Welcome to Business plan

The Business Action Plan And Its Timetable Page

Latest Business Action Plan And Its Timetable News

Business Action Plan And Its Timetable Questions asked

Voting Question: Richard Nixon's Philadelphia Plan?

Richard Nixon's Philadelphia Plan A was a direct attack on affirmative action. B aimed at giving direct economic assistance to business. C attempted to counter the Supreme Court's opposition to affirmative action. D required construction trade unions to establish timetables and goals for hiring black apprentices. more

Resolved Question: How to deal with a compulsive, highly-sensitive "know-it-all" in your kitchen, looking over your shoulder?

You've decided what you want to prepare. You have your recipe committed to memory or in hand. All your ingredients have been laid out. And you begin...cutting, mixing, pre-heating, whatever. You are committed to a course of action and now working on a recipe timetable. Then someone comes in and sticks their nose in your business and notices your main ingredient, saying, "Oh, you're cooking X? Well HERE'S how I would cook X" as they proceed to invalidate your whole game plan before it has ever even been deployed. Of course in a perfect world, you could just ignore this person and proceed on your own. But when it is their kitchen and their food, and you are the hired chef, you can't just blow them off, right? This is a senior citizen who does this to me. A mother-type character, age 79...in and out of the hospital, and I've agreed to cook her meals as I am widely regarded as a very good personal chef and am hired by others to help with parties and other events often. But when I surrender to the direction of this 79 year old and step away, allowing them to do it as they want to do it, then she gets totally agitated, runs to the bedroom, raises her voice, and acts like I am impossible to deal with. Too many cooks in the kitchen? It's just 2 people. And I definately know how to work as a team. But when I have committed to a course of action and then midstream, my legs are kicked out from under me, I am in a no-win situation. I can just say "no" and proceed as planned, thereby invalidating her opinion. Or I can surrender, thus triggering her over-reaction to become hyper-sensitive and run away like I am some Ogre who rules the kitchen, when nothing could be further from the truth. The time to consult with me on meal preparation is BEFORE I start..not midstream after I have already committed. But how to get this across to a senior citizen who purposely doesn't want to know the details ahead of time...just serve them, please them, surprise them the way they liked to be surprised, but sure as heck do as they say whenever they say "JUMP!" If you are having to care for a senior like this, your feedback would be appreciated. I'm looking for a tactful way to resolve this conflict which falls into the arena of dealing with obcessive-compulsive personality types. more

Resolved Question: Where is our Entrepreneurial Spirit? Bored with your 9 to 5 job and endless pressure by your boss?

