Uncle Sam's Plantation

ImWithStupid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Progressives say that conservatives only care about rich people and power. Common sense would tell you that in order to stay in power they would want as many people to become rich as possible.

Progressives also like to say they are for the poor. What do you suppose common sense would tell you about how the progressives operate to stay in power?

Back on Uncle Sam's Plantation
Star Parker
Monday, February 09, 2009

Six years ago I wrote a book called "Uncle Sam's Plantation." I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas. A poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.

A vast sea of perhaps well intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960's, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.

A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"

Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems. The kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.

The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.

Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.

I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican congress and signed into law by a Democrat president. A few years after enactment, welfare roles were down fifty percent.

I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth producing American capitalism.

But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.

Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.

Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."

Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.

There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.

Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.

In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.

"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending-it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, health care, and education."

Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."

Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.

Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."

Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single parent homes and out of wedlock births.

It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.

Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/02/09/back_on_uncle_sams_plantation?page=2


And the main stream media continues to try to help spread the lie...


View attachment 2755
 

Attachments

  • e3b9ed0741f80205bcb3be40ee5b4d7a.jpg
    e3b9ed0741f80205bcb3be40ee5b4d7a.jpg
    36.3 KB · Views: 9
Obviously written by a racist, ignorant, moron.

There is one big flaw in his claim about Obama trying to get everybody a hand out. The new law makes it so people must purchase insurance themselves.

Doesn't make sense that purchase insurance = hand out.

Where's the socialism?

His opinion has no merit whatsoever.

As for your videos showing guys going "NO WE AIN'T RACIST" whoopy... it doesn't counter those who ARE racist among the T(errorist) Party.
.
.
 
Obviously written by a racist, ignorant, moron.

There is one big flaw in his claim about Obama trying to get everybody a hand out. The new law makes it so people must purchase insurance themselves.

Doesn't make sense that purchase insurance = hand out.

Where's the socialism?

His opinion has no merit whatsoever.

.
.

Star Parker is a black woman.

Second. BS, everyone will have to purchase health care. It's all going to be subsidized. Just more IRS welfare, like getting back more in a return than you paid in.

It's getting so they might as well move the IRS from the Department of the Treasury to the Department of Health and Human Services.
 
Uncle Sam's Plantation, future tense... (i.e. Liberal Progressive Utopia)

http://www.pjtv.com/video/Trifecta/Flatscreen_TVs_And_Forced_Prostitution%3A_Welcome_To_Your_Socialist_Nightmare_/3440/
 
BTW, can you list ANY EXAMPLE AT ALL of this alleged socialism the morons in the video are speaking of?

The ****'s getting pretty deep when they start talking about women being made into whores.

What's pathetic is people like you actually play into this horse ****.
.
.
 
And for another thing, we were supposed to be a socialist country under Clinton too... remember?

How come THAT never happened?
.
.
 
It's continuing to happen. Under Clinton, Bush and Obama.

You still can't get past your myopic view of what socialism/government control is. :rolleyes:

The government doesn't have to technically "own" an industry or sector of the economy to make it socialist.

Right now the federal government has control of health care, education, a major industry, is moving on the financial industry, and has said that energy is soon to come.

What else is there?

The government in Italy and Germany didn't "own" the companies either, but they were in control of the socialism there.
 
So how are they controlling health care?

And don't say "MEDICAID/MEDICARE" duh.. that is OPTIONAL..

I wanna know how they are controlling my Dr., My insurance, my choices..

The only form of "CONTROL" I saw in the new HCR, would have been Republicans/Blue Dogs trying to control who can and can't get an abortion.
.
.
 
So how are they controlling health care?

And don't say "MEDICAID/MEDICARE" duh.. that is OPTIONAL..

I wanna know how they are controlling my Dr., My insurance, my choices..

The only form of "CONTROL" I saw in the new HCR, would have been Republicans/Blue Dogs trying to control who can and can't get an abortion.
.
.


Really? You're sticking to that talking point?

So telling every American what their health insurance plan must include, but can't include too much, isn't control?

Making insurance companies nothing but collection agencies for the government, isn't control.

Setting up panels to decide what the best treatment and drug for each condition is, and if the local doctor deviates he can be fined, isn't control?

i.e. contributing to Medicare/Medicaid is optional?
 
Really? You're sticking to that talking point?

So telling every American what their health insurance plan must include, but can't include too much, isn't control?

Making insurance companies nothing but collection agencies for the government, isn't control.

Setting up panels to decide what the best treatment and drug for each condition is, and if the local doctor deviates he can be fined, isn't control?

i.e. contributing to Medicare/Medicaid is optional?
Fined? That's a rumor, sorry, not true. The Dr.'s have it as an option to receive more money from the medicare/medicaid system by following the guidelines.

And yes, medicare and medicaid is optional .gov health care... you always have the option of A: getting a job and buying insurance, or B: growing old and continuing to buy your own off the fortune you have amassed for yourself over the years... nobody is twisting your arm.
.
.
 
Fined? That's a rumor, sorry, not true. The Dr.'s have it as an option to receive more money from the medicare/medicaid system by following the guidelines.

And yes, medicare and medicaid is optional .gov health care... you always have the option of A: getting a job and buying insurance, or B: growing old and continuing to buy your own off the fortune you have amassed for yourself over the years... nobody is twisting your arm.
.
.

So telling doctors that they either treat patients as the government panel says or they don't get as much in compensation, even if the doctor believes another treatment is better, isn't government control?

See Romney Care in Mass. It's all going to be medicare in a decade.

Want some more Kool-Aid/Soylent Green.
 
So telling doctors that they either treat patients as the government panel says or they don't get as much in compensation, even if the doctor believes another treatment is better, isn't government control?

See Romney Care in Mass. It's all going to be medicare in a decade.

Want some more Kool-Aid/Soylent Green.
Where are you getting your info from? The Dr.'s will still get the same compensation they are now, nothing has changed except that they will be given an incentive to do a better job. No, that isn't government control at all.. don't know where you get that it is.
.
.
 
Where are you getting your info from? The Dr.'s will still get the same compensation they are now, nothing has changed except that they will be given an incentive to do a better job. No, that isn't government control at all.. don't know where you get that it is.
.
.

It's in the bill that the gov't is compiling panels to decide what the "best" treatment for different ailments is and doctors either use the treatments in the guidelines or be compensated less.
 
NAACP: House Slaves Of A Mostly White DNC
When Tea Party Express spokesperson, Mark Williams crossed the line, Tea Party organizations and members denounced him. When Cedra Crenshaw, a Republican black mother, is tossed off a ballot in Illinois because she might win, thus advancing the cause of blacks with more conservative views, the NAACP is silent. That's because their real goal is advancing the cause of Democrats, not black people..

Big picture, slavery is as alive and well in the Democrat Party, as it was when the late Senator Robert Byrd donned his Kleagle costume. And organizations like the NAACP legitimize it in the eyes of blacks everywhere.
 
Bender, I can't believe how uninformed you are in almost every discussion.


Sticks and carrots.


The Government uses a a series of incentives and penalties to control the doctors and lead them by the nose to a desired outcome. By telling doctors that they will get paid more money if they "CONFORM" to the specific treatments to save the Government money, then the doctors are no longer going to be doing what is the best for the patient but instead will be doing what is best for their bank accounts.



Control the money, control the industry, and the socialists/progressives have taken control of the money.
 
Back
Top