Posted on 09/07/2003 1:16:41 PM PDT by nwrep
For months, I have struggled with a hypothetical question, a thought experiment if you will: If the enemies of the United States, such as Al Qaeda, had a political wing in the US Congress, how would their votes differ from those cast by the most liberal group in the House, namely, the Congressional Black Caucus, who are all members of the Democrat party?
After great reflection and research, I have reached a sobering conclusion: in matters of the military, there would not be any significant difference between the aggregate voting record of the CBC and that of the hypothetical political wing of Al Qaeda.
An objective analysis of the voting patterns, statements, policy positions, and arguments proffered by the CBC would leave one in no doubt as to the logical conclusion of their stance on American military power. Every action taken by the CBC in Congress has had the intention of suppressing, rolling back and reducing the strength of the American military.
Such attitudes continued, and gained strength, even in the face of the greatest catastrophe to strike this nation since the end of WWII.
Consider for example the votes of some key members of the CBC, such as John Conyers, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Charlie Rangel, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Jesse Jackson, Jr., as well as recently deposed terrorist lover Cynthia McKinney:
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 All except Waters and Jackson-Lee voted no, Roll call: 382 Yea, 40 Nay
Bill to combat terrorism All voted no.
Bill to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world All except Rangel voted no.
One cannot help but be stunned by this extraordinary hostility to the US military and unwillingness to support the war on terrorism when the burning embers at the WTC have not yet died down, and when the rest of the nation is immersed in collective grief and anger over these acts.
If these people would not support their country as she fought back after these monstrous acts perpetrated against her, when would they?
Most of the members of the CBC have consistently voted against military appropriations, weapons systems, DoD authorizations, CIA funding, and have championed the cause of nuclear and conventional disarmament of America. If you are Al Qaeda, what better ally could you hope to have in the Congress of the United States? If you are a terrorist wishing to inflict harm on US possessions overseas, who better to champion your cause than those who would reduce funding for covert intelligence operations that might intercept and end your efforts?
In addition, as if such votes were not enough for the CBC to put themselves solidly in the corner of America's enemies, consider some other actions they have taken over the years:
* Cynthia McKinney blaming Bush for the 9/11 attacks suggesting he had foreknowledge of the event.
* CBC members visiting Castro and applauding him for his rule, and receiving help from him in the form of Cuban medical training for inner city African-Americans.
* John Conyers and others prominently leading and speaking at major anti-war rallies, which were recently cited as a source for strength and applauded by none other than the man convicted in the Bali terrorist bombing.
* Charlie Rangel mourning the deaths of Saddam's sons and downplaying their importance in the war against Saddam Fedayeens in Iraq.
* All CBC members aligning themselves strongly with the communist inspired anti-war movement.
* Publicly contradicting President Bush on foreign policy and pursuing their own by backing Venzuelan communist dictator Hugo Chavez: Comandante Chavez's Friends
If these actions do not further the agenda of the enemies of America, what will?
If the CBC does not get political contributions from America's enemies, isn't it time for them to start getting a paycheck from the people they serve?
Hardly an intelligent question...or you're missing my point entirely....
Individuals that demonstrate their individuality can be judged accordingly..
Since one can not meet all members of any large group - one determines how they will regard that group by their collective behavior or the positions taken by their "leaders" or "spokespersons"....
It really makes no difference if the group is racial, ethnic or political --- the public "persona" of that group in many ways is determined by the behavior and actions of the group or their "leadership's" positions...
All I am saying, is that I think it is rational - to be wary or suspicious of any "group" when that group has demonstrated "unfriendly" or "undesirable" behavior...
Have you attempted to join a KKK Bar-B-Que lately? Kind of an extreme example, but I hope you'll understand my point...
This is never a easy subject to discuss.
Most whites are not honest about how they feel about the problems facing race relations in this country.. We are in a world of hurt...and I don't hold much hope for quick resolutions, when I see the direction the majority of black "leaders" and black "spokespersons" are taking the situation..
Semper Fi
Your main choices are to be either trusting and open until your knowledge and experience with them shows them untrustworthy, or untrusting and relatively closed until you know enough about them to start trusting them.
In arriving at this initial state, most humans tend to use the visible characteristics of the stranger to try to predict behavior, based on what you know about other people with the same characteristics.
When I see a well-groomed, well-dressed person, I tend to be less wary of getting mugged by that person than I would of a scuzzy street-person, because my experience and the experience of those I talk to, indicates that not to many mugging are committed by people who look middle-class
The unfortunate facts of life are that if you are noticed to be a member of a group that has a high percentage of bad people, most people will be wary until you prove otherwise. It's a fact of life. To demand otherwise is to demand that people endure a higher rate of victimization due to having trusted people who were part of a group that includes a high percentage of predators
The Congress for Racial Equality (CORE) is a great conservative black organization that has made fighting the power of Jesse Jackson one of its many goals. It is worthy of support by all conservatives.
Brotherhood Organization for a New Destiny (BOND) is yet another conservative black group.
Then there are great conservative black voices such as Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and Judge Clarence Thomas.
So, given that "glowing" assessment, you write us off as "fringe fanatics?" Does that make it easier for you to lump all blacks together?
So - if I elect to be cautiously suspicious of all Muslims, or blacks (until proven otherwise)- as a form of personal self defense - I'm a racist?
No, it makes you closed minded.
Is there ONE predominantly black organization that is countering the devastating racist behavior of Jesse, Al, PUSH, NAACP, BCC, etc.....
CORE, BOND, BAMPAC, CURE, Project 21; Need I continue?
For those blacks that have thrown on the yoke and inferior mentality of slavery - I commend and respect..
Thanks for the patronizing bone. I guess that's all I rate as a "token."
It may shock you to learn that I have served proudly with proud blacks who thought of themselves as American Marines (not black Marines), have blacks in my family and have both blacks and Muslims in my closest circle of friends...
Don't tell me: "Some of my best friends are black..."
Feh...
Yes, perhaps it could be said I'm painting with a broad brush....but when you need to cover 90% of a huge and potentially dangerous wall - you don't use an artist's brush...
Like I said initially, thank you for your candor. I now know where I stand with you, since your broad brush just clean slaps over me. Why not use a roller or a paint-gun while you're at it, massa. It'll paint me much faster than that brush.
Roy Innis, President of CORE, is also on the board of directors of the NRA and regularly gives speeches on the value of the 2nd Amendment
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.