Voting is a Right, NOT a Privilege ~~ The Struggle continues

votingTime to pass the Voting Rights Act, change redistricting rules, and make it easier for ALL Americans to VOTE


Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” -George Santayana (16 December 1863 in Madrid, Spain – 26 September 1952 in Rome, Italy) was a philosopher, essayist, poet, and novelist. 

 On March 7, 1965, hundreds of brave unarmed nonviolent women and men dared to March for African Americans’ right to vote.

The fact is, that less than 1% of eligible Blacks could vote or register to vote.

A group of people organized a Peaceful Protest: The March would start in Selma, then move on to the state capitol in Montgomery.

However, as these peaceful protesters tried to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge to Montgomery the police, seemingly already assuming a defensive posture; some on horses had, looking back, a predetermined tactical intervention plan against protesters. The protesters, mostly young African Americans also walked quietly with a mixture of older individuals and white Students as well: and as they did so; police proceeded to try and control the protesters which quickly resulted in the “excessive use of force.”

As protesters continued, it became clear that the excessive force was now an active use of police brutality and acts of murder; the grotesque beating of a young black leader of nonviolent protesting #RepJohnLewis had his skull cracked open among other injuries to his body.  These Montgomery officers were out to do harm as they surrounded and knocked out young protesters using their nightsticks, and sprayed water cannons at close range, while others used tear gas.

These kids had no weapons; they did NOT fight back because they were not there to fight, but showed much courage and strength in the face of absolute brutal violence by an adversarial organization minorities are expected to respect. The men in police uniforms, hired to protect and serve citizens, were actually a force activated by the state to show physical power, discrimination, and racism in all its worse forms.

We must never forget that some of our fellow Americans died for our right to vote! This was an attempt to March in peaceful disobedience quickly became an adverse harmful environment to young black and white women and men, students from all backgrounds, and folks who believed voting is a right had to quickly retreat while journalists and photographers became witnesses to the suffering, violence, and death.

The brutal reaction by the police was not only caught on tape, but it also forced then-President Johnson, once against civil rights programs as a Senator, to call on Congress for equal voting rights for all on March 15.


The Voting Act of 1965 became a law on August 6; and is a landmark piece of national legislation in the United States that outlawed discriminatory voting practices that had been responsible for the widespread disenfranchisement of African Americans in the U.S.

A day that started out peacefully quickly descended into an awful, johnlewisbeatwithknightstickugly March of death for the right to vote called, “Bloody Sunday”.

Now, some 50 years later, a new “Jim Crow” era has emerged with a major step backward in the fight for civil and voting rights. Conservative states are targeting not only African Americans but Senior citizens, first-time voters, early voting, Students, low-income, immigrants, and the undocumented though Republicans call them (illegals), those who lean left call them Dreamers; some born or brought to the US as youngsters all victims of circumstance are now, voting age. Also, Governors from Republican controlled States allowed election officials to purge voters, people without birth certificates were given limited or completely denied access to the voting booth failing to meet new voter ID regulations, and some were treated like possible (illegals). This is the 21st Century; we should be on a progressive path toward equality for all, not one that will re-engage folks in the act of racism or exclusion leading to suppressing participation in the election process. In 2017, Republicans tried to pass and or enforce new, even stricter voter ID legislation or influence their districts with strange redistricting rules and regulations.  While some judges … have struck down some of these restrictive laws that ultimately suppress the vote, it is clear the effort to shut people of colour out of the election process sadly continues.

We need to push back on all attempts to suppress the Right to Vote.

With so much at stake, it is time to stop sitting on the sidelines. If we are going to succeed, Conservative lawmakers NEED to hear our Voices.

We cannot turn back the clock on Voting Rights For the sake of the Next Generation

Thank You for Taking Action


~ Nativegrl77


50 thoughts on “Voting is a Right, NOT a Privilege ~~ The Struggle continues”

    1. Thank you for the reblog! I have been nervous about affirmative action and the voter rights act SCOTUS decisions … I decided to keep posting until the decision is rendered hoping for the best

      Liked by 1 person

    1. I appreciate the likes and agree with the concept of your blog … Good Luck


  1. The article contradicts itself. The author calls for equality among voters, which I totally agree with, but should that same equality also be granted to the states? An antiquated provision of the 1965 law that was struck down last week by the SCOTUS held 14 states to a different standard. Texas simply asked for the same voter id rules used by Indiana, but because of the 1965 voter law, they were denied. The action taken by SCOTUS simply corrected that inequality.

