My pleasure. Thank you for your support. :)
I just stole this and I'm spreading it around. We need a little chuckle.
Posted on 11/06/2008 5:55:13 AM PST by RobinMasters
In this thread (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2126850/posts?page=13) some people shared their experiences about what they saw after the Election.
Carley said : "You could see shock and awe on the faces of most people yesterday. The commuter train in NJ was filled with silent people, black and white, wondering just what they hell they had done.
The trip was eerily silent when it’s usually filled with people chatting away."
or jnygrl : "My husband takes NJ Transit. He said his train was silent yesterday until it stopped at Newark."
Please, feel free to share what you've experienced around you. It would be useful for some FReepers or others.
My pleasure. Thank you for your support. :)
I just stole this and I'm spreading it around. We need a little chuckle.
I sent something like that to my sister before the election, and she voted for him anyway.
:-(
Oh puhleeeze! I think even Obama knows the answer to that one! ;-) You know I love you!
“What I think I might say is this, “OK, here’s my husband’s wallet. Take whatever you want because now you’re entitled to it.”
To heck with that! Tell them to hand you THEIR wallet, that you want them to start spreading the wealth to you, since THEY were the ones that voted for it and apparently believe in it.”
Yeah, I thought of that, but there’s one problem with that. They are broke, have NO money, and have done nothing to improve their situation. THAT is why they love Obama so much, because he will take from the greedy, immoral, evil rich people and “help” those who don’t have as much. Truly truly pathetic people.
>>One of my kids’ friend’s mother said yesterday afternoon, “I think I made a big mistake. But I’m not going to worry about that right now.”
What the h, e, double hockey sticks is wrong with these people?
You have my sympathy, then. I hope your husband is understanding and supportive of you.
They should be careful. The 35-year-olds will be doing the hiring — and firing.
i was gonna ask my stockbroker friend how he felt, but he had jumped out of a window.
I never claimed what you just said. (Is that the way you normally twist what you read?)
Here's what I said -- what you were responding to -- and since you're a bit reading-challenged, allow me to highlight in bold-faced the key qualifying words: Generations later, marriage still was "optional" in many urban families...
So what did I say?
(1) I said "many urban families". What did you then twist that to mean? (The "black community" -- implying the entire black community).) Oh, and BTW, "many" doesn't even mean "most."
(2) More importantly, I further qualified my statement by centering the contemporary problem as one that has been retained within the "urban" population strain -- not suburban and not rural. And since your history-challenged response failed to take this into account, let me focus on the "history" you chose to ignore -- and in so doing completely distorted what I said in order for you to support your response.
Rural South Population Numbers Among African-Americans, 1870 on
1870: 80% of African Americans lived in the rural south (source: Author Kwang Chung Kim).
1890s: This increased to between 90% - over 90% (Sources: escholarship.org and author Melvyn Bragg)
1910: The Percentage of U.S. residents who were African-Americans and chose to reside in the rural south was still over 80% (Source: edliberation.org)
Before WWI: This percentage was still "almost 90%" according to Faustine Jones, "Black Americans & the City: A Historical Survey," Journal of Negro Education, Summer, 1973, p. 265.
So, right there you can see that for over 50 years post-slavery, my comments were not even addressed to this overwhelming number of rural families!! And, not only did almost 90 or even over 90 percent of the black community NOT live in "urban" areas, YOU are the one who changed the remaining "urbanites" from what I said -- "many" to imply I was talking about the entire black community. Furthermore, since you referenced Booker T. Washington -- who died in 1915, please tell me how you could apply Washington's comment made toward almost 90% of rural black families and use that to shine a light on what I said about "urban" families? (Apples & Oranges)
Even in the beginning of the 1930s, the majority of African-Americans lived in the rural South. (So now we're talking 70 years of post-slavery). And you'll note that the South has been the last "frontier" to become urbanized. Cornell University said in 1970 that 41.3% of the rural population of the U.S. still lived in the South.
