Sunday, July 25, 2010
GOP Politician Confirms What Was Long Suspected: Republicans Intentionally Feed the Racism, Anger, and Paranoia of the Far Right
GOP Politician Confirms What Was Long Suspected: Republicans Intentionally Feed the Racism, Anger, and Paranoia of the Far Right
By David Corn, Mother Jones Online
Posted on August 4, 2010, http://www.alternet.org/story/147732/gop_politician_confirms_what_was_long_suspected%3A_republicans_intentionally_feed_the_racism%2C_anger%2C_and_paranoia_of_the_far_right
It was the middle of a tough primary contest, and Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) had convened a small meeting with donors who had contributed thousands of dollars to his previous campaigns. But this year, as Inglis faced a challenge from tea party-backed Republican candidates claiming Inglis wasn't sufficiently conservative, these donors hadn't ponied up. Inglis' task: Get them back on the team. "They were upset with me," Inglis recalls. "They are all Glenn Beck watchers." About 90 minutes into the meeting, as he remembers it, "They say, 'Bob, what don't you get? Barack Obama is a socialist, communist Marxist who wants to destroy the American economy so he can take over as dictator. Health care is part of that. And he wants to open up the Mexican border and turn [the US] into a Muslim nation.'" Inglis didn't know how to respond.
As he tells this story, the veteran lawmaker is sitting in his congressional office, which he will have to vacate in a few months. On June 22, he was defeated in the primary runoff by Spartanburg County 7th Circuit Solicitor Trey Gowdy, who had assailed Inglis for supposedly straying from his conservative roots, pointing to his vote for the bank bailout and against George W. Bush's surge in Iraq. Inglis, who served six years in Congress during the 1990s as a conservative firebrand before being reelected to the House in 2004, had also ticked off right-wingers in the state's 4th Congressional District by urging tea-party activists to "turn Glenn Beck off" and by calling on Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) to apologize for shouting "You lie!" at Obama during the president's State of the Union address. For this, Inglis, who boasts (literally) a 93 percent lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, received the wrath of the tea party, losing to Gowdy 71 to 29 percent. In the weeks since, Inglis has criticized Republican House leaders for acquiescing to a poisonous, tea party-driven "demagoguery" that he believes will undermine the GOP's long-term credibility. And he's freely recounting his frustrating interactions with tea party types, while noting that Republican leaders are pushing rhetoric tainted with racism, that conservative activists are dabbling in anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nonsense, and that Sarah Palin celebrates ignorance.
The week after that meeting with his past funders -- whom he failed to bring back into the fold -- Inglis asked House Republican leader John Boehner what he would have told this group of Obama-bashers. Inglis recalls what happened:
[Boehner] said, "I would have told them that it's not quite that bad. We disagree with him on the issues." I said, "Hold on Boehner, that doesn't work. Let me tell you, I tried that and it did not work." I said [to Boehner], "If you're going to lead these people and the fearful stampede to the cliff that they're heading to, you have to turn around and say over your shoulder, 'Hey, you don't know the half of it.'"In other words, feed and fuel the anger and paranoia of the right.
During his primary campaign, Inglis repeatedly encountered enraged conservatives whom he couldn't -- or wouldn't -- satisfy. Shortly before the runoff primary election, Inglis met with about a dozen tea party activists at the modest ranch-style home of one of them. Here's what took place:
I sat down, and they said on the back of your Social Security card, there's a number. That number indicates the bank that bought you when you were born based on a projection of your life's earnings, and you are collateral. We are all collateral for the banks. I have this look like, "What the heck are you talking about?" I'm trying to hide that look and look clueless. I figured clueless was better than argumentative. So they said, "You don't know this?! You are a member of Congress, and you don't know this?!" And I said, "Please forgive me. I'm just ignorant of these things." And then of course, it turned into something about the Federal Reserve and the Bilderbergers and all that stuff. And now you have the feeling of anti-Semitism here coming in, mixing in. Wow.Later, Inglis mentioned this meeting to another House member: "He said, 'You mean you sat there for more than 10 minutes?' I said, 'Well, I had to. We were between primary and runoff.' I had a two-week runoff. Oh my goodness. How do you..." Inglis trails off, shaking his head.
While he was campaigning, Inglis says, tea party activists and conservative voters kept pushing him to describe Obama as a "socialist." But, he says, "It's a dangerous strategy to build conservatism on information and policies that are not credible...This guy is no socialist." He continues:
The word is designed to have emotional charge to it. Throughout my primary, there were people insisting that I use the word. They would ask me if he was a socialist, and I would always find some other word. I'd say, "President Obama wants a very large government that I don't think will work and that spends too much and it's inefficient and it compromises freedom and it's not the way we want to go." They would listen for the word, wait to see if I used the s-word, and when I didn't, you could see the disappointment.Why not give these voters what they wanted? Inglis says he wasn't willing to lie:
I refused to use the word because I have this view that the Ninth Commandment must mean something. I remember one year Bill Clinton -- the guy I was out to get [when serving on the House judiciary committee in the 1990s] -- at the National Prayer Breakfast said something that was one of the most profound things I've ever heard from anybody at a gathering like that. He said, "The most violated commandment in Washington, DC" -- everybody leaned in; do tell, Mr. President -- "is, 'Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.'" I thought, "He's right. That is the most violated commandment in Washington." For me to go around saying that Barack Obama is a socialist is a violation of the Ninth Commandment. He is a liberal fellow. I'm conservative. We disagree...But I don't need to call him a socialist, and I hurt the country by doing so. The country has to come together to find a solution to these challenges or else we go over the cliff.Inglis found that ideological extremism is not only the realm of the tea party; it also has infected the official circles of his Republican Party. In early 2009, he attended a meeting of the GOP's Greenville County executive committee. At the time, Republicans were feeling discouraged. Obama was in the White House; the Democrats had enlarged their majorities in the House and Senate. The GOP seemed to be in tatters. But Inglis had what he considered good news. He put up a slide he had first seen at a GOP retreat. It was based on exit polling conducted during the November 2008 election. The slide, according to Inglis, showed that when American voters were asked to place themselves on an ideological spectrum -- 1 being liberal, 10 being conservative -- the average ended up at about 5.6. The voters placed House Republicans at about 6.5 and House Democrats at about 4.3. Inglis told his fellow Republicans, "This is great news," explaining it meant that the GOP was still closer to the American public than the Democrats. The key, he said, was for the party to keep to the right, without driving off the road.
Inglis was met, he says with "stony" faces: "There's a short story by Shirley Jackson, 'The Lottery.'" The tale describes a town where the residents stone a neighbor who is chosen randomly. "That's what the crowd looked like. I got home that night and said to my wife, 'You can't believe how they looked back at me.' It was really frightening." The next speaker, he recalls, said, "'On Bob's ideological spectrum up there, I'm a 10,' and the crowd went wild. That was what I was dealing with."
Inglis acknowledges he's intimately familiar with extreme politics. He was part of the GOP gang that went after Clinton and impeached him for the Lewinsky affair:
I hated Bill Clinton. I wanted to destroy him. Then I had six years out [after leaving Congress in 1999] to look back on that, and now I would confess it as a sin. It is just wrong to want to destroy another human being and to spend so much time and effort trying to destroy Bill Clinton -- some of it with really suspect information. We went on and on about Whitewater. We had talked about the strange things about Vince Foster's death. The drug dealing at Mena airport. So in the six years I was out, I looked back and realized, "Oh what a waste."When he returned to the House in 2005, Inglis, though still a conservative, was more focused on policy solutions than ideological battle. After Obama entered the White House, Inglis worked up a piece of campaign literature -- in the form of a cardboard coaster that flipped open -- that noted that Republicans should collaborate (not compromise) with Democrats to produce workable policies. "America's looking for solutions, not wedges," it read. He met with almost every member of the House Republican caucus to make his pitch: "What we needed to be is the adults who say absolutely we will work with [the new president]."
Instead, he remarks, his party turned toward demagoguery. Inglis lists the examples: falsely claiming Obama's health care overhaul included "death panels," raising questions about Obama's birthplace, calling the president a socialist, and maintaining that the Community Reinvestment Act was a major factor of the financial meltdown. "CRA," Inglis says, "has been around for decades. How could it suddenly create this problem? You see how that has other things worked into it?" Racism? "Yes," Inglis says.
As an example of both the GOP pandering to right-wing voters and conservative talk show hosts undercutting sensible policymaking, Inglis points to climate change. Fossil fuels, he notes, get a free ride because they're "negative externalities" -- that is, pollution and the effects of climate change -- "are not recognized" in the market. Sitting in front of a wall-sized poster touting clean technology centers in South Carolina, Inglis says that conservatives "should be the ones screaming. This is a conservative concept: accountability. This is biblical law: you cannot do on your property what harms your neighbor's property." Which is why he supports placing a price on carbon -- and forcing polluters to cover it.