    I would also like clarification on this statement by the author – “and the undocumented though Republicans call them (illegals)” – What else would you call a person who broke our immigration laws and came here illegally?


    1. I am the author … they are my thoughts my rant and a call to action … which definitely was to preserve voter rights … What SCOTUS did was to cut slash and burn the right to vote by booting it to the States… If, you know your history States Rights is the problem because voting should not be treated differently … if so, why? I know that Republicans have stated that they don’t want everyone voting… That is just wrong. I would say that #VRA should cover all 50 states because America will be more brown than white by 2020 but we still have more white people in positions of power, willing to engage in voter suppression; like they are now. What you read were MY FEELINGS – the non-verbal or verbal yet complicit agreement corporations engaged offered no path to citizenship … they exploited their workers on so many levels. Last, I don’t feel dreamers are illegals



  2. What documentation do you provide for making the blanket statement that “Republicans don’t want everyone voting”, and how do you reconcile that statement with the “FACT” that it has been democrats that have tried repeatedly to suppress the military vote. Republicans want to suppress no one’s vote, they simply want votes to be verifiable and limited to one vote per legal citizen. In other words, no cheating. Why is that such a horrible thing, and how exactly is requiring id suppressing anyone’s right to vote?

    On another note, I agree, corporations have and continue to exploit cheap labor in the form of illegal workers, but that doesn’t mean people who came here illegally should be rewarded for breaking our immigration laws, it simply means we should enforce the labor laws that are on the books, which both democrats and republicans have failed to do.

    Your last statement, “I don’t feel dreamers are illegals” is just wrong. What if my dream is to commit a crime such as murder or robbing a bank, if I go through with it is it okay because it was a dream of mine?


    1. well, If you read my reasons for blogging it was that I needed to sound off. I hear you and thanks for reading and commenting on MY blog. I was also sounding off to what is in my opinion “A new Jim Crow” because voter suppression that occurred in the 2012 election and has been given the big Green light by SCOTUS impacts Senior citizens, Students, low income, Early voters Souls to the Polls etc. as written in MY rant



    2. I am just re-reading and found that I didn’t really respond to your question … here is my proof of my statement that republicans don’t want everyone voting .. just one of many articles …I took it from Right Wing Watch and the video of weyrich saying so is below

      Weyrich is widely regarded as the “founding father of the conservative movement.” He founded ALEC and co-founded the Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority, Council for National Policy, and Free Congress Foundation, among others.

      “I don’t want everybody to vote,” says Weyrich in the video.

      ~~ and nowhere in that article do I say democrats have tried to suppress the vote because that statement is a conservative meme and you know it
      ~~ I disagree with you about children of circumstance who have absolutely no say in what is going on and are def dreamers and like I told someone else the analogy or comparison of an undocumented person and a criminal is just odd and just wrong because I know that not all white people are racist supremacists or nationalist do know that not all black or brown people are criminals or that the punishment doesn’t often meet the crime when black&brown people are tried and convicted more often than whites


      1. The article does nothing to show voter suppression, it simply states fact, when fewer people vote, conservative candidates fare better. The statement that voter fraud is “virtually non-existent” is laughable. Why is it that in every single state that requires voter id to cast a ballot, Barack Hussein Obama lost?


      2. it started out as a petition …and clearly we are on opposite ends of the issue of voter rights … bye


  3. The only voter suppression that I am aware of that has been given a green light (by the AG, not SCOTUS) is failure to prosecute the voter intimidation done by the NBPP. If there truly was additional voter suppression I would love to hear more about it as I have not heard of this through the lamestream media. I am also confused about how requiring an id to vote suppresses the votes of Senior citizens, students, low income and early voters. What am I missing?