In this society, to be an entrepreneur would probably indicate that you are adventurous enough to want to take charge of your life and experience an unpredictable career. Some of your colleagues, family and friends will support your decision because you could be doing something that they themselves have ever thought of but never dare to try. While others will be cynical about it. Either they find no goal in life that's worth pursuing (reached a stagnant stage in life) or they have gotten their fingers burnt before so as to advise their peeps never to follow their footsteps. Being entrepreneur would mean you are actually stepping out of your comfort zone to deal with the unpredictable. Though you may face higher possibilities of uncertainties, challenges and woes, at the end of the day you might actually find that its all worth it. Its a magical feeling. But what exactly are some woes faced by most entrepreneurs today? 1. Fear of failing Nothing in this world comes free and if they really do, there must be a good reason behind it. Failing is not as hard as picking oneself up again after a failure. Like the law of attraction, the more you are afraid of it, the closer Fear can sense you can creep to you, its amazingly scary. 2. Why Low and Slow Sales? In the business world, everyone is either selling products or services to earn a living. To start a business, entrepreneurs have to understand that it takes time for you to break even follow by profit or loss. Set both long and short term goals and make sure you reflect on them on fixed period of time. I know of some companies which hold weekly internal meetings without fail to revise and reflect on their progress of work. To just sit there and naively believe that sales will improve upon business start-up will definitely become your No. 1 reason to fail. Most important: Believe strongly in what you sell. 3. No Proper work flow When people feed-backed that laziness (aka lack of motivation) is the reason behind their failed venture, I would see it as lack of a systematic organised work flow. It makes an entrepreneur lose track of what he is supposed to do. It would be good to start off with a checklist to ensure both the major and minor roles have been worked out. Doing up a timetable or organiser to plan activities ahead would be another suggestion. People often get lost when comes to prioritising (Everything seems important?) and putting ideas into actions. One will suddenly feel that he has much to do. (So many things, so little time) If you have assistance, learn the beauty of delegation. When you delegate, not only your workload becomes lighter, you are actually training your staff's capability and AQ at the same time. (Just don't forget to reward accordingly) 4. The ''Power'' of being Stubborn Admit it when it's your fault that caused something unpleasant to happen. Go with the flow and your intuition when it comes to certain issues and decision making, not your ego and pride. Being Stubborn during tough times and see your team through can actually be Determination in disguise. However being stubborn in important decision making would probably lead to doom faster. A stubborn person's worst enemy is Angel Flexible & Humble. Of course, there are many more uncountable woes faced by an entrepreneur, some major ones, some minor ones. Most important at the end of day, if you want to venture, be daring and go ahead. Learn and do it at the same time. If you want to plan and research first, by all means. But do not let yourself sink into it without an action plan. No experience will mean no growth in your business. Like Nike's slogan: Just Do it! (You'll know it!) Feel free to share if you felt the above before or more. more

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.? Why Martin Luther King Was Republican It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s. During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Sen. Al Gore Sr. And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King. In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tenn., after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.), a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968. Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon's 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation's fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs. Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans. Critics of Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater, who ran for President against Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation. Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater also ignore the fact that Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on Jan. 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only 35 words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest against the Vietnam War, Johnson referred to Dr. King as "that ****** preacher." Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist "Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party. "Dixiecrats" declared that they would rather vote for a "yellow dog" than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was know as the party for blacks. Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their political careers as Democrats, including Robert Byrd, who is well known for having been a "Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan. Another former "Dixiecrat" is former Democrat Sen. Ernest Hollings, who put up the Confederate flag over the state Capitol when he was the governor of South Carolina. There was no public outcry when Democrat Sen. Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment," including the Civil War. Yet Democrats denounced then-Senate GOP leader Trent Lott for his remarks about Sen. Strom Thurmond (R.-S.C.). Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Byrd and Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched. The 30-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party began in the 1970s with President Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," which was an effort on the part of Nixon to get Christians in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were still discriminating against their fellow Christians who happened to be black. Georgia did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states, including Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats. Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats. Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous. After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3 kept their promise and killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29. The blockage of the minimum wage bill was the second time in as many years that Democrats stuck a legislative finger in the eye of black Americans. Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004, blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Clinton before he finally signed it. Since the welfare reform law expired in September 2002, Congress had passed six extensions, and the latest expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the Democrats are school choice opportunity scholarships that would help black children get out of failing schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs. 77.5 years for whites). Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans. In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.Source(s)http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16500Yeah I never understood why 90% of African American votes go Democrat? Clinton has stated he respects and has modeled his politics on Fulbright who was a known racist... Bird (D) served 11 years as Majority leader and was a KKK Vidmember... Yet, George Bush has appointed more members of minority groups to the highest positions of power in the history of the US... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5_1yRVtey8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzfK7AWx6_sYes I'm Black,I just want to clear that up. I'm a republican too. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it"George Wallace was a Democrat TOO!!!!George Corley Wallace Jr. (August 25, 1919 -- September 13, 1998), was a United States politician who was elected Governor of Alabama as a Democrat four times (1962, 1970, 1974 and 1982) and ran for U.S. President four times, running as a Democrat in 1964, 1972, and 1976, and as the American Independent Party candidate in 1968. During the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s, he rose to fame as a symbol of bigotry.This Video was taped from the History Channe and uplaoded to youtube.firey_cowgirl you need to watch more History and not cnn.Video from the he History. Channelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5_1yRVtey8 more