Asked why conservatives and Republicans have demonized the issue of climate change and clean energy, Inglis replies, "I wish I knew; then maybe I wouldn't have lost my election." He points out that some conservatives believe that any issue affecting the Earth is "the province of God and will not be affected by human activity. If you talk about the challenge of sustainability of the Earth's systems, it's an affront to that theological view."
Inglis voted against the cap-and-trade climate legislation, believing it would create a new tax, lead to a "hopelessly complicated" trading scheme for carbon, and harm American manufacturing by handing China and India a competitive edge on energy costs. Instead, he proposed a revenue-neutral tax swap: Payroll taxes would be reduced, and the amount of that reduction would be applied as a tax on carbon dioxide emissions -- mainly hitting coal plants and natural gas facilities. (This tax would be removed from exported goods and imposed on imported products -- thus neutralizing any competitive advantage for China, India, and other manufacturing nations.)
Here was a conservative market-based plan. Did it receive any interest from House GOP leaders? Inglis shakes his head: "It's the t-word." Tax. He adds, "It's so contrary to the rhetoric we've got out there, to what Beck, Limbaugh, and others are saying."
For Inglis, this is the crux of the dilemma: Republican members of Congress know "deep down" that they need to deliver conservative solutions like his tax swap. Yet, he adds, "We're being driven as herd by these hot microphones -- which are like flame throwers -- that are causing people to run with fear and panic, and Republican members of Congress are afraid of being run over by that stampeding crowd." Inglis says that it's hard for Republicans in Congress to "summon the courage" to say no to Beck, Limbaugh, and the tea party wing. "When we start just delivering rhetoric and more misinformation...we're failing the conservative movement," he says. "We're failing the country." Yet, he notes, Boehner and House minority whip Eric Cantor have one primary strategic calculation: Play to the tea party crowd. "It's a dangerous strategy," he contends, "to build conservatism on information and policies that are not credible."
Asked if there are any 2012 GOP contenders who can lead the party in a more credible direction, Inglis points to Rob Portman, a former House member who was President George W. Bush's budget director. But Portman is now running for Senate in Ohio. He's not 2012 material. What about Sarah Palin? Inglis pauses for a moment: "I think that there are people who seem to think that ignorance is strength." And he says of her: "If I choose to remain ignorant and uninformed and encourage people to follow me while I celebrate my lack of information," that's not responsible.
Inglis is a casualty of the tea party-ization of the Republican Party. Given the decisive vote against him in June, it's clear he was wiped out by a political wave that he could do little to thwart. "Emotionally, I should be all right with this," he says. And when he thinks about what lies ahead for his party and GOP House leaders, he can't help but chuckle. With Boehner and others chasing after the tea party, he says, "that's going to be the dog that catches the car." He quickly adds: "And the Democrats, if they go into the minority, are going to have an enjoyable couple of years watching that dog deal with the car it's caught."
David Corn is the Washington bureau chief of Mother Jones and the co-author of Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War and is the author of The Lies of George W. Bush. He writes a blog at davidcorn.com.
Sunday, July 4, 2010
A Cautionary Tale of a Reluctant Dominatrix: PERMANENT OBSCURITY
from: http://www.thefetishcorner.com/a-cautionary-tale-of-a-reluctant-dominatrix-permanent-obscurity-a-novel-richard-perez/
Article by Carla Melendez
Book Review by Carla M.
Dommes are all the rage these days — from Melissa Febos to Elise Sutton. Take it as a sign of shifting gender roles, take it as a sign of female empowerment, take it as a sign of embracing a subculture that just years ago was considered freakish and taboo. Richard Perez’s novel, PERMANENT OBSCURITY explores the world of dommes and “dominas,” particularly from the point of view of two down-and-out East Village wannabe artists who enter it partly out of curiosity, partly out of desperation.
This is by no means a politically correct book — even regarding BDSM culture; the story involves drugs, which as some may or may not know don’t mix with that world, or shouldn’t mix with that world. And this is partly the point of this cautionary tale. Shifting gender roles does not grant anyone the license to abuse others; with power comes responsibility. So maybe the most obvious question this story asks is: How can you dictate to others when you can’t control yourself?
The narrator of this story is Dolores. And she and Serena are best friends; both are young. Both have drug issues. It’s Serena, the more self-confident of the two, who takes ads on Craigslist for willing male subs. Dolores, although dominant by nature, is conflicted and can’t identify that way, and that would make her the more middle-of-the-road character:
“Oh, right,” Serena laughed. “I forgot how you hate being a top.”
She said it sarcastically, but I thought it was true. I mean, it was more responsibility than I wanted.
Usually.” (p. 142)
The story of PERMANENT OBSCURITY hinges on empowerment vs. being powerless; and it underscores the debilitating, soul-sucking quality of addiction, which undermines any possibility of control. And this is the major dilemma in the arts. Addiction of some sort seems to come with the territory. Who and what are artists, poets, writers if not addicted and compulsive people?
The central premise of PERMANENT OBSCURITY revolves around a dream of defining one’s own destiny. Early in the book, Dolores and Serena strike out as photographer and fetish model to produce a layout for a LA publisher, and from there a seed is planted: some possibility of a future project, which evolves into a movie idea. Not just an implausible fantasy, but a real possibility. If only Dolores and Serena can contain their neurotic need for self-sabotage. To put their plan into effect they rely on what’s familiar: putting out an ad on Craigslist, but this time for a writer (who also becomes an agent/author of destiny). With the writer aboard, script approval at hand, they seem, literally, to be in command of their own real life narrative. (The only thing the writer doesn’t deliver is a story ending, which, significantly, he promises to deliver “in person.”)
By hook or crook, Dolores and Serena get the necessary supplies to fulfill their plan: boosted camera, lights, moving van, media. But then fear and the dragon of meaningless rears its ugly head. What are they doing? Why are they doing it? It’s a question that artists continually ask themselves. Now add doubt and drugs to the equation. Then add massive drugs to dull the doubt and self-criticisms and what you concoct is a recipe for disaster, which is how this story unfolds. The Dominatrix film staring Serena, filmed and co-directed by Dolores, devolves into a face-sitting horror show/farce scripted by either Marquis de Sade, Eric Stanton, or David Lynch.
PERMANENT OBSCURITY may not sound like a pleasant story and in many ways it isn’t; yet what makes it palatable is the narrative voice of Dolores, an impulsive and often comically conflicted character, unaware of her own darkness and the depth of her own self-destructive nature. Some have called this a black comedy, and by turns it’s very funny. But in the world of the arts, where desperation and addiction rules, it stands as a warning to anyone who might let control slip away — would-be dominatrix and artist alike.
Book available on Amazon.
PERMANENT OBSCURITY: Or a Cautionary Tale of Two Girls and Their Misadventures with Drugs, Pornography and Death by Dolores Santana
(as told to Richard Perez)
Paperback: 464 pages
Publisher: Ludlow Press
ISBN-10: 0971341540
ISBN-13: 978-0971341548
About the Author
Originally from Cranston RI, I now live in Brooklyn. I’m a freelance writer, songwriter. I also manage a small fetish apparel shop and collect Burlesque memorabilia.
a novel Richard Perez
March 6, 2011 By Leave a Comment
Article by Carla Melendez
Book Review by Carla M.
Dommes are all the rage these days — from Melissa Febos to Elise Sutton. Take it as a sign of shifting gender roles, take it as a sign of female empowerment, take it as a sign of embracing a subculture that just years ago was considered freakish and taboo. Richard Perez’s novel, PERMANENT OBSCURITY explores the world of dommes and “dominas,” particularly from the point of view of two down-and-out East Village wannabe artists who enter it partly out of curiosity, partly out of desperation.
This is by no means a politically correct book — even regarding BDSM culture; the story involves drugs, which as some may or may not know don’t mix with that world, or shouldn’t mix with that world. And this is partly the point of this cautionary tale. Shifting gender roles does not grant anyone the license to abuse others; with power comes responsibility. So maybe the most obvious question this story asks is: How can you dictate to others when you can’t control yourself?
The narrator of this story is Dolores. And she and Serena are best friends; both are young. Both have drug issues. It’s Serena, the more self-confident of the two, who takes ads on Craigslist for willing male subs. Dolores, although dominant by nature, is conflicted and can’t identify that way, and that would make her the more middle-of-the-road character:
“Oh, right,” Serena laughed. “I forgot how you hate being a top.”