    1. I really don’t like being baited, next you will be writing that you don’t watch tv… as I am very sure you know which states purged voters based on name&; id, stopped early voting&;soulstothepolls… and I cannot even count how many minorities stood in line for hours to vote – oh and because of the voter id laws some 30K people did not vote because of the short notice of documents needed in order to vote.. if you don’t like what I write or post don’t read it
      enough said


  4. Reblogged this on Terri Goldson and commented:
    Controversy continues over voter suppression laws that have been passed in states governed by Republicans. Multiple studies and reports indicate there has not been voting fraud of any significance, which gives credibility to the belief that such measures are in place to make it more difficult for people of color, elderly and young people to vote. There have not been laws in place to restrict voting since the Jim Crow era. It is a sad commentary for the country (USA) that is supposed to be the shining example of Democracy throughout the world.


  5. Sorry but I must respectfully disagree – contrasted with voter fraud which does likely exist in this country – waged by factions of both parties – obtaining a free ID card seems hardly the unreasonable task, or “race issue” (some make it out to be), especially in the modern age.

    Jim Crow laws were deplorable. Impeding any US citizen’s ability to vote is deplorable.

    But free ID cards available at one’s leisure do not equal the severe disadvantage brought about by “Jim Crow.” At the very least, community outreach should be able to provide ID verification and cards, to those less able and who would otherwise not be able to obtain them (IE – the elderly, those in rural locations, or who have some other extreme limitation, etc). I would think a system for resolving such issues – for “at need” individuals – could be devised without great difficulty; provided such accommodation was written into the law.

    As far as the rest of us “able-bodied-informed” city dwellers, if we can’t bother to make our way to some local hub, get our voter ID, and prove we are legal citizens on Election Day (same as we would to acquire public assistance – also a right) then maybe we shouldn’t vote.

    I don’t mean to be argumentative but there are many well meaning, respectable, organizations that would argue against assertions “voter fraud does not exist,” not to mention that lack of evidence does not prove a “negative” in this case.

    One does not need harbor ill will toward minorities to support bringing as much integrity to the system as possible. And even so, comparing voter ID to Jim Crow (in my opinion) is a bit of a stretch. Especially when juxtaposed any veracity these ID’s could (help) add to the system.


    1. Thank you for your visit and the response as well because lately the idea of being swept away for having a diff thought than the government is beyond my understanding … I didn’t go through ole’jim crow. I have a driver’s license/voter card but I can tell you ID’s are not free in every state and if you were born at home you could get purged from the rolls … I respect your opinion, we disagree. I know that where I live we, accepted water bills etc. and while it was not something we liked to do, provisional ballots offered. Though if you watched TV from 2008-2012 and lived in Republican districts, provisional ballots did not always get included so; your definition of voter fraud is different for me. I feel, have heard and believe voter fraud is about 1% if anything and the idea of voting twice feeding the box etc. gets a giggle out of me when clearly gerrymandering is legal voter fraud that needs to be looked at. I would like to know where people can get free ID cards because I would post that on the regular …please provide states and information! I used to consider where I live as uber liberal but then 8days of early voting got eliminated…souls to the polls and because we vote by mail some didn’t’ care but it was the principle of it all …the participation of the voting process. I think we all need to have the option to vote by mail…maybe online, in-person and stop the suppression but if you heard ..A whole lot of Republicans said … they do not want everyone voting… Brave People died for our right to vote yet SCOTUS2013 snipped Section5 out like it meant nothing haven’t voted to update the VRA yet and Redstates are eliminating Souls to the Polls, early voting while narrowing down the hours available? I do not know if you have ever experienced discrimination racism or anyone telling you NO, because of how you look, your skin colour etc., but watching our elders be told sorry after decades of voting to suddenly not be able to is the New Jim Crow. The problem is not how silly my entry is but how far will Republicans take this nonsense. I wanted to add that I did include civil rights, as prisons specifically private ones house mostly People of colour and the numbers are increasing, Stand Your Ground only seems to work for whites and drug laws seem to favor whites as well. However, if you listen to mainstream media, most whites do meth etc. blacks crack but get more time on first time offenses and for smaller amounts found in their possession. In 2010 -2013 older men & women of colour were treated like as Republicans say “illegal immigrants,” and purged from voting rolls, some, after paying a lot of $$$ voted … poll tax. I can’t even begin to discuss how women of colour are treated , let alone Black women. It’s disgusting


      1. Yes, I cannot speak from experience as it regards “prejudice” the way you describe it. And, I do appreciate you saying you respect my opinion. Let me say I also respect yours.