Atlanta
Yes? And? What do your anecdotal bites about urban Atlanta have to do with what I said? (I never even addressed "the history of a black middle class.") I mean "so what?" The African-American community had a very profitable business community in Tulsa until the race riot of 1921. But how would that negate or reinforce what I said? What do profitable business communities where American-American families thrived in post-slavery America have to do with anything I said?
...my 3xg-grandfather was the #1 slaveholder in Russell County Alabama. The #2 man was a Jewish guy from Charleston or Savannah (can't remember which), and #3 was a free black man.
In 4 states alone, free blacks had over 10,000 slaves. In Charleston, SC, alone over 400 slaveholders in the 1830s and 1840s were black. (Source: University of Wisconsin @ Eau Claire)
Relatively few Southerners owned slaves, since the majority worked on the very large plantations.
The same University of Wisconsin source says "31 percent" of Southerners were slaveholders (another source I saw said "29 percent.") So almost 1/3rd is "a few?" Another source said 49% of South Carolina families were slaveholders...so half of that state is by no means "a few." (Also I don't understand how you can crunch the numbers of 30% = "a few" when defending your heritage but when I pointed out that "many" urban families --which were only 1 of 8 black families referenced to begin with -- is somehow provocative for you).
So, let's get back to my original point about the effects of a legacy -- positive & negative. The University of Wisconsin @ Eau Claire says that in 1820, 68% of black families were headed by a woman. That matriarcal trend continued well into the next 44 slaveholder years...and I contend, beyond that.
Just because that 68% decreased over the generations -- only to rise back up to 70% more than 150 years later -- doesn't mean the two are not totally unrelated. (As with any trend, many variables exist...I never claimed this was the only variable...that would be poor social science)
Thanks! And thank God that he is! He’s been converted from being a lifelong Democrat (taken to anti-war rallies as a kid, hippie mom, all that) to being a bonafide conservative.
He thinks his aunt and her family are all nutburgers.
Good post. People have forgotten consequences because consequences are no longer relevant and certainly not apparent.
I'm no rocket surgeon, but I learned long ago that education is never free and I don't need the psychic hotline to see that we are going to get schooled. I just hope we don't need much re-education to find the necessary common sense to end the lesson early...say, by 2010.
Interesting thread. I suppose I just don’t understand this phenomenon. It’s different than when Jimmy Carter was elected, people were upset at Nixon and you could feel where this silliness came from. Similarly, when Clinton was elected it was the economy. But this time around, it’s as if America willingly blinded itself.
As he should be. They won. Everytime I think of the suffering the people who founded this Nation went through and then having it turned over to a communist maraxist by a bunch of pimple faced punks I want to puke.
And that is just for starters.
Great advice. His being a dim would be enough for me, but I’ve already tried the conservative/liberal match up with the predicted results coming true, so I now have the experience to know better than to try that one again. Much more than the politics, anyone who is so blind to true feelings and impassioned pleas to think they are only to rile him (as in it’s all about him), is NOT a keeper.
“I actually removed all obama gloaters from my myspace and facebook contacts”
Wow, I hadn’t thought of that! I can’t imagine the amount of propaganda on myspace or facebook. I bet it is overrun. I don’t go those sites but I’ve read about them.
>>I actually became physically ill.
>Me too. I have never physically reacted from an election. Until Tuesday and Weds.
When the Florida Supremes tried to hand it to Gore in 2000, I ended up in the emergency room. Fortunately, it was just stress, and not the ticker.
I took this year a bit more fatalistically.
> And I will continue to associate with them. Mostly because I still like them; but I must confess, too, that the schadenfreude will be thick on the ground before too long — and I won’t even have to say a thing. They’ll know.
I agree. Furthermore, you may be a lifeline to pull them back to the side of rationality when their disillusionment sets in. For a comparable reason, Christ sat with the sinners.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.