She said it sarcastically, but I thought it was true. I mean, it was more responsibility than I wanted.
Usually.” (p. 142)
The story of PERMANENT OBSCURITY hinges on empowerment vs. being powerless; and it underscores the debilitating, soul-sucking quality of addiction, which undermines any possibility of control. And this is the major dilemma in the arts. Addiction of some sort seems to come with the territory. Who and what are artists, poets, writers if not addicted and compulsive people?
The central premise of PERMANENT OBSCURITY revolves around a dream of defining one’s own destiny. Early in the book, Dolores and Serena strike out as photographer and fetish model to produce a layout for a LA publisher, and from there a seed is planted: some possibility of a future project, which evolves into a movie idea. Not just an implausible fantasy, but a real possibility. If only Dolores and Serena can contain their neurotic need for self-sabotage. To put their plan into effect they rely on what’s familiar: putting out an ad on Craigslist, but this time for a writer (who also becomes an agent/author of destiny). With the writer aboard, script approval at hand, they seem, literally, to be in command of their own real life narrative. (The only thing the writer doesn’t deliver is a story ending, which, significantly, he promises to deliver “in person.”)
By hook or crook, Dolores and Serena get the necessary supplies to fulfill their plan: boosted camera, lights, moving van, media. But then fear and the dragon of meaningless rears its ugly head. What are they doing? Why are they doing it? It’s a question that artists continually ask themselves. Now add doubt and drugs to the equation. Then add massive drugs to dull the doubt and self-criticisms and what you concoct is a recipe for disaster, which is how this story unfolds. The Dominatrix film staring Serena, filmed and co-directed by Dolores, devolves into a face-sitting horror show/farce scripted by either Marquis de Sade, Eric Stanton, or David Lynch.
PERMANENT OBSCURITY may not sound like a pleasant story and in many ways it isn’t; yet what makes it palatable is the narrative voice of Dolores, an impulsive and often comically conflicted character, unaware of her own darkness and the depth of her own self-destructive nature. Some have called this a black comedy, and by turns it’s very funny. But in the world of the arts, where desperation and addiction rules, it stands as a warning to anyone who might let control slip away — would-be dominatrix and artist alike.
Book available on Amazon.
PERMANENT OBSCURITY: Or a Cautionary Tale of Two Girls and Their Misadventures with Drugs, Pornography and Death by Dolores Santana
(as told to Richard Perez)
Paperback: 464 pages
Publisher: Ludlow Press
ISBN-10: 0971341540
ISBN-13: 978-0971341548
About the Author
Originally from Cranston RI, I now live in Brooklyn. I’m a freelance writer, songwriter. I also manage a small fetish apparel shop and collect Burlesque memorabilia.
Butt Plug advice for a female slave
I am 32 and I've recently developed a love for bondage porn and all things BDSM. My dream is to become the sex slave of a dominant Master. but sadly, I have no idea where to go about searching for such a relationship. In the meantime, I occasionally get the urge to masturbate with a buttplug. I bought a set of 3 buttplugs, one of them way too small, one medium sized, and one that was so big, I never managed to get it in. More recently, I got an inflatable vibrating one that I LOVE and it has worked out fantastically. I really want to try putting it in and walking about for a while, sleeping with it in, or just going about my day while being plugged. My problem is, every time I get it all prepared and ready, I'm so aroused I basically can't help myself. As soon as I'm done with it, I really want nothing to do with the butt plug. It's probably just fappers remorse, but any advice for keeping the plug in without giving in? If I had a master it would be a lot easier.
- Freeze the key to a pair of handcuffs in a cup of ice, leave the cup on the floor. Handcuff your hands behind your back and put in the butt plug. Hopefully you won't be able to unlock yourself until the ice has melted, leaving yourself plenty of time to enjoy your bound situation.
- ice timers are awesome. and if safety is a concern, you can always employ an unpleasant failsafe. example: drop another key in an open bucket of paint. it's there if you have to have it, but you won't want to grab it unless it's an emergency.
- This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. IT IS DANGEROUS TO DO SELF-BONDAGE, especially with cuffs, which you cannot cut through if you get stuck. Honestly, this is BDSM 101. facepalm
- Any Master is going to enjoy some obedience. You could think of forcing yourself as practicing.
Sent in by Fan - How did you get away with being nude in what seems like a suburban neighborhood?
How did you get away with being nude in what seems like a suburban neighborhood?
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Taking your slave on a leash in public.
| Playing in Public: Ethical Exhibitionism | |
| Yes, it is possible to lead your lover down the street on a leash in this magnificent leather Mecca of San Francisco. At least you can do this a few times a year, at our great events like Pride Parade, Folsom Street Fair and the lesser known Dore Alley Fair. But what does an exhibitionistic kinkster do to get his thrills the rest of the time? It's never cool to play with the nonconsenting, and in the exhibitionist's case, this means your audience. The difference between the acts of a responsible member of our leather community and a case of sexual assault is ethics and consent. Responsible kinky play does not nonconsensually disturb or hurt people emotionally or physically, and that includes your onlookers. There are numerous venues all over our fair city that will allow and even encourage such shows, ranging from leatherbars to public clubs to particularly licentious street fairs. There is no need to get out the whips in the basement at Macy's, even if you always did have a Martha Stewart fetish. But what about subtler games, where you enjoy the titillation of being out in public while in your roles, but several hundred onlookers may never know that they've just been props in the grand scheme of your sexual fantasies? Here are a few ideas and suggestions for getting kinky in public while staying safe and ethical. Bondage harnesses, buttplugs, dildos or fetish clothes under your regular everyday wear is always apropos for the really well dressed kinkster. How about adding an element of extra spice to the proceedings and rigging some remote control for those interesting devices? One adventurous couple managed a very amusing setup with a vibrating pager. For the more masochistic, some pet stores sell remote dog training collars which trigger an electric shock up to a quarter mile away when you push the control button. For safety reasons as well as additional titillation, I recommend that these units be worn a good distance below the neck and torso in humans. | A very important safety note on this trick is not to use cheap handcuffs that don't lock securely in place. Long term pressure on the carpal nerve of the wrist can cause serious damage, not to mention the possibility of problems down below if a cheap cuff tightens too far. Wrist padding is highly recommended. For boy bottoms only, you can manage some pretty outrageous bondage in public if you're willing to sacrifice a pair of old jeans. Or maybe all his old jeans are already altered that way, who knows. Inside the jeans, cut out the right hand pocket. Handcuff your bottom's wrist to the base of his cock and balls through the pocket hole. How about some ways to show dominance and submission in public without anyone else catching on? You can always play chauffeur and wealthy employer, especially if you enjoy dressing the roles. Deferentially addressing your companion as "Sir" or "Ma'am" in public is always noticed, but rarely remarked upon. Even more subtly, your submissive partner can be under standing orders not to start eating in a restaurant until you have taken the first bite, and you will of course order for both of you. If you enjoy public humiliation, there is no need to upset other diners by making your partner drink from a bowl on the floor - save that scene for the Eagle, please. Simply instruct your submissive to eat only with his or her fingers. If you are a real fiend, do this in a very upscale restaurant and order your submissive to ask for both ketchup and Kool-Aid at some point in the meal. Your waiter will certainly think that your pet is a culinary barbarian, but is unlikely to suspect that there is anything more titillating going on. This works especially well in a sushi bar. If your imagination is good and you understand the limits of your audience, there are innumerable games you can play in public with your exhibitionistic submissive while remaining ethical and safe. Of course, if you just want to go all out and perform a naked flogging with a matched pair of giant dildoes while your submissive is sucking your toes and being forced to hum "Dixie", it's a much better idea to check out the local SM party circuit. After all, everyone knows that it's in terrible taste to hum "Dixie" in public. |
Master-slave: The Language Of Love
| BDSM: The Language Of Love |
| Some of us are hardwired for DS or SM or both. Some of us - even in the BDSM community - aren't. When a partner who's hardwired ends up with a partner who isn't, their languages of love may literally be different. Love to me is the awesome committment of total physical trust, the gifts of body and soul given and recieved, desire fierce enough to leave its mark on willing flesh. Romance is the security of real bondage, knowing that you are valued enough to be literally held, and you value your partner enough to restrain him. The gift of dominance is as bright and beautiful as the gift of submission, and as awesome in its scope. To take the responsibility, the burdens of another's life, completely into your hands for a moment so that they can rest - this is true love, to me. To submit one's self utterly into those hands, trusting, is a gift whose worth cannot be measured in this world, and nothing material could ever hope to match it. Those things are in me to the core, and they will be with me forever. Yet I have had partners who did not feel or believe those things, and the result is hurt that runs deep. Intellectually, one can understand that some people are simply different in their languages of love. Emotionally, you feel abandoned, and lost, and very much alone. The blow to your self esteem can be a heavy one - what is wrong with you that your lover does not want you this way, does not trust you enough to give you the gift of himself? The answer is nothing, but you cannot believe. And the hurt goes on. |
Main | Essays and Thoughts
The Seat of the Matter - Erotic Spanking by Tanonymous
| BDSM Play and Safety: by Tanonymous SM Basics: The Seat of the Matter - Erotic Spanking | |