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

Why Martin Luther King Was Republican It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s. During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Sen. Al Gore Sr. And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King. In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tenn., after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.), a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968. Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon's 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation's fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs. Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans. Critics of Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater, who ran for President against Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation. Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater also ignore the fact that Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on Jan. 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only 35 words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest against the Vietnam War, Johnson referred to Dr. King as "that ****** preacher." Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist "Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party. "Dixiecrats" declared that they would rather vote for a "yellow dog" than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was know as the party for blacks. Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their political careers as Democrats, including Robert Byrd, who is well known for having been a "Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan. Another former "Dixiecrat" is former Democrat Sen. Ernest Hollings, who put up the Confederate flag over the state Capitol when he was the governor of South Carolina. There was no public outcry when Democrat Sen. Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment," including the Civil War. Yet Democrats denounced then-Senate GOP leader Trent Lott for his remarks about Sen. Strom Thurmond (R.-S.C.). Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Byrd and Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched. The 30-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party began in the 1970s with President Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," which was an effort on the part of Nixon to get Christians in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were still discriminating against their fellow Christians who happened to be black. Georgia did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states, including Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats. Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats. Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous. After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3 kept their promise and killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29. The blockage of the minimum wage bill was the second time in as many years that Democrats stuck a legislative finger in the eye of black Americans. Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004, blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Clinton before he finally signed it. Since the welfare reform law expired in September 2002, Congress had passed six extensions, and the latest expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the Democrats are school choice opportunity scholarships that would help black children get out of failing schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs. 77.5 years for whites). Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans. In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.Source(s):http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16500Yeah I never understood why 90% of African American votes go Democrat? Clinton has stated he respects and has modeled his politics on Fulbright who was a known racist... Bird (D) served 11 years as Majority leader and was a KKK Vidmember... Yet, George Bush has appointed more members of minority groups to the highest positions of power in the history of the US... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5_1yRVtey8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzfK7AWx6_s Yes I'm Black,I just want to clear that up. I'm a republican too.jxt299 You can look for it on the web..Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.Zoe Dot Those Who Forget History Are Doomed to Repeat It".Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" more

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

Why Martin Luther King Was Republican It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s. During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Sen. Al Gore Sr. And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King. In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tenn., after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.), a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968. Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon's 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation's fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs. Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans. Critics of Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater, who ran for President against Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation. Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater also ignore the fact that Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on Jan. 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only 35 words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest against the Vietnam War, Johnson referred to Dr. King as "that ****** preacher." Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist "Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party. "Dixiecrats" declared that they would rather vote for a "yellow dog" than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was know as the party for blacks. Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their political careers as Democrats, including Robert Byrd, who is well known for having been a "Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan. Another former "Dixiecrat" is former Democrat Sen. Ernest Hollings, who put up the Confederate flag over the state Capitol when he was the governor of South Carolina. There was no public outcry when Democrat Sen. Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment," including the Civil War. Yet Democrats denounced then-Senate GOP leader Trent Lott for his remarks about Sen. Strom Thurmond (R.-S.C.). Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Byrd and Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched. The 30-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party began in the 1970s with President Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," which was an effort on the part of Nixon to get Christians in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were still discriminating against their fellow Christians who happened to be black. Georgia did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states, including Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats. Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats. Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous. After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3 kept their promise and killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29. The blockage of the minimum wage bill was the second time in as many years that Democrats stuck a legislative finger in the eye of black Americans. Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004, blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Clinton before he finally signed it. Since the welfare reform law expired in September 2002, Congress had passed six extensions, and the latest expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the Democrats are school choice opportunity scholarships that would help black children get out of failing schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs. 77.5 years for whites). Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans. In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.Source(s):http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16500Yeah I never understood why 90% of African American votes go Democrat? Clinton has stated he respects and has modeled his politics on Fulbright who was a known racist... Bird (D) served 11 years as Majority leader and was a KKK Vidmember... Yet, George Bush has appointed more members of minority groups to the highest positions of power in the history of the US... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5_1yRVtey8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzfK7AWx6_sYes I'm Black,I just want to clear that up. I'm a republican too.Those Who Forget History Are Doomed to Repeat It". more