        For this reason I am cautious to get too deep into political views here, since I fear we might unnecessarily clash. Save to say, I can assure there are many districts throughout our country which misunderstand “conservatism” and what it means to represent.

        For me, personally, I believe market based solutions provide the best service and can meet (most) public needs – otherwise unnecessarily placed in the hands of the public sector. I find Government tends to mismanage just about everything it’s involved in – implying somehow people can’t take care of themselves, while often creating poverty traps thru many of it’s subsidies. It is also often wrought in fraud, and burdened by overzealous unions – somehow the main purpose becoming its very bureaucracy, at the expense of taxpayers – it often fails to provide “good service” to its people by lacking objectivity and the demands of a (responsible) profit margin (or budget).

        For this reason I tend to resent legislation which would further transfer power to the Federal government, and so lean Libertarian – a bit more conservative.

        On the other hand Republicans can annoy me getting bogged down by social issues in order to appease the far right. So, it’s a mixed bag really. Essentially both sides of the aisle are corrupt, and full of establishment types, and too often put party politics over the needs of the nation’s people.

        So, you just have to place your vote with the party you (currently) align with best (which for me is primarily about accountability, and the economy) – the wisdoms of Milton Friedman, etc (IE – these days I vote Republican).

        Unfortunately, the world we live in is hyper-partisan. As such, both sides use inflammatory language to insight their base, which too often leaves those less informed with misconstrued notions about the “political process,” and consequently what (most) people (and the politicians who represent them) would actually intend (IE – I am a whole hearted believer Mr. Romney would have governed as a technocrat – honestly and honorably – however I can see how the 2012 campaign may have convinced many folks otherwise.)

        Nevertheless, in the end I believe we are (all) more similar than we are different… most of us just trying to get along. Are experiences will affect our outlook, and therefore who we trust, and so it’s quite easy for politicians & their “fear mongers” to divide us – ironically enough, despite most of us wanting the same things, – what is best for each other’; regardless of race, gender, sexual preference, or ethnicity.

        We all want politicians who will represent us with fairly, and with honesty (which both sides seem to fail at miserably).

        As such, I think, whether rich or poor, whether black or white, liberal or conservative, if most of us want what is best for each other, then most of us also want what is best for our country – the main difference being how we hope to achieve it. And so it is in this vein I believe (most) voter ID legislation comes to fruition. However I would add, the idea that in some cases it gets used for the wrong reasons is (in my opinion) further proof voter fraud exists in this country – whatever “the form.” And, we can be sure there are people on both sides of the aisle hoping to skew it.

        In which case, my referencing “free voter ID, provided with noble intent, and with community outreach for ‘at need’ individuals,” was more a way of saying I believe it is a worthy effort – if administered appropriately, and for the right reasons.

        In closing I will just say I believe there are very few conservatives in my opinion (IE – Republicans) who are really interested in holding back minorities – or obstructing anyone’s right to vote; at least no more than are liberals (who by the way have plenty of racists among them – unconscious or otherwise).

        If you you’re not familiar already them – I think David Webb, Dr. Ben Carson, Tim Scott, and Larry Elder all offer great fearless perspective in this regard; men who I respect very much and believe display great courage in the face of many (would be) liberal detractors (simply because they are black and conservative).

        Anyway, it sounds to me like you put a lot of thought into these issues which I commend. This is what matters most – that you pay attention and cast your vote accordingly.

        Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comment. I appreciate your cogent logic and open mindedness. Before leaving I would like to recommend this presentation for you by Jonathon Haidt –

        Haidt is a Social Psychologist and Phd, who has done fascinating work – exploring people, our social groups, and what tends to drive our political moralities. I hope you find it informative …. maybe even refreshing. I would love to get your thoughts.

        Take care and God bless!