| Once you learn how to spank safely, you are well on your way to learning how to spank erotically. It is possible to give your partner an orgasm by spanking him or her slowly and rhythmically. Of course, you may not always want your naughty partner to enjoy the spanking you are giving, but it's always nice to know how to reward as well as punish. In order to deliver the most enjoyable and erotic spanking possible, you need to be able to give a good warm-up. Begin fairly lightly, especially if your partner is new to the idea of being spanked. Try to establish a steady rhythm. The ideal rhythm should be a lot like your preferred sexual one, and should allow your partner to be stimulated by the constant, rhythmical pressure of his or her genitals against your leg as you spank. The tender area at the juncture of the thighs and ass is a good place to spank. In addition to being quite sensitive, it is also an erogenous zone. Don't forget to intersperse your smacks with a lot of rubbing and caressing. A nice spanking also puts your partner in the perfect position for some anal play. A gloved finger or a dildo does nicely for this form of stimulation. Always be sure to use a water-soluble lubricant with a glove or condom - oil-based lubes like Vaseline or Crisco eat microscopic holes through latex in forty seconds flat. If your partner seems tense or inhibited, you might want to raise the level of sexual excitement by rubbing his or her genitals as you spank. If a person is in a state of sexual arousal, he or she can usually take a lot more in the way of erotic pain. My personal preference for delivering an erotic spanking is the bare hand, slightly cupped for maximum effect. While I enjoy an over the knee spanking, another favorite position of mine is to have my partner on all fours on a bed or sofa. This way, I can stand roughly parallel to his waist and really put my shoulder into the spanking. | With a few of my more experienced play partners, the hand alone is never enough. I keep a delightful paddle of burnished oak that is about an inch thick and a foot wide which is definitely not for beginners. I like to use it on very heavy masochists and also for a regular spanking when my arm gets tired. I just lift it up and drop it over the pair of consenting bun cheeks, and the weight of the paddle does all the work. You can easily assemble a good collection of spanking toys without going to any specialty stores. You can pick up quite a few useful things at toy stores, such as ping pong paddles and other "pervertable" sports gear. Most general stores carry rulers and hairbrushes, which make excellent spanking accessories. Wooden spoons can also be fun to spank with, and chances are there may already be a few in your kitchen. The local hardware store is also a great source of things to play with, but mind the splinters and don't use anything thicker than your little finger or heavier than a ping ping paddle until you get a little more experience with toys. Anything made of leather, wood or plastic that has a broad surface is safe to spank with. Beware of using small, thin instruments, because they can concentrate too much force in one area and may break skin. Stick to toys with large surface areas in proportion to their weight. Avoid anything made of metal, and stay away from the parts of the body that are unsafe to spank, such as the kidneys, spine, sacrum, joint areas, and shins. A good general rule to follow for body parts is that if it has a lot of padding, it is probably safe to spank. If you would be hitting on or near bones, tendons, or internal organs without a good layer of fat an muscle i |
Empowering SM: Kink as Self-Therapy by Tanonymous
| BDSM Play and Safety: by Tanonymous Empowering SM: Kink As Self-Therapy? | |
| While I don't think BDSM play is necessarily unhealthy, I do think some of us use it as a positive way to play out and gain a sense of empowerment over hurts that happened to us in the past - a kind of self-therapy that can be remarkably empowering and effective. Scripts etched deeply into our mind in childhood can feel somehow comfortable, even if they're dysfunctional and terrible for us and painful to act out. Regardless of the roles we choose to play, and who we choose to be to one another, we are all potentially healers and healed, nurturers and the ones taken care of. It's all right to be afraid, sometimes. Try to keep this in mind. Your personal feelings, your fears and your weaknesses are your right as a human being. You have the right to be little and scared, and held and reassured. That's a lot of what some of us BDSM'rs like to play with, the need to be nurtured when you're scared or hurt. Different things scare and hurt different people; depending on what happened to them when they really were little, and the choices they made then. Some of those things are too terrifying to play with, and some of them are the things that we most want to play with. If you ever got caught trying on Mommy's clothes, or if you were caught masturbating, often that sense of shame is internalized, eroticized and sometimes fossilized in the cores of ourselves. | Unless we deliberately replay those sensations, and make the choices again in our adult lives, it can continue to shape who we are without our control or our consent. This is one of the reasons why we play. We are talking to those deeply buried feelings within ourselves, and even when we don't remember why we have them, we have the need to control them and eroticize them and make them into something positive and healthy. We reclaim our own power over ourselves and our own healing by voluntarily choosing to replay old scripts with new outcomes. Yes, the naughty little boy gets punished - but he also has an orgasm. It's OK to put on Mommy's clothes, and instead of being disapproved of, you're told how sexy you look. You're forced to do something "terrible and degrading", and of course you love every minute of it, since you suggested it in the first place. You surrender yourself and are made helpless, and no harm comes of it. Or you surrender yourself and you are beaten; but then you are hugged and held and loved, and the pain becomes both an expression of caring and a cathartic release. These scripts might once have been genuinely abusive, emotionally or physically, but through consensual and caring play we can transform them into something positive and healing. The healthy BDSM'r says, "This is something I choose now for myself, and it makes me stronger. I am empowered and I am healed by honoring these feelings I have, and acting them out in a healthy way with a consenting partner." |
The Slave Positions - BDSM community by Tanonymous
| The BDSM Community: by Tanonymous BDSM Myths: The One True Way | |
| Believe it or not, there is absolutely no such thing as "a" standard for slaves, or for the BDSM lifestyle in general. There are some good basic principles, and of course technical knowledge of your tools and techniques and psychology is a good idea, but a lot of the arbitrary stuff (slave positions, etc) is just that - arbitrary. "OK, get on your knees. Now, turn your head sideways and down - you aren't allowed to look at your Mistress/your Master. Put your hands behind you so you can't easily stop me from doing anything I might want to, making you vulnerable. That is your Proper Slave Position." "Kneel up so that your ass is exposed, and you are required to keep your eyes on me at all times so that you can anticipate my every wish and desire. Your hands should be in front of you, palms up, indicating submission and your offering of yourself to me. Ok, that is your Proper Slave Position." I just made both of those up off the top of my head, and guess what - they both work just fine, and neither of them is THE Proper Slave Position unless I arbitrarily decide that it is. And then, my decision that one of these two is THE Proper Slave Position and the one I'm going to use for the rest of my life does not impact anybody except my personal play partners.YOU can make up your own version of The Proper Slave Position, and ignore me entirely. In fact, I recommend that you do so. There are subtle psychological differences between the two positions I just outlined that emphasize different aspects of a slave's training, and the best results will be gained by making sure you understand the psychology of what you are doing as it applies to the psychology of the individual. The best results will probably not be gained by using somebody else's textbook formulas on every slave you train regardless of their individual differences and needs. One of the saddest myths in the BDSM community is that there is somehow a single authoritative source of what is True and Right and Proper for all BDSMr's everywhere. People waste their time trying to find The One True Secret Authoritative Source of What Is Right For Everybody, instead of working on a practical level to discover what is right for them. The unfortunate end result is if they delude themselves into thinking that they have found THE source, they apply it religiously without consideration for the fact that particular arbitrary formulas may not be perfectly suited for the individual or the situation. | If they never do find a source they can convince themselves is THE correct one, they waste time looking instead of having enough confidence in themselves to use what works and adapt methods to suit. The other unfortunate end result is occasionally that True Gurus will pop up and try to tell you that they have "THE" source, and by default everybody else is wrong. Laugh at these people as heartily as they deserve. Anybody who claims to have the right answers for *everyone* else is seriously reality challenged, to say the least. I tend to listen to and respect people who say things like, "This works for me. This has worked for me and my partners for X years. These principles and techniques have helped support and maintain long term, functional BDSM relationships for us in a happy and healthy way. They may work for you, too, if you can adapt them to your circumstances." I tend to giggle at folks who say, "I know Secret Slave Position #137 and it is the One True Key to Mastery of the Ultimate Slave. I am a Real True Master." Those are the ones buying into the myth instead of living in the reality, and it would be funnier if it wasn't so tragic. There are many *good* sources of excellent, practical information and advice written by lifestylers in the scene who know what they're talking about because they've been doing it successfully for many years. Find these sources. The idea that you are training a slave (or being trained) according to some One True Proper mystical standard for Real Slave Training is no doubt nice fantasy material, but when the fantasy's over and your trained slave finds out that nobody else in the BDSM community has ever heard of the source that you decided was The One True Right One, severe disillusionment can set in. I think it's better to be honest in the first place - as well as confident enough in your own authority that you do not have to invoke a mythical one. I consider slave training to be a psychological art consisting of methods of behavior modification through various tools and techniques. I feel that the primary aim of slave training is to achieve a state of willing, ecstatic submission while feeling at a very deep level that you are being firmly directed and controlled - even in the (temporary) absence of a specific command from the owner. To this end, applying arbitrary formulas without being able to adapt for the particular psychology of the individual would be singularly ineffective. So, get as good a grasp as you can of the psychological dynamics and responses you want to elicit, and how to elicit them in the individual you want to train, as well as a good grounding in basic BDSM tools, techniques and safety - and write your own damn program. |
Main | Essays and Thoughts About WIITWD | Beginning BDSM Lifestylers
A Collar and its meanings.