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5_1yRVtey8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzfK7AWx6_s Yeah I never understood why 90% of African American votes go Democrat? Clinton has stated he respects and has modeled his politics on Fulbright who was a known racist... Bird (D) served 11 years as Majority leader and was a KKK Vidmember... Yet, George Bush has appointed more members of minority groups to the highest positions of power in the history of the US... Why Martin Luther King Was Republican It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s. During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Sen. Al Gore Sr. And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King. In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tenn., after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.), a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968. Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon's 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation's fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs. Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans. Critics of Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater, who ran for President against Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation. Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater also ignore the fact that Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on Jan. 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only 35 words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest against the Vietnam War, Johnson referred to Dr. King as "that Nigger preacher." Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist "Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party. "Dixiecrats" declared that they would rather vote for a "yellow dog" than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was know as the party for blacks. Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their political careers as Democrats, including Robert Byrd, who is well known for having been a "Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan. Another former "Dixiecrat" is former Democrat Sen. Ernest Hollings, who put up the Confederate flag over the state Capitol when he was the governor of South Carolina. There was no public outcry when Democrat Sen. Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment," including the Civil War. Yet Democrats denounced then-Senate GOP leader Trent Lott for his remarks about Sen. Strom Thurmond (R.-S.C.). Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Byrd and Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched. The 30-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party began in the 1970s with President Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," which was an effort on the part of Nixon to get Christians in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were still discriminating against their fellow Christians who happened to be black. Georgia did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states, including Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats. Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats. Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous. After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3 kept their promise and killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29. The blockage of the minimum wage bill was the second time in as many years that Democrats stuck a legislative finger in the eye of black Americans. Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004, blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Clinton before he finally signed it. Since the welfare reform law expired in September 2002, Congress had passed six extensions, and the latest expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the Democrats are school choice opportunity scholarships that would help black children get out of failing schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs. 77.5 years for whites). Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans. In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.Wow Adam B How many minority groups did Bill Clinton appoint to the highest positions of powerSource(s): http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16500Yes I'm Black,I just want to clear that up. I'm a republican too.It's called change noway dog Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" more

Resolved Question: I ask Democrates, are we going to stand for the Left wing doing what the are doing?Glenn Greenwald?

Resolved Question: youre royal bosses the truth?