      2. I hope you might open up to the possibilities that privatization means no caps on cost, wild increases and less regulation, which led us to where we are now. The house of Bush spent taxpayer money like a drunken sailor with the government credit card that caused a financial collapse and a slow economy due to an incredible amount of obstruction in Congress. I have much to say about government V privatization, I will not. We disagree. I do not believe in ruling with fear, lying like bush, fear mongering to GOTV or talking like Rep.SteveKing others to scare folks about people of colour. I think Romney would have had us in a war asap and that 47% comment was no joke or planned ,he was caught on tape. I know most white folks are not nationalist’s/kkk’s or supremacists because I have common sense but after the many deaths of young black males and cases against black women I have to wonder how safe people of colour really are. I believe the fear mongering is working. I would not call myself a socialist but I do like FEMA, EMTs, Police etc. and would pay a smidge more to get better services. I am certain I nor my friends or neighbors could handle it all on our own, expect our kids to do it let alone go back to the days when women had 8+ kids to help get the work done. I do know of, have watched and listened to your list of conservative black men. Where is allen west or Michael steele? I do not agree with much of their policies. surprise! I am not sure why but it seems like people just don’t realize people of colour are not a monolithic group, yes, walking, driving, shopping while Black( discrimination racism) are common experiences that will definitely gain significant supporters on both sides of the political aisle, other issues not so much. I believe women should have equal pay for equal work and I am definitely pro-reproductive rights! I am and will always be offended by the likes of a Rep.PaulRyan and the GOP about race, income inequality, intelligence whether to rile the base or not, it is wrong. Thanks for the visit


  6. Yes unfortunately many issues such as the Republican response to “Lilly Ledbetter” do get misunderstood – (in this case) that resistance from the right was more about some “effort of inequity” towards woman & minorities than it was “statute of limitations” – concerned with how it would play out in the court system thru trial lawyers. Since it is fair to say, as is, our legal system is greatly overburdened with fraudulent lawsuits and the harms they bring.

    This of course seems trite in the face of demanding fair pay for (all) individuals, I would think. However, it is not so much “this” element of the bill that caused so many Republicans to resist it, as it was the “process” by which the bill was brought to vote – having not gone thru committee; avoiding “regular order” – an unfortunate practice which both sides are often guilty of these last 20 years – in order to use legislation (at times, more so) as a “political tool,” than it is about law.

    IE – Reid and Pelosi ran the legislative branch in 2009 and did not allow the Ledbetter Act (meant to revise the Supreme Court’s 2007 finding) into committee.

    (You probably know this, and I don’t mean to imply you don’t) but committee allows both sides of the aisle to meet on a bill before it’s voted on, to hash out their differences – adding or striking amendments that may cause the other side to refuse it. In the case of “Ledbetter,” Republicans would have argued for at least “some” kind of restriction on statute of limitations.

    Such practices are a perfect example of what I referred to earlier, about how politicians today unfairly divide Americans – thru “fear mongering”– putting Party politics above all else. It is this same mechanism by which Reid refuses today to let anything go to a vote or thru committee, which might cause Democrats in red districts to take a stand – where it would put them at odds with their constituents. Likewise, using similar (very cynical) politics, items may be brought to vote (before going to committee), in order to force Republican’s take a stand on something, and make them appear “unjust” in the eyes of voters.

    This is not to say these methods aren’t used by Republicans when they run things (as seen by their slow walking the budget committee, after last year’s sequester negotiation – incidentally a process ended by Paul Ryan collaborating with Patty Murray – Ryan an avid champion of “regular order,” and someone who I think was unfairly ridiculed for his vote on “Ledbetter” – but then that was one of the “more cynical” reasons for bringing Ledbetter to vote, the way it was). As I said, establishment types on both sides, putting Party politics over the people.

    Therefore, what drives much of this behavior (like with Ledbetter), is an effort to create “political weapons,” to be used in campaigns – by denying “regular order” and making no effort at bi-partisan support. Of course, the only winners in this process are politicians themselves – as they corrupt the system, fail the American people, and “fear monger” them (in this case, so it would appear Republicans reject “fair pay for women and minorities”).

    Again, these practices occur on both sides of the aisle. I’m in no way attempting to malign Democrats over Republicans thru my explanation of it. I simply mean to point out how politicians mislead the electorate – thru slide of hand tactics, and “supportive media sources” who rally their cause – leaving voters confused, and believing someone’s “out to get them.”

    In which case voters end up divided, pointing fingers at the other side, arguing with one another over what they believe is “ideology,” when it is more about “semantics.”