 A collar in BDSM symbolizes a commitment that has often been compared to a wedding ring. This type of commitment comes in other forms, such as a brand, a tattoo, a piercing.... Each symbolizing the pledge of the Dominant to their submissive to protect, love and cherish them. When the submissive accepts the collar, the submissive surrenders to the Dominant and makes a promise to be devoted and loyal. Some collars are made with no clasp to signify the never ending love of the relationship. Other collars have a ring to attach a leash and a place for an engraved tag or pendant to show ownership. The collar is to be worn in the presence of the Dominant at all times. When apart, all the submissive needs to do is touch it to be reminded of the bond they share. Each collaring is a unique symbol of love, respect and a bond between two people who care greatly for each other. In these pages the members of #submission would like to share their unique collaring with you.... ...From a submissive I was asked to write an article on collars/collaring. I told KttN no one would be interested in what I had to say about the subject. I've only been collared once in almost 4 years of being involved in D/s and have not worn a collar in almost a year and a half. This does not exactly make me an authority on the subject, though it does make me an anomoly in the online D/s community where there are those who change collars more often then most people change their socks.A collar means different things to different people. Each unique relationship defines it in their own way. It truly doesn't matter if anyone else understands their particular significance as long as the two involved mutualy agree and understand it. That being true, no one can give a definitive explaination of what a collar is or what it is supposed to signify. Only within our own hearts and within each relationship can we do that. What follows are my thoughts, feelings and perceptions. No one else's. Some liken a collar to wedding ring which is an easy and convenient analogy. A collar around the neck is an outward symbol of ownership and commitment just like a wedding ring signifies to all that the person wearing it is "taken". But I believe the similarities end there. A wedding ring binds two people in a court of law, but doesn't necessarily mean anything more. Not every marriage is merely a formality by any stretch of the imagination, but we've all seen loveless marriages of convenience or marriages filled with neglect and abuse to illustrate the point. I humbly believe a collar binds two hearts, two souls together at a much deeper level then a mere wedding ring ever can. Where a wedding ring is but placed upon a finger and a piece of paper is signed, legally obligating the two parties to one another, a collar isn't merely placed around a neck. It is secured around one's heart. A collar symbolizes not only ownership, commitment, love and devotion, but embodies the qualities of honor, respect and trust. As a submissive, when I accept a collar, I pledge to focus my entire being on Master, making His pleasure my joy. It symbolizes Him becoming the center of my universe, my island where I can retreat to, to find peace, pleasure, comfort and strength before heading back out into the world. It represents my promise to honor Him with my every word and action, to take Him into my heart and soul and carry Him with me all the days of my life. A collar is a tangible reminder of "home", the only place I truly belong...at Master's feet...the one place I can truly be me, free to explore and express my heart and desires without fear. The advent of the internet and IRC has lead to many changes within the D/s community, primarily in making information accessible and providing a place for exploration. Computers are a safe place to explore. One can "try on" new feelings and explore different scenarios in the comfort of their living rooms without really having to experience the sting of a whip and each person has the ability to turn off their computer and walk away if uncomfortable. This has brought into the D/s community scores of people who are merely curious or who view an evening on IRC in a bdsm channel as an entertaining diversion from their mundane lives. The popularity and ease of the internet has sometimes obscured the real significance of a collar, even though, most surely, most are seeking those deeper joys. The result is that all too often on IRC, collars are trivialized. There is no honor, no commitment as many participate in what is often refered to as the "Collar of the Month Club." I know my even mentioning this fact will anger many, but I speak the truth and everyone has seen it themselves whether they can be honest enough to admit it or not.  How often do we see bored housewives, clearly unfailthful (at least in thought if not in deed) to their husbands, parading their {collar} on a channel while sanctimoniously declaring their abiding love and fidelity to a man they've never laid eyes on and never intend to meet? How often do we see men hitting on anything female (pulse is optional to some) and collaring the first woman to say yes just to get off on some cybersex? Where is the honor, respect, beauty and symbolism in the collar, let alone in the relationship, in these situations?Not all relationships or collarings on IRC are as I've described. For many IRC is also a springboard to real life encounters and has it's place as a mode of communication in long distance relationships. There are many who, for whatever reason, can not explore D/s in their real life and IRC is their only outlet for expression. Their heart is sincere, their feelings very real. In such cases the bond forged over time leading to a collaring online can produce just as deep and just as intense an emotional/ spiritual relationship as can be obtained in real life. (Though I venture to say, in online only relationships, something is always missing due to the lack of actual physical touch or something so simple, yet so v ital, as being able to look into someone's eyes.) Before one can even begin to consider collaring or be collared, I believe a few things are necessary such as honesty with self and excellent communications skills. Honesty with self means being able to look deep inside, acknowledging who and what you are, accepting that, being that to the best of your abilities and then to communicate that sense of self to your partner. There is no dishonor in being honest. If you are Dominant or submissive, admit it and embrace it. Some aren't Dominant or submissive, but are just people who enjoy kinky or rough sex. Others truly are but can not take it to real life. Some are just bored and view D/s as entertainment. The most important thing is to be honest with yourself and with your partner before offering or accepting that collar. If one can not do that, then the result is strangers coming together briefly, both quickly growing disillusioned or worse yet, being hurt, then left wondering what went wrong..."this time".  Be honest with yourself, not only about who and what you are, but about what your needs are. Are you looking for a casual, no strings attached play partner? Are you looking for online only or to move to real time? Are you looking for parttime D/s or a 24/7 relationship? How much time and attention do you sincerely need in order to feel secure in a relationship? Are your basic needs primarily sexual in nature, more emotional/spiritual or a combination? These questions need to be answered and then one needs to communicate the answers to their partner *before* collaring.Know yourself first and then take the time to get to know your partner. Anyone who tries to rush you into a collaring, must have their motives suspect. All good things take time and there is never a reason to rush into any relationship, especially one as serious as a collar. If someone tries to force or press the issue and you aren't ready, take a step back and assess the situation. This is a huge red flag. What is it this person really wants? Do they just want a little cybersex, a little excitement, to get off? Are they just so desperate not to be alone? Do they feel the need to fit in, peer pressure, so want to collar or be collared to be part of the "in crowd"? Is this a game for them, a conquest? Are they on the rebound? A sincere D/s relationship takes time. A collar is not a play thing. It is not equivilent to "going steady" nor is it a status symbol. A collaring is a serious contract, if you will, between two parties pledging their love and devotion to one another. It should never be entered into lightly, but only after great forethought and taking the time to get to know one another extremely well. In accepting a collar, a submissive pledges to give her entire heart, mind, body and soul to another, to surrender completely to Him. In offering a collar a Master agrees to cherish, protect, nurture and care for the submissive in all ways, to appreciate and never abuse the gift He has been given. A collar embodies the heart and soul of both the Master and the submissive. For me, I will accept no collar until that Master not only owns my heart, but has become my soul. cinnamon^ |
Thursday, June 24, 2010
The Root of the Republican Party's Agenda
Yes! I am a 
for opposing the Republican Party or GOP....The Grand old fucking Party!!!!!! There I said it....don't waste your email saying so...
-------------------------------
------------------------------
The Republican Party was formed in 1854 specifically to oppose the Democrats, and for more than 150 years, they have done everything they could to block the Democrat agenda. In their abuses of power, they have even used threats and military violence to thwart the Democrat Party’s attempts to make this a progressive country. As you read the following Republican atrocities that span three centuries, imagine if you will, what a far different nation the United States would be had not the Republicans been around to block the Democrats’ efforts.