an insight in to what is really happening,dont blame ur postie blame the bosses.Gender: Gender:Male Joined: 30 Dec 2006 Member No:37 Posts: 2932 Posts per day: 13.45 Location: West Riding. Reply with quote Post Leighton's fight to the death at Royal Mail http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,,2141689,00.html With more strikes imminent, the future of very British institution is under threat, write Nick Mathiason and Jo Revill Sunday August 5, 2007 The Observer As fireside chats go it was unconventional. But then Allan Leighton, chairman of the Royal Mail and one of Britain's best connected businessmen, likes to style himself as a man of the people with a dash of Mr Motivator thrown in. Urging his 167,000 workforce not to embark on Britain's first national post strike in more than a decade, the 54-year-old told them: 'You know me. I don't do bullshit.' The intention was to warn his employees, famously prone to wildcat action, against launching a series of strikes. It failed. Leighton built his career on motivating thousands of disgruntled supermarket employees he called 'colleagues'. Together they turned Asda from a backwater into a powerhouse supermarket. But life has not gone so smoothly since. Leighton chaired a number of companies that have faced problems. But none like Royal Mail. Strike action received overwhelming backing throughout the network three weeks ago. It began 10 days ago. Last week, the Communication Workers Union extended action by another two weeks, paralysing businesses and inconveniencing the public. Talks between the parties have just started at Acas, the arbitration service. At stake is Leighton's personal reputation; but more important is the future of an institution that is part of the fabric of British society. As it teeters under the weight of a £6bn pension shortfall and haemorrhages lucrative business customers - last month Amazon, the internet business, pulled its parcel contract - questions are now being asked whether the Royal Mail will, in future, be capable of fulfilling its obligation to guarantee deliveries to every household in Britain. Then there is the future of the post office network itself. Next year the government wants Royal Mail group to close 2,500 underperforming post offices in a move that will spark furious protests from communities and could seriously damage the government. Before that, Leighton and his chief executive, Adam Crozier, the former Football Association boss, have to resolve a dispute that shows every sign of escalating into a war of attrition. For the CWU though, this dispute is not just about a below-inflation 2.5 per cent pay deal plus a possible £800 bonus for hitting performance targets. Dave Ward, a former postman marshalling the dispute as deputy general secretary of the CWU, says it is about the philosophical direction of an organisation where he has worked since he left school in Tooting, south London, 35 years ago. Ward has seen the business used as a cash cow by repeated governments who have raided Royal Mail profits to pay for other priorities. Starved of investment, it briefly plunged into the red a few years ago, but now it is making money. Ward wants back money sucked out of the business to pay for modernisation and to enable workers on an average wage of £323 a week to get more. The message is falling on deaf ears. Leighton and Crozier say that employees at rival post firms who use modern automation systems are paid 25 per cent less and are 40 per cent more productive. The workforce take this statement as an insult. Morale is low. When the Royal Mail asks for voluntary redundancy, bosses are trampled in the rush. Faith and trust have broken down. Ward believes Leighton and Crozier accepted government-imposed competition rules that will condemn the service to commercial suicide. He wants so-called access agreements to private companies using the postal service to be rewritten. Both sides are digging in as the government buries its head in the sand, concerned not to step into the row and be seen as protectionist. Pat McFadden, enterprise minister at the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform - formerly the DTI - says: 'It is really for the company and the union to resolve this dispute. We are in touch with both sides but it is for them to sit down together and reach a resolution. We are not setting any kind of timetable.' Adam Crozier, 43, is the calculating, smart operator to Leighton's 'bish, bash bosh' diplomacy. While Leighton does the bold big picture, it