    Of course, there are large divides in ideology I realize – especially as it pertains to economics, union practice, mandatory spending/entitlements, tax policy, etc. However, I would disagree that “civil rights and/or fair pay” are really a part of “the fight” in Washington, or for most Americans – only that our politicians (sadly) have made it seem this way (as they do with many issues).

    And so, we get campaigns like 2012 – believing somehow there is a “war on women” (as though women only vote according to gender), or that someone who believes the term “marriage” should be reserved for male/female union must be a “homophobe,” or those who prefer “compassionate welfare reform” do not care about minorities.

    This of course is all made worse by bomb throwers on either side (Mark Levin, Al Sharpton, and the like), often appearing as narrow-minded bigots, who make every effort to slander and antagonize anyone who disagrees with them (IE – the listener at home).

    As far as Bush, while I did disagree with much of his policy; the war, and overspending. It’s safe to say his budgets in no way rivaled that of President Obama (not even with the war). As well, much of the policy (lack of regulation, etc – which may have played a part in the 2008 collapse) were the result of legislation carried over from the Clinton era (implemented and aided by Senate Democrats – and of course “Congressional obstructionism” during Bush would’ve resulted from Democrats).

    This is not to say Obama didn’t inherit a massive clusterf#@k when he took office, which has dictated much of his spending policy – however behaviors on Wall street, and the borrowing practices of many Americans (which primarily fueled the “derivates time bomb” that annihilated our economy), and all that followed it, can not fairly be laid just at the feet of Bush – as though, if not for him it would never have happened.

    Forgive me if I’ve overstepped here (in any way), regarding our political differences. I would like to be cautious, since we might disagree on the approach in dealing with many of these issues – regarding spending, supply side economics, welfare reform, gut and amend legislative practice (the ACA), Obama’s leadership (or in many ways “lack thereof,” as I see it) – arguing timing, details, and approach, etc. But I think this would mean arguing over views neither of us are likely to change any time soon. Save to say, you have sound reason to vote your beliefs, and so do I – and neither wish any harm toward the other 

    To be honest I’d rather focus on how “politicians unfairly divide us,” and therefore our similarities, rather than how we differ. I am big believer that much of what we see as “differences” (as stated earlier) are often more about “semantics” – driven by a lack of resolve and compromise in Washington, and not the (sometimes, seemingly implied) ill-will of the American electorate. If we could fix this I think much of the rest would take care of itself.

    Speaking of similarities, I also think Steve King is an idiot  I also believe Public services have a role to play in police & fire, military, etc. (though I would argue FEMA should be reserved for “Katrina-like moments,” not any rich idiot who decides to build his home on beach front property – just another way government subsidies end up skewing markets at the expense of tax payers).

    Regarding black conservatives, I did not mention Alan West or Michael Steele only because I see Mr. Steele as a bit of RHINO, and find Mr. West too “macho” and opportunistic at times. It’s not to say I don’t appreciate their accomplishments. I just don’t find them quite the impressive role model (in my opinion) that the others represent. To this end, I’m not sure if you were implying that I see blacks as monolithic, or not (forgive me if misunderstood). I don’t. Rather, it is because (the extent of) diversity in African American political thought rarely gets attention in most “mainstream media forums” (unless being ridiculed), that I bring it up. I didn’t mean to imply you are not aware that well-thought black conservatives have a place on the national stage; I just wish they received more attention aside from FOX.

    I will also add that my reference to racists among liberals was not necessarily directed (just) at the unfair criticisms sometimes made of black conservatives, but also at the “sanctimonious white liberals” who cry injustice, while enacting contradictory policy, or subtlety demeaning blacks and minorities in their everyday life.

    As example, Deblasio squashing NY charter schools for the sake of the Teacher’s union. Or, this insight offered by Clarence Thomas last month –
    “My sadness is that we are probably today more race and difference-conscious than we were in the 1960s when I went to school. To my knowledge, I was the first black kid in Savannah, Georgia, to go to a white school. Rarely did the issue of race come up. Now, name a day it doesn’t come up. Differences in race, differences in sex, somebody doesn’t look at you right, somebody says something. Everybody is sensitive. If I had been as sensitive as that in the 1960s, I’d still be in Savannah. Every person in this room has endured a slight – every person – somebody has said something that has hurt their feelings or did something to them, or left them out. That’s a part of the deal, that’s life”
    He went on to say –
    “The worst I have been treated was by northern liberal elites. The absolute worst I have ever been treated. The worst things that have been done to me, the worst things that have been said about me, has been by northern liberal elites, not by the people of Savannah, Georgia.”
    But again I digress. I tend to let myself get drawn into politics more than I like. That said, I hope you don’t take anything I said the wrong way. Nothing here was meant to be argumentative, just a hoping to point out some things we had yet to discuss.