But First You must understand how the Republican Party changed its colors in the 60s...and How the Lincoln's Republican Party was really today's Democrats...
Read This to understand: Southern Strategy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
and this: Southern Democrats http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats
and this: Dixicrats http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrat
Strategy behind State Rights: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States'_rights_(speech)
March 20, 1854
Opponents of Democrats’ pro-slavery policies meet in Ripon, Wisconsin to establish the Republican Party
---------------------------
---------------------------
May 30, 1854
Democrat President Franklin Pierce signs Democrats’ Kansas-Nebraska Act, expanding slavery into U.S. territories; opponents unite to form the Republican Party
June 16, 1854
Newspaper editor Horace Greeley calls on opponents of slavery to unite in the Republican Party
July 6, 1854
First state Republican Party officially organized in Jackson, Michigan, to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies
--------------------------
--------------------------
February 11, 1856
Republican Montgomery Blair argues before U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his client, the slave Dred Scott; later served in President Lincoln’s Cabinet
February 22, 1856
First national meeting of the Republican Party, in Pittsburgh, to coordinate opposition to Democrats’ pro-slavery policies
--------------
-------------
March 27, 1856
First meeting of Republican National Committee in Washington, DC to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies
May 22, 1856
For denouncing Democrats’ pro-slavery policy, Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) is beaten nearly to death on floor of Senate by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks (D-SC), takes three years to recover
March 6, 1857
Republican Supreme Court Justice John McLean issues strenuous dissent from decision by 7 Democrats in infamous Dred Scott case that African-Americans had no rights “which any white man was bound to respect”
June 26, 1857
Abraham Lincoln declares Republican position that slavery is “cruelly wrong,” while Democrats “cultivate and excite hatred” for blacks
October 13, 1858
During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee
----------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
October 25, 1858
U.S. Senator William Seward (R-NY) describes Democratic Party as “inextricably committed to the designs of the slaveholders”; as President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of State, helped draft Emancipation Proclamation
June 4, 1860
Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) delivers his classic address, The Barbarism of Slavery
April 7, 1862
President Lincoln concludes treaty with Britain for suppression of slave trade
----------------
----------------
April 16, 1862
President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no
July 2, 1862
U.S. Rep. Justin Morrill (R-VT) wins passage of Land Grant Act, establishing colleges open to African-Americans, including such students as George Washington Carver
July 17, 1862
Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes Confiscation Act stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”
August 19, 1862
Republican newspaper editor Horace Greeley writes Prayer of Twenty Millions, calling on President Lincoln to declare emancipation
August 25, 1862
President Abraham Lincoln authorizes enlistment of African-American soldiers in U.S. Army
September 22, 1862
Republican President Abraham Lincoln issues Emancipation Proclamation
January 1, 1863
Emancipation Proclamation, implementing the Republicans’ Confiscation Act of 1862, takes effect
--------------------
--------------------
February 9, 1864
Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton deliver over 100,000 signatures to U.S. Senate supporting Republicans’ plans for constitutional amendment to ban slavery
June 15, 1864
Republican Congress votes equal pay for African-American troops serving in U.S. Army during Civil War
June 28, 1864
Republican majority in Congress repeals Fugitive Slave Acts
October 29, 1864
African-American abolitionist Sojourner Truth says of President Lincoln: “I never was treated by anyone with more kindness and cordiality than were shown to me by that great and good man”
January 31, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition
March 3, 1865
Republican Congress establishes Freedmen’s Bureau to provide health care, education, and technical assistance to emancipated slaves
April 8, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition
June 19, 1865
On “Juneteenth,” U.S. troops land in Galveston, TX to enforce ban on slavery that had been declared more than two years before by the Emancipation Proclamation
-----------------------
-----------------------
While researching Juneteenth, I found almost no mention of the troops under Union general Gordon Granger, who were sent to Galveston to ENFORCE the ban on slavery. History revisionists would have you believe that General Granger was a glorified messenger boy. But he was the Union general put in charge of Texas. When he read the Emancipation Proclamation in Galveston, he was also reading the riot act, and he rode ahead of enough troops to put down any resistance. The Emancipation Proclamation had gone into effect two-and-a -half years earlier and the Civil War had been over for two months. It is absolutely unbelievable that Texas slaveholders -- or Texas slaves -- would have been totally ignorant of this. I mean, Texas isn't the name of another planet. They had telegraphs and newspapers and word of mouth. They didn't need a Union general to inform them of world events. A messenger who was sent to Texas to inform people of emancipation was killed. It is thought the plantation owners wanted their slaves for one more harvest.Astoundingly, the Democrats seem to have hijacked this day as their own. What follows is a statement that was posted on a Juneteenth Web site a few years ago.
Washington, D.C. - Democratic National Committee (DNC)Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued the following statement in commemoration of Juneteenth."This Saturday, Democrats across America will celebrate the anniversary of Juneteenth, the country's longest-running observance of the abolition of slavery."Juneteenth is a celebration of liberty, as we remember that day in 1865 when the news of emancipation finally reached the slaves of Galveston, Texas - two and a half years after President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. On that day, slavery was finally eradicated from our country's shores and a new sense of hope had been achieved for the entire nation."139 years after that historic day, the Democratic Party remains committed to fighting for equality in our schools, our workplaces, and in our neighborhoods to ensure an equal opportunity for all Americans."
Scuse me?? The Democratic Party remains committed to fighting for equality? When the did this happen? Wasn't it the Democratic Party that fought on the side of slavery? Wasn't it the Democratic Party that fought against EVERY attempt to institute equality in our schools, our workplaces and our neighborhoods, right through the 1964 Civil Rights Act? At what point in our history did the Democratic party -- the party of slavery, the party of segregation, the party of the Ku Klux Klan -- become this nation's champion of liberty?Talk about an Extreme Makeover! By the way, you won't find a statement from the head of the RNC on that site. Apparently, the Republican party had nothing to do with freeing the slaves.
November 22, 1865
Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination
--------------------------
--------------------------
December 6, 1865
Republican Party’s 13th Amendment, banning slavery, is ratified
February 5, 1866
U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves
April 9, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law
-------------------------
-------------------------
April 19, 1866
Thousands assemble in Washington, DC to celebrate Republican Party’s abolition of slavery
May 10, 1866
U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no
June 8, 1866
U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no
July 16, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of Freedman's Bureau Act, which protected former slaves from “black codes” denying their rights
July 28, 1866
Republican Congress authorizes formation of the Buffalo Soldiers, two regiments of African-American cavalrymen
July 30, 1866
Democrat-controlled City of New Orleans orders police to storm racially-integrated Republican meeting; raid kills 40 and wounds more than 150
January 8, 1867
Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.
July 19, 1867
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans
---------------------------
---------------------------
March 30, 1868
Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”
May 20, 1868
Republican National Convention marks debut of African-American politicians on national stage; two – Pinckney Pinchback and James Harris – attend as delegates, and several serve as presidential electors
September 3, 1868
25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress
September 12, 1868
Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress
-------------------------
-------------------------
September 28, 1868
Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana murder nearly 300 African-Americans who tried to prevent an assault against a Republican newspaper editor
October 7, 1868
Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”
October 22, 1868
While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan
November 3, 1868
Republican Ulysses Grant defeats Democrat Horatio Seymour in presidential election; Seymour had denounced Emancipation Proclamation
December 10, 1869
Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office
February 3, 1870
After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race
----------------------
----------------------
May 19, 1870
African-American John Langston, law professor and future Republican Congressman from Virginia, delivers influential speech supporting President Ulysses Grant’s civil rights policies
May 31, 1870
President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights
June 22, 1870
Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South
September 6, 1870
Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell
February 28, 1871
Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters
March 22, 1871
Spartansburg Republican newspaper denounces Ku Klux Klan campaign to eradicate the Republican Party in South Carolina
April 20, 1871
Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans
-----------------------
-----------------------
October 10, 1871
Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands
October 18, 1871
After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan
November 18, 1872
Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”
January 17, 1874
Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government
September 14, 1874
Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed
March 1, 1875
Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition
-----------------------
-----------------------
September 20, 1876
Former state Attorney General Robert Ingersoll (R-IL) tells veterans: “Every man that loved slavery better than liberty was a Democrat… I am a Republican because it is the only free party that ever existed”
January 10, 1878
U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919. Republicans foil Democratic efforts to keep women in the kitchen, where they belong
July 14, 1884
Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery
August 30, 1890
Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South
June 7, 1892
In a FIRST for a major U.S. political party, two women – Theresa Jenkins and Cora Carleton – attend Republican National Convention in an official capacity, as alternate delegates
February 8, 1894
Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote
----------------------
----------------------
December 11, 1895
African-American Republican and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Miller (R-SC) denounces new state constitution written to disenfranchise African-Americans
May 18, 1896
Republican Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting from Supreme Court’s notorious Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, declares: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens”
December 31, 1898
Republican Theodore Roosevelt becomes Governor of New York; in 1900, he outlawed racial segregation in New York public schools
May 24, 1900
Republicans vote no in referendum for constitutional convention in Virginia, designed to create a new state constitution disenfranchising African-Americans
January 15, 1901
Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans
---------------------
---------------------
October 16, 1901
President Theodore Roosevelt invites Booker T. Washington to dine at White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country
May 29, 1902
Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%
February 12, 1909
On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP
June 18, 1912
African-American Robert Church, founder of Lincoln Leagues to register black voters in Tennessee, attends 1912 Republican National Convention as delegate; eventually serves as delegate at 8 conventions
August 1, 1916
Republican presidential candidate Charles Evans Hughes, former New York Governor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice, endorses women’s suffrage constitutional amendment; he would become Secretary of State and Chief Justice
May 21, 1919
Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no
--------------------------
--------------------------
April 18, 1920
Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus
August 18, 1920
Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures
January 26, 1922
House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster
June 2, 1924
Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans
October 3, 1924
Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention
----------------------
----------------------
December 8, 1924
Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis argues in favor of “separate but equal”
June 12, 1929
First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country
August 17, 1937
Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation
June 24, 1940
Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it
October 20, 1942
60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries
April 3, 1944
U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system
August 8, 1945
Republicans condemn Harry Truman's surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that "[t]he use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."