is Crozier who is the power behind the Royal Mail. Their big idea was to give postal workers a stake in the company by turning the group into a John Lewis-style partnership. If the workers had shares in the business they would receive yearly bonuses based on profit. Industrial relations would be improved at a stroke. There was one problem: the government, the Royal Mail's only shareholder, didn't buy the idea. More blows followed. The postal regulator has rejected his request for zonal pricing, which would have seen letters posted to and from London charged at different rates to the rest of the country. And Europe is insisting the Royal Mail pays VAT, in a move that could destroy its finances. Royal Mail has postponed the publication of its accounts, due in May. The suspicion is that there is embarrassment at the scale of bonuses Leighton and Crozier will scoop. The strange thing is that the combatants in the current dispute appear to respect each other. Crozier knows the union believes it has a viable plan for the future- it is just that he thinks the government has no intention of adopting it. The CWU is pinning its hopes on a government manifesto commitment to review the impact of competition in the postal service in this parliament. If the review said that competition harmed service standards to business and the public, pressure would build to return the service to its old protected status. But that is unlikely. The future looks to be a maelstrom of more industrial unrest over pay, massive job cuts and changing work practices. For the CWU, job cuts mean questions over its own future. Fewer jobs mean fewer members. Like a cornered animal the CWU is becoming more aggressive. And worryingly for the government, it is not alone. Unions representing the civil and health service this weekend said they were preparing to co-ordinate industrial action with the CWU as they reject below-inflation pay deals in the public sector of 2 per cent. The Prime Minister's glossy sheen of recent weeks might soon fade as a series of Old Labour-style disputes threaten to break out. _________________ Workers, public service and social responsibility Not Profit and Shareholders Domestic Communication Ingress Operative "Strength through Unity" "Work to Live" Not "Live to Work" Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:56,pm View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website coppertop Gender: Gender:Male Joined: 27 May 2007 Member No:869 Posts: 87 Posts per day: 1.24 Reply with quote Post Good one Very good indeed well worth reading , let's hope with more ia combined with the other union's we might get some decent attention Sun Aug 05, 2007 3:17,pm View user's profile Send private message wranglered Joined: 29 Jan 2007 Member No:122 Posts: 14 Posts per day: 0.07 Location: Lincolnshire Reply with quote Post This is a very good article - I have highlighted all the failures of Leighton in it - I have also disputed the claim we think they have a viable business plan - it is on the union noticeboard tomorrow. Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:38,pm View user's profile Send private message johno47 Gender: Gender:Male Joined: 10 Feb 2007 Member No:166 Posts: 289 Posts per day: 1.64 Location: Burslem Reply with quote Post At last someone who gets the facts right...UNITY IS STRENGTH. Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:14,pm View user's profile Send private message pipecockskank Gender: Gender:Male Joined: 02 Aug 2007 Member No:2,176 Posts: 7 Posts per day: 2.33 Reply with quote Post Good summery of the position, fair and balanced, but crozierfuckoff a smart operator Shame on you. Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:20,pm View user's profile Send private message F0zziebear MYSTERY MAN Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Member No:142 Posts: 255 Posts per day: 1.37 Reply with quote Post An impressive article Finally a journalist who understands the industry Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:35,pm View user's profile Send private message smokerjim Gender: Gender:Male Joined: 13 Jun 2007 Member No:1,278 Posts: 149 Posts per day: 2.81 Location: Sevenoaks Reply with quote Post Good to see it spreading out from the Mirror as well - their support is most welcome, but the wider the media coverage is, the greater the pressure on leightonfuckoff & crozierfuckoff _________________ Q. Why do Leighton & Crozier have long, thin penises? A. They are tight fisted w*nkers A.G. in Sevenoaks - woo-'kin'-hoo more