    Speaking of which I hope you get a chance to check out that video I linked in the last comment. It’s not some right wing talking point, I promise. Just a human behavior study really, discussing the basic template for morality that humans seem to be born with (as Dr. Haidt puts it – harm/care, fairness/reciprocity, in group/loyalty, authority/respect, purity/sanctity) and how these things tend to effect our political outlook. It’s not biased toward lib/consv in anyway. Just a fun trip 

    Take care!


    1. I disagree with you on most if not everything regarding republican/libertarian policies used in my opinion to keep Americans in place,specifically those in the middle or lower classes and REDSTATES taking away or pushing low wages, no union access and laws that short change people of colour, worker and women’s rights. Women make up 53% of the voter population and a considerable amount hold mostly low wage jobs paying .77 on a dollar … hardly trite. I am not going to say democrats are perfect but I vote for the democratic party for a reason. I think folks who want to be “Public Servants,” have to be better than the Michele Bachmann’s, Steve King Jeff Session Paul Ryan, the new GOP, for their votes& unseemly rhetoric about lazy inner city men, women, rape, SNAP,UI and kids just to name a few. Yes, bills get “debated.” and will grant you the unfortunate truth that some complicit relationships let things slide into becoming law, such as the Monsanto bill with that ugly rider, but the filibuster has never been used as much as is today. How far can Americans get when the opposing party met the night Barack was sworn in, agreeing to be the Party of NO thinking they could make him a 1term Prez and be his waterloo? That is not the behavior or definition of a true Public Servant I will take a look, You take care too ..


      1. Yes, I enjoyed our conversation.. if you ever want to share thoughts on that video I would be interested 🙂


      2. I’m sorry by “trite” I meant (what would seem) the “Republican argument,” if not for the manner in which the bill was handled; not going to committee. etc. In fact my view is to the contrary – I believe fair pay is noble, and women should be paid at the same as men who hold an equivalent position.

        Some good info on why women tend to earn less, when viewed as broad-base statistic –


  7. I agree with troymo. The last link he gives clearly shows men don’t typically earn more than women who hold similar jobs. It’s only when total earnings are measured it appears that way which has more to do with career choices than anything.

    I would also add Paul Ryan is not a racist, the way recent criticisms try to suggest. You may not like his choice of words or approach, in matters involving minorities or those living in inner city environments. But his heart is in the right place. In fact, nothing he’s said recently differs much from the concerns echoed in President Obama’s new program “My Brother’s Keeper.” Not to mention Paul Ryan was mentored by Jack Kemp, a well known advocate for minorities who fought tirelessly against racism.

    I think maybe some of your information sources are incorrect, or you’re being misled thru fear tactics the way troymo talks about. Here are just two articles I found about Paul Ryan which refute your claims. Believe he doesn’t want to help minorities if you want, but it isn’t true.


  8. I’m confused are you saying you disagree Jack Kemp was a champion for minority rights or that Paul Ryan didn’t mentor with him? It’s strange to me someone would deny something just to assert their position even if its wrong, or ignore studies that show women do NOT earn more than men. Maybe you didn’t view the links or choose to not know these things 😦

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The thing is, this is not the Republican party of the 90’s and I don’t care that PaulRyan mentored him because jack kemp had free will,he used his own mind on some issues for the greater good because of his constituents, but was still a conservative regarding a woman’s right to reproductive rights. I have listened to Paul Ryan, read budgets 1-4 and take what he says about ayn rand very serious. I have a problem with how you’re using “studies” as if they were facts because I don’t know if you’re only using FOX and the daily beast. I don’t view FOX as a real source and that dailybeast entry not only is an online paper but this thing you refer to was written by Ron Christie?!!. ok, Surefire Whimsystick this is where you say Psych, you write satire! I used the studies done by the government accountability office for information. The fact is women of colour are being paid .54cents or less on the dollar while most report “women” only make .77on the dollar. The GAO is reporting that “women” now make .80cents. I think your last sentence is offensive and assumes you know the truth given you’re using FOX News and they rarely deal in the facts and ignoring them probably is confusing for you