February 18, 1946
Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools
July 11, 1952
Republican Party platform condemns “duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters
September 30, 1953
Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education
December 8, 1953
Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education
May 17, 1954
Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education
November 25, 1955
Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel
March 12, 1956
Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation
June 5, 1956
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law
October 19, 1956
On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America”
November 6, 1956
African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President
September 9, 1957
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act
September 24, 1957
Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools
June 23, 1958
President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights
February 4, 1959
President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats
May 6, 1960
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats
July 27, 1960
At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform
May 2, 1963
Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights
June 1, 1963
Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama
September 29, 1963
Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School
June 9, 1964
Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate
June 10, 1964
Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.
June 20, 1964
The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act
March 7, 1965
Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL
March 21, 1965
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace
August 4, 1965
Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose
August 6, 1965
Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor
July 8, 1970
In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits
September 17, 1971
Former Ku Klux Klan member and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D-AL) retires from U.S. Supreme Court; appointed by FDR in 1937, he had defended Klansmen for racial murders
February 19, 1976
President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII
September 15, 1981
President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs
June 29, 1982
President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act
August 10, 1988
President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR
November 21, 1991
President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation
August 20, 1996
Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law
April 26, 1999
Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President
January 25, 2001
U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee declares school choice to be “Educational Emancipation”
March 19, 2003
Republican U.S. Representatives of Hispanic and Portuguese descent form Congressional Hispanic Conference
May 23, 2003
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture
February 26, 2004
Hispanic Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX) condemns racist comments by U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL); she had called Asst. Secretary of State Roger Noriega and several Hispanic Congressmen “a bunch of white men...you all look alike to me”
* * *
There you have it. What a different country this would be, had not Republicans blocked the agenda of Democrats every step of the way. But this evil organization is far from through. Now, they want to give education vouchers to public school children, so kids of every race and class can attend private schools of their CHOICE. Where will we get our garbage collectors, dishwashers and ditch diggers if blacks, Hispanics and white trash have access to a good education? They are trying to stop undocumented immigration, meaning the cheapest labor Democrats have had since the days of slavery will be taken away. They are trying to end segregation and slavery all over again!
And in true Republican tradition, they just can't stop poking their nose into other people's business, trying to destroy a woman's right to choose. They are trying to crush the secret vision of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who once said, ""We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population…"
Is there NO end to the freedoms these fascists will try to destroy?! No matter how many lies must be told, no matter how many schoolchildren must be mis-educated, no matter how many elections must be rigged, THE REPUBLICANS MUST BE STOPPED!
for opposing the Republican Party or GOP....The Grand old fucking Party!!!!!! There I said it....don't waste your email saying so...
-------------------------------
The Republican Party was formed in 1854 specifically to oppose the Democrats, and for more than 150 years, they have done everything they could to block the Democrat agenda. In their abuses of power, they have even used threats and military violence to thwart the Democrat Party’s attempts to make this a progressive country. As you read the following Republican atrocities that span three centuries, imagine if you will, what a far different nation the United States would be had not the Republicans been around to block the Democrats’ efforts.
But First You must understand how the Republican Party changed its colors in the 60s...and How the Lincoln's Republican Party was really today's Democrats...
Read This to understand: Southern Strategy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
and this: Southern Democrats http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats
and this: Dixicrats http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrat
Strategy behind State Rights: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States'_rights_(speech)
March 20, 1854
Opponents of Democrats’ pro-slavery policies meet in Ripon, Wisconsin to establish the Republican Party
---------------------------
---------------------------
May 30, 1854
Democrat President Franklin Pierce signs Democrats’ Kansas-Nebraska Act, expanding slavery into U.S. territories; opponents unite to form the Republican Party
June 16, 1854
Newspaper editor Horace Greeley calls on opponents of slavery to unite in the Republican Party
July 6, 1854
First state Republican Party officially organized in Jackson, Michigan, to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies
--------------------------
February 11, 1856
Republican Montgomery Blair argues before U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his client, the slave Dred Scott; later served in President Lincoln’s Cabinet
February 22, 1856
First national meeting of the Republican Party, in Pittsburgh, to coordinate opposition to Democrats’ pro-slavery policies
--------------
March 27, 1856
First meeting of Republican National Committee in Washington, DC to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies
May 22, 1856
For denouncing Democrats’ pro-slavery policy, Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) is beaten nearly to death on floor of Senate by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks (D-SC), takes three years to recover
March 6, 1857
Republican Supreme Court Justice John McLean issues strenuous dissent from decision by 7 Democrats in infamous Dred Scott case that African-Americans had no rights “which any white man was bound to respect”
June 26, 1857
Abraham Lincoln declares Republican position that slavery is “cruelly wrong,” while Democrats “cultivate and excite hatred” for blacks
October 13, 1858
During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee
----------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
October 25, 1858
U.S. Senator William Seward (R-NY) describes Democratic Party as “inextricably committed to the designs of the slaveholders”; as President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of State, helped draft Emancipation Proclamation
June 4, 1860
Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) delivers his classic address, The Barbarism of Slavery
April 7, 1862
President Lincoln concludes treaty with Britain for suppression of slave trade
----------------
----------------
April 16, 1862
President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no
July 2, 1862
U.S. Rep. Justin Morrill (R-VT) wins passage of Land Grant Act, establishing colleges open to African-Americans, including such students as George Washington Carver
July 17, 1862
Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes Confiscation Act stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”
August 19, 1862
Republican newspaper editor Horace Greeley writes Prayer of Twenty Millions, calling on President Lincoln to declare emancipation
August 25, 1862
President Abraham Lincoln authorizes enlistment of African-American soldiers in U.S. Army
September 22, 1862
Republican President Abraham Lincoln issues Emancipation Proclamation
January 1, 1863
Emancipation Proclamation, implementing the Republicans’ Confiscation Act of 1862, takes effect
--------------------
February 9, 1864
Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton deliver over 100,000 signatures to U.S. Senate supporting Republicans’ plans for constitutional amendment to ban slavery
June 15, 1864
Republican Congress votes equal pay for African-American troops serving in U.S. Army during Civil War
June 28, 1864
Republican majority in Congress repeals Fugitive Slave Acts
October 29, 1864
African-American abolitionist Sojourner Truth says of President Lincoln: “I never was treated by anyone with more kindness and cordiality than were shown to me by that great and good man”
January 31, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition
March 3, 1865
Republican Congress establishes Freedmen’s Bureau to provide health care, education, and technical assistance to emancipated slaves
April 8, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition
June 19, 1865
On “Juneteenth,” U.S. troops land in Galveston, TX to enforce ban on slavery that had been declared more than two years before by the Emancipation Proclamation
-----------------------
While researching Juneteenth, I found almost no mention of the troops under Union general Gordon Granger, who were sent to Galveston to ENFORCE the ban on slavery. History revisionists would have you believe that General Granger was a glorified messenger boy. But he was the Union general put in charge of Texas. When he read the Emancipation Proclamation in Galveston, he was also reading the riot act, and he rode ahead of enough troops to put down any resistance. The Emancipation Proclamation had gone into effect two-and-a -half years earlier and the Civil War had been over for two months. It is absolutely unbelievable that Texas slaveholders -- or Texas slaves -- would have been totally ignorant of this. I mean, Texas isn't the name of another planet. They had telegraphs and newspapers and word of mouth. They didn't need a Union general to inform them of world events. A messenger who was sent to Texas to inform people of emancipation was killed. It is thought the plantation owners wanted their slaves for one more harvest.Astoundingly, the Democrats seem to have hijacked this day as their own. What follows is a statement that was posted on a Juneteenth Web site a few years ago.