Resolved Question: All democrats agree we must stay on course in Iraq? How do liberals feel now?

In the first debate between candidates for the Democratic Party’s 2008 presidential nomination, the leading contenders made clear that whatever their differences with the Bush administration’s handling of the war in Iraq, they are all committed to maintaining the US occupation of the oil-rich country and that, if elected president, they would not hesitate to use US military power anywhere in the world to defend the geo-political interests of American imperialism. The debate, which was broadcast by MSNBC television from South Carolina State University, included ostensible front runners New York Senator Hillary Clinton, Illinois Senator Barack Obama and former North Carolina senator and vice presidential candidate John Edwards, as well as Delaware Senator Joseph Biden, Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. Also included were Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska senator Mike Gravel. The debate was overshadowed by the deep crisis over the war in Iraq and the growing popular hatred of for the war—particularly among Democrat voters, who according to a poll released this week are 78 percent in favor of total withdrawal and 54 percent in favor of immediate withdrawal. While all of the candidates did their best to feign opposition to the war, the debate began just hours after the Senate approved a supplemental spending bill that will provide the White House with an additional $124 billion to continue the fighting and occupations in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Most of those on the platform sought to cast the funding bill as an “antiwar” measure because of the toothless and non-binding timetable in the bill for the withdrawal of some troops from Iraq. “The Congress has voted, as of today, to end this war,” Clinton declared. Echoing the comments of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid earlier in the week, Senators Clinton, Biden and Obama made it clear they were against “this” war—i.e., opposed to the way the Bush administration is conducting the occupation of Iraq, not “the” war itself. Clinton set the tone by claiming the US had done everything to help the Iraqi people to have “freedom” and “their own country” but now it was time for the Iraqis to decide whether they would “take that chance.” Blaming the Iraqi people for the devastating civil war that has resulted from the US invasion and the shattering of Iraqi society, Clinton said the Iraqi government had to provide “security and stability without our young men and women in the middle of their sectarian civil war.” These comments parallel previous statements by Clinton who has indicated that if elected she would keep large numbers of US troops in Iraq for the foreseeable future—not to protect the civilian population against sectarian reprisals,but to defend America’s “vital national security interests”: first and foremost, oil. In his remarks, Biden criticized Bush’s “fundamentally flawed policy” in Iraq, which he defined as the “notion of being able to set up a strong, central government in Baghdad that will be democratic.” The way forward, Biden said, was to “decentralize Iraq” and have a “limited central government” to “share their oil wealth.” Biden has been the most strident proponent of partitioning Iraq into ethno-religious statelets, dividing Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis. Such a proposal is a prescription for ethnic cleansing and mass killings on a scale not seen since the partitioning of India in the 1940s. Governor Richardson endorsed this reactionary proposal, calling for the US to establish a “political framework” to “divide oil revenues” and possibly “set up three separate entities.” Illinois Senator Barack Obama said he had opposed the war from the start and then attempted to justify his repeated votes to fund it as hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and more than 3,300 US soldiers have been killed. He claimed that the troops needed the best military hardware possible in order to “come home safely.” In reality, Congress has the power to assure the safe return of the troops by cutting off funding, something the Democratic leadership refuses to do. Representative Dennis Kucinich pointed out this anomaly, saying every time the Democrats voted to fund the war they were “reauthorizing the war all over again.” The Democrats, he said, “have the power to end the war right now, and that’s what we should do.” Criticizing the Senate war-spending bill, Kucinich said he had proposed a bill that called for the United Nations to provide peacekeepers and security forces that “will move in as our troops leave.” Gravel—a Vietnam-era senator who opposed the Nixon administration on the military draft and the war—also denounced the war-spending bill, saying he was “embarrassed” by what was going on in Congress. Because Bush is determined to continue the war, the Democrats should pass a law, he said, making it a “felony” to keep the troops in Iraq. Neither Kucinich nor Gravel enjoys any support from the Democratic Party leadership, let alone from the Wall Street investors and other corporate backers who are pouring millions of dollars into the campaigns of the top contenders. Nevertheless, they play a central role in fostering illusions that the pro-war and pro-big business Democratic Party can be pressured to stop the war and defend the interests of working people. Kucinich in particular presents himself as the “voice of conscience” in the Democratic Party and living proof that there is an antiwar, progressive faction within it. In the 2004 elections, the Ohio congressman also sought the party’s presidential nomination. After the Democratic Party leadership smothered the Howard Dean campaign—around which significant antiwar sentiment had gathered—it took measures to suppress antiwar opposition within the party and to make sure the elections were not turned