      Liked by 1 person

  9. yes, well I apologize if offended. ron christie may be a conservative, but he is a man of color and probably capable deciding for himself if Paul Ryan means him harm. I also get my news from many sources not just Fox. that said daily beast is hardly conservative news source, neither is washington post or georgetown university (both referenced in the piece about women’s pay someone linked above) and that article was written by christina hoff sommers. its not even hard to understand really. women do tend to dominate care professions, walk through any hospital or school. these things are about career choices and what labor markets are willing to pay more than republicans holding women down. sorry if upset you.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks … We disagree which is okay. I stated my problem with FOX and Christie who both lean right or extreme right. I don’t read much of the daily beast and have no intention of watching FOX but I give more cred to the GAO for facts and numbers by far. This is a non-partisan org. in my opinion probably more accurate in how they determine their results, such as “women” now making .80cent on the dollar. I don’t believe anything you wrote or the articles you referred to are hard to understand really because it’s about Equal Pay for Equal Work and it’s still not happening like a Republican stated, “women need to learn how to negotiate or that we are too busy … It’s about control and some good’ole boys club that has a complicit relationship of who wears the pants. Women deserve to be paid the same as any man doing the same job and most conservatives have a “family values” platform that puts women 2 or 3 steps behind women …just look at the House and the panels they have regarding women’s issues with no women or people of colour and while a member of Congress says they care etc. they have voted no on the floor of Congress on issues that help minorities on all levels. Rep.PaulRyan would be that “waterloo” demint was talking about, but it wouldn’t be Obama’s waterloo it would be Americans who will lose and suffer with a guy like him in charge

      Liked by 2 people

  10. well the GAO numbers do not argue with the daily beast article. its not “average total earnings” in question its whether there is pay discrpencies between men and women who have same jobs.

    this link explains very simply what lies inside GAO report

    also this study from the us dept of labor

    Click to access Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf

    or university of chicago economics professor Marianne Bertrand study

    all say same thing as GAO and all are not biased conservatives. women average .8 on the dollar men do but clearly there are many complicated reasons our president prefers to exploit and in doing so tends to be dishonest.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. listen … this is my board ..I engaged in a friendly debate, you offended me said you’re sorry and go right back at it! I get it Republicans are one uppers liking the last word … yet, this is my comment board …write about your sources and reasons you don’t agree with me as well as your hate for the President on your own board- k

      Liked by 1 person

  11. really? I hate Obama? strange thing say about someone just because they can acknowledge president is sometimes dishonest. its not about hating Obama its about understanding his limitations as a leader. nothing to do with race sorry you feel that way 😦 non of this was about getting upper hand it was hoping to showing limitation of just taking .8 figure and leaving rest out. i really not trying to offend you. but i will go

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you for the visit and response. I think Election2010 and the Tea Party shoved our Govt into an express elevator that took us back in time, though we were warned no one seemed to take any of it very seriously. I have always voted during midterms & national elections via mail so suppression here in Washington is less likely to happen though they did cut 8days from early voting once&voters screamed. Now, they are trying to expand voting options. #Midterm2014Matters Unfortunately, the NEW Jim Crowe South ideology will always be tough, but your age group can be part of the change we all need by voting in HUGE numbers, stay inline and mobilize around qualified democrats on the local &national elections. We need to rise up against suppression … Women, POC, Students, Seniors, Gays and Immigrants and vote so you and other students can finish school without the fear that Republicans love to engage in

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The battle is going to be tough and more often than not those who vote for dems don’t vote during the midterms. I hope the DNC has an office in every state as well as $$ to GOTV on college campus’! We need organizations like ROCKTheVote and the Women’s league to participate. I know OFA is starting to offer fellowships hire&train hopefully for 2014 & 2016 ~~ I agree with you, we need to rally – stand up for what is right. Imagine a right of center Congress along with a conservative Supreme Court! They could do some serious damage to us and the next generation

        Liked by 2 people

Comments are closed.