Washington, D.C. - Democratic National Committee (DNC)Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued the following statement in commemoration of Juneteenth."This Saturday, Democrats across America will celebrate the anniversary of Juneteenth, the country's longest-running observance of the abolition of slavery."Juneteenth is a celebration of liberty, as we remember that day in 1865 when the news of emancipation finally reached the slaves of Galveston, Texas - two and a half years after President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. On that day, slavery was finally eradicated from our country's shores and a new sense of hope had been achieved for the entire nation."139 years after that historic day, the Democratic Party remains committed to fighting for equality in our schools, our workplaces, and in our neighborhoods to ensure an equal opportunity for all Americans."
Scuse me?? The Democratic Party remains committed to fighting for equality? When the did this happen? Wasn't it the Democratic Party that fought on the side of slavery? Wasn't it the Democratic Party that fought against EVERY attempt to institute equality in our schools, our workplaces and our neighborhoods, right through the 1964 Civil Rights Act? At what point in our history did the Democratic party -- the party of slavery, the party of segregation, the party of the Ku Klux Klan -- become this nation's champion of liberty?Talk about an Extreme Makeover! By the way, you won't find a statement from the head of the RNC on that site. Apparently, the Republican party had nothing to do with freeing the slaves.
November 22, 1865
Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination
--------------------------
December 6, 1865
Republican Party’s 13th Amendment, banning slavery, is ratified
February 5, 1866
U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves
April 9, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law
-------------------------
April 19, 1866
Thousands assemble in Washington, DC to celebrate Republican Party’s abolition of slavery
May 10, 1866
U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no
June 8, 1866
U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no
July 16, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of Freedman's Bureau Act, which protected former slaves from “black codes” denying their rights
July 28, 1866
Republican Congress authorizes formation of the Buffalo Soldiers, two regiments of African-American cavalrymen
July 30, 1866
Democrat-controlled City of New Orleans orders police to storm racially-integrated Republican meeting; raid kills 40 and wounds more than 150
January 8, 1867
Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.
July 19, 1867
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans
---------------------------
March 30, 1868
Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”
May 20, 1868
Republican National Convention marks debut of African-American politicians on national stage; two – Pinckney Pinchback and James Harris – attend as delegates, and several serve as presidential electors
September 3, 1868
25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress
September 12, 1868
Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress
-------------------------
September 28, 1868
Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana murder nearly 300 African-Americans who tried to prevent an assault against a Republican newspaper editor
October 7, 1868
Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”
October 22, 1868
While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan
November 3, 1868
Republican Ulysses Grant defeats Democrat Horatio Seymour in presidential election; Seymour had denounced Emancipation Proclamation
December 10, 1869
Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office
February 3, 1870
After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race
----------------------
May 19, 1870
African-American John Langston, law professor and future Republican Congressman from Virginia, delivers influential speech supporting President Ulysses Grant’s civil rights policies
May 31, 1870
President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights
June 22, 1870
Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South
September 6, 1870
Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell
February 28, 1871
Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters
March 22, 1871
Spartansburg Republican newspaper denounces Ku Klux Klan campaign to eradicate the Republican Party in South Carolina
April 20, 1871
Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans
-----------------------
October 10, 1871
Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands
October 18, 1871
After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan
November 18, 1872
Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”
January 17, 1874
Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government
September 14, 1874
Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed
March 1, 1875
Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition
-----------------------
September 20, 1876
Former state Attorney General Robert Ingersoll (R-IL) tells veterans: “Every man that loved slavery better than liberty was a Democrat… I am a Republican because it is the only free party that ever existed”
January 10, 1878
U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919. Republicans foil Democratic efforts to keep women in the kitchen, where they belong
July 14, 1884
Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery
August 30, 1890
Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South
June 7, 1892
In a FIRST for a major U.S. political party, two women – Theresa Jenkins and Cora Carleton – attend Republican National Convention in an official capacity, as alternate delegates
February 8, 1894
Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote
----------------------
December 11, 1895
African-American Republican and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Miller (R-SC) denounces new state constitution written to disenfranchise African-Americans
May 18, 1896
Republican Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting from Supreme Court’s notorious Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, declares: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens”
December 31, 1898
Republican Theodore Roosevelt becomes Governor of New York; in 1900, he outlawed racial segregation in New York public schools
May 24, 1900
Republicans vote no in referendum for constitutional convention in Virginia, designed to create a new state constitution disenfranchising African-Americans
January 15, 1901
Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans
---------------------
October 16, 1901
President Theodore Roosevelt invites Booker T. Washington to dine at White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country
May 29, 1902
Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%
February 12, 1909
On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP
June 18, 1912
African-American Robert Church, founder of Lincoln Leagues to register black voters in Tennessee, attends 1912 Republican National Convention as delegate; eventually serves as delegate at 8 conventions
August 1, 1916
Republican presidential candidate Charles Evans Hughes, former New York Governor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice, endorses women’s suffrage constitutional amendment; he would become Secretary of State and Chief Justice
May 21, 1919
Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no
--------------------------
April 18, 1920
Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus
August 18, 1920
Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures
January 26, 1922
House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster
June 2, 1924
Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans
October 3, 1924
Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention
----------------------
----------------------
December 8, 1924
Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis argues in favor of “separate but equal”
June 12, 1929
First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country
August 17, 1937
Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation
June 24, 1940
Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it
October 20, 1942
60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries
April 3, 1944
U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system
August 8, 1945
Republicans condemn Harry Truman's surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that "[t]he use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."
February 18, 1946
Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools
July 11, 1952
Republican Party platform condemns “duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters
September 30, 1953
Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education
December 8, 1953
Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education
May 17, 1954
Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education
November 25, 1955
Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel
March 12, 1956
Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation
June 5, 1956
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law
October 19, 1956
On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America”
November 6, 1956
African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President
September 9, 1957
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act
September 24, 1957
Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools
June 23, 1958
President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights
February 4, 1959
President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats
May 6, 1960
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats
July 27, 1960
At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform
May 2, 1963
Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights
June 1, 1963
Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama
September 29, 1963
Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School
June 9, 1964
Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate
June 10, 1964
Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.
June 20, 1964
The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act
March 7, 1965
Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL
March 21, 1965
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace
August 4, 1965
Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose
August 6, 1965
Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor
July 8, 1970
In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits
September 17, 1971
Former Ku Klux Klan member and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D-AL) retires from U.S. Supreme Court; appointed by FDR in 1937, he had defended Klansmen for racial murders
February 19, 1976
President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII
September 15, 1981
President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs
June 29, 1982
President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act
August 10, 1988
President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR
November 21, 1991
President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation
August 20, 1996
Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law
April 26, 1999
Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President
January 25, 2001
U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee declares school choice to be “Educational Emancipation”
March 19, 2003
Republican U.S. Representatives of Hispanic and Portuguese descent form Congressional Hispanic Conference
May 23, 2003
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture
February 26, 2004
Hispanic Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX) condemns racist comments by U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL); she had called Asst. Secretary of State Roger Noriega and several Hispanic Congressmen “a bunch of white men...you all look alike to me”
* * *
There you have it. What a different country this would be, had not Republicans blocked the agenda of Democrats every step of the way. But this evil organization is far from through. Now, they want to give education vouchers to public school children, so kids of every race and class can attend private schools of their CHOICE. Where will we get our garbage collectors, dishwashers and ditch diggers if blacks, Hispanics and white trash have access to a good education? They are trying to stop undocumented immigration, meaning the cheapest labor Democrats have had since the days of slavery will be taken away. They are trying to end segregation and slavery all over again!
And in true Republican tradition, they just can't stop poking their nose into other people's business, trying to destroy a woman's right to choose. They are trying to crush the secret vision of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who once said, ""We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population…"
Is there NO end to the freedoms these fascists will try to destroy?! No matter how many lies must be told, no matter how many schoolchildren must be mis-educated, no matter how many elections must be rigged, THE REPUBLICANS MUST BE STOPPED!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)