into a referendum on Iraq. This campaign culminated in the nomination of a pro-war candidate—Massachusetts Senator John Kerry. Kucinich immediately dropped his campaign and called for “unity” behind Kerry, thus attempting to confine the opposition to the war tightly within the borders of a pro-war party. Earlier this week Kucinich introduced three articles of impeachment against Vice President Cheney for the campaign of lies about WMDs and Iraqi-al-Qaeda ties that was used to justify the war against Iraq, as well as similar fabrications used to prepare another war against Iran. These are indeed grounds for impeaching Cheney. However, there is zero support for this within the Democratic Party leadership, which is averse to any serious struggle that might bring masses of working people into a political confrontation with the Bush administration. For that reason, when the debate moderator asked for a show of hands from the Democratic candidates on who supported Kucinich’s action against Cheney, not one hand was raised. In the end, Kucinich and Gravel functioned as foils during the debate so that the leading Democratic contenders could re-assert their commitment to defending the interests of corporate America with military force. This point was noted by the Washington Post, which said that Kucinich and Gravel “provided a counterpoint of left-wing ideas that drew rebukes for a lack of seriousness from Biden and Obama. The challenges from the liberal flank allowed almost all the others to assert that, despite their criticisms of President Bush’s Iraq policy, they are ready to use military force to retaliate against future terrorist attacks.” Fully embracing the “global war on terrorism,” the leading Democratic candidates singled out as potential future targets of US military action not only Iran and North Korea, but also Russia and China. Biden also specifically raised the possibility of intervening in Darfur, which leading Democratic think tanks hope will be a launching point for defending US interest in Africa, while at the same time selling it to the American people as a “good, humanitarian” war. Kucinich pointed out that Obama and Clinton had told pro-Israeli lobby groups that “all options were on the table with Iran” and that this was a thinly-veiled threat to use nuclear weapons. Obama justified his remarks by saying a nuclear-armed Iran “will be a major threat to us and to the region.” Calling Iran “the largest state sponsor of terrorism” because of its support for Hezbollah and Hamas, Obama repeated the same threats made by Bush and Cheney in the run-up to the war with Iraq, saying Iran could “place a nuclear weapon into the hands of terrorists,” posing a “profound security threat for America.” Gravel pointed out that the US has carried out sanctions against Iran for 26 years, while constantly threatening the country with military strikes. “Tell me, Barack,” he said, “who do you want to nuke?” Obama shrugged the question off, responding, “I’m not planning to nuke anybody right now, Mike, I promise you.” Biden was even more forceful, calling on Kucinich and Gravel to “stop all this happy talk here about the use of force doesn’t make sense. The use of force in Afghanistan is justified and necessary; in Darfur, justified and necessary; in the Balkans, justified and necessary. You guys can have your happy talk, there’s real life.” The debate made clear that the Democrats’ chief criticism of the war in Iraq is that it has placed an enormous strain on the fighting capacity of the US military and diverted attention from other threats to US interests throughout the world. The plan for “strategic redeployment” advocated by the Democratic candidates is aimed at maintaining colonial control in Iraq—by waging a bloody counter-insurgency with fewer troops, primarily US Special Forces and the Air Force—and freeing up troops for Afghanistan and interventions in other global hot spots. This support for militarism stems from the fact that the Democratic Party speaks for the same financial oligarchy as the Republicans. This truth was reiterated throughout the debate, as Clinton, Obama and Edwards went out of their way to praise the multi-millionaire and multi-billionaire hedge fund managers and Wall Street speculators who have enriched themselves at the expense of the great mass of working people. Clinton praised the people willing to invest their money in the “free market system” and the “entrepreneurial economy,” many of whom have poured some of that money into her multi-million-dollar campaign war chest. After repeating his refrain about being brought up poor and humble in a South Carolina textile mill town for the one thousandth time, John Edwards responded to a question about being hired by the $30 billion hedge fund Fortress Investment Group with the absurd claim that “those people in New York who work in financial markets understand—in some ways, at least—what can be done and can play a significant role in trying to lift people who are struggling.” more

Welcome to Business plan

Latest Business Action Plan And Its Timetable News

Business Action Plan And Its Timetable Questions asked

Voting Question: Richard Nixon's Philadelphia Plan?

Resolved Question: How to deal with a compulsive, highly-sensitive "know-it-all" in your kitchen, looking over your shoulder?

Resolved Question: Where is our Entrepreneurial Spirit? Bored with your 9 to 5 job and endless pressure by your boss?

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

Resolved Question: Why do black people vote Democrats?Democrats started the kkk.Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.?

Resolved Question: I ask Democrates, are we going to stand for the Left wing doing what the are doing?Glenn Greenwald?

Resolved Question: youre royal bosses the truth?

Resolved Question: All democrats agree we must stay on course in Iraq? How do liberals feel now?

Resolved Question: Bush a true orator?

Top Business Action Plan And Its Timetable Links

Menu