harry reid Must Resign! ... by Frances Rice

(The following is published on “INSIGHT on Freedom” with the permission of the author. … Ed)

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

HARRY REID MUST RESIGN!
By Frances Rice

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

Wielding a sharp racial sword, Democrats ruthlessly destroy the careers of Republicans on racial matters, accepting no apologies. Yet, using a glaring double standard, those same Democrats quickly give a pass to any Democrat, such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who again displayed egregious racism.

Hardly a ripple of protest was made in 2004 when Reid shamelessly slurred Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an incompetent Negro who could not write good English. "Slap at Thomas stinks of racism," was the headline of the New York Daily News' December 7, 2004 editorial.

Now, Reid has described then-Senator Barack Obama as "light skinned" and "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one." With this racial slur, Reid denigrates not only Obama, but also the entire population of black Americans as being uneducated Negroes who cannot speak standard English, the same type of disgusting remark he made over five years ago about Justice Thomas, a graduate of Yale Law School. A tribute to Justice Thomas that includes details about his stellar career is posted on the NBRA website.

Any American with an ounce of decency would not tolerate the type of disgusting racial epithets hurled by Reid at black Americans. If Reid had a scrap of politesse or common decency, he would apologize immediately to all black Americans, not just President Obama, and resign. It says a lot about his character and his innate disdain for blacks that he has refused to do so.

Obama's readiness to give Reid a pass is in sharp contrast to how Obama reacted in 2002, wasting no time issuing a challenge to the Republican Party to repudiate Republican Senator Trent Lott's remarks about Senator Strom Thurmond and seek his resignation as the Republican senate majority leader. The article "Obama in '02: 'The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott'" by John McCormack uncovers the following quote from Obama that was printed in the December 12, 2002 issue of the "Chicago Defender".

"It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do," said Obama.

He said: "The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party."
In the arsenal of excuses for Reid not resigning, as did Lott, is the claim that Reid's racist comments were not of the same caliber as Lott's remarks made on the occasion of Thurmond's 100th birthday. Lott was criticized and later apologized for his favorable comments about Thurmond's life's work that encompassed his ill-fated 1948 presidential bid when Thurmond was a racist Democrat, and Lott was only seven years old. Thurmond died in 2003.

The fine line of racial calibration afforded Reid is never permitted any Republican under any circumstances. Resign! That's the universal cry from Democrats to Republicans, regardless of the nature of the charge of racism, and even when the charges are false. Further, Democrats are not shy about embracing or speaking well of their aging leaders who have engaged in horrendous acts of racism.

Democrats who called for Lott's resignation were silent when Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd praised former Klansman Democrat Senator Robert Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment". Unlike Byrd, Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan that was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party. After he reformed on racial issues and joined the Republican Party - the party of freedom and equality for blacks - Thurmond defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats.

Egregiously Byrd, in March of 1968, while referring to the fact that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. left Memphis, Tennessee after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. This motivated Dr. King to return to Memphis a few weeks later where he was assassinated on April 4, 1968.

Byrd was also a fierce opponent of desegregating the military and complained in one letter: "I would rather die a thousand times and see old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen of the wilds."

In the early 1970's, Byrd pushed to have the senate's main office building named after a former "Dixiecrat," Democrat Senator Richard Russell who was Senator Byrd's mentor and leading opponent of anti-lynching legislation and other civil rights laws of the 1950's and 1960's that were championed by Republicans. Recently, in 2001 Byrd was forced to apologize for using the N-word on television. During Byrd's last bid for re-election to the senate, Obama wrote a letter of support for the racist Byrd, and not one murmur of indignation was uttered about the fact that Obama was honoring a former Klansman. Democrats showed no shame when they heralded Byrd as "the conscience of the senate." Can we say hypocrisy?

Why is there omitted from most discussions about racism all the racists words and deeds of numerous other Democratic Party leaders, including President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, former President Bill Clinton and former President Jimmy Carter? Instances or racism on the part of these and other Democrats are detailed in articles posted on the NBRA website.

The new book by Wayne Perryman "Whites, Blacks & Racist Democrats" provides details about the origin and depth of the contempt Democrats have always had for black Americans, starting in 1792. In his book on page 184, Perryman reports what Democrat President Lyndon Johnson said to his closest friend, Democrat Senator Richard B. Russell of Georgia. Historical documents show that Johnson told Russell the following:

"These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they got something now that they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, but not enough to make a difference. For if we don't move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there'll be no way of stopping them.... It will be Reconstruction all over again..."

Until and unless we hold Democrats to the same standard of racial purity imposed on their political opponents, we will never end the Democrats' use of racial tactics designed to keep our nation divided along hyphenated lines.

The resignation of Senator Harry Reid would signal an end to the Democrats' era of race mongering for partisan political gain. However, all signs show that Reid will not resign, and the Democrats will never loosen their race-baiting grip around the throat of America.
So, it is up to the people of Nevada to vote Reid out of office during the November 2010 election, and the rest of us to kick the Democrats out of Congress, since they are determined to tax and spend our nation into a long socialist winter.
http://blackrepublican.blogspot.com/2010/01/harry-reid-must-resign.html

Frances Rice is a retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel, a lawyer and chairman of the National Black Republican Association. She may be contacted at: http://www.nbra.info/
***************************************************

About the author:

Frances RiceLieutenant Colonel Frances Rice, United States Army, Retired is a native of Atlanta, Georgia and retired from the Army in 1984 after 20 years of active service. She received a Bachelor of Science degree from Drury College in 1973, a Masters of Business Administration from Golden Gate University in 1976, and a Juris Doctorate degree from the University of California, Hastings College of Law in 1977. In 2005, she became a co-founder and Chairman of the National Black Republican Association, an organization that is committed to returning African Americans to their Republican Party roots.