"Democrats" are waging a War on Whites? Who knew?

H/T Left in Alabama

Finally a war I can support!  Just kidding. Those who know me know I am anti-war/anti-violence of any kind. My weapons of choice are words and the ballot box, but I got to thinking....what if democrats did wage a war on white folks?  Maybe if Democrats had waged a war on white folks we wouldn't be in this mess.  By mess I am referring to sending our troops to war based on dead wrong intelligence, raiding the surplus to give the rich a tax cut, spying on the American people without a warrant, outing CIA  agents,  massive unemployment, record foreclosures, failing public schools and infrastructure, and the list goes on and on, like the Energizer Bunny.

Before we jump into Congressman Mo Brooks (r. AL 05) #WarOnWhites we must decode his code words.  First, democrats are code for black folks, African Americans, Negroes, coloreds, and whatever else you want to call people of color, not to be confused with them their illegals, which is code for Mexicans, Hispanics, anyone else from south of the border.  So when Congressman Brooks says democrats are waging war on white folks, he's really saying black folks are waging war on white folks, because everybody knows the democratic party panders to black voters at the expense of white voters.  Now, this is not true, but this is the perception held by some, not to be confused with all, white folks.

A generation ago, the Alabama Democratic Party’s black caucus had to fight for representation on the party’s executive committee, but today the party and that caucus, the Alabama Democratic Conference, overlap so much they are nearly synonymous.

Under a 25-year-old consent decree, ADC can select at-large executive committee members to make the committee racially proportionate to the party’s electorate. But it has exercised that power only in terms of black and white. Hispanics and other minority groups are not represented well, if at all, on the committee.

The ADC’s power has put its president, Joe Reed, squarely in the party driver’s seat and has made him a divisive figure. Last year, a spat with then-party chairman Mark Kennedy ended with Kennedy resigning his position and creating a new political group, the Alabama Democratic Majority, which some in the party hoped could reform or replace the state executive committee. At the time, Kennedy denied that was its purpose, but the message was clear: For at least part of the leadership, Alabama’s Democratic party had become too dysfunctional to be salvageable.

What Kennedy and his allies left behind was a smattering of white faces in a mostly black crowd.

I tried to tell them instead of creating their own separate and unequal party to get rid of Joe Reed and his bunch, they should have been joining Joe Reed and his bunch.  But did they listen to me?  Naaaaah. So here we are 3 months before the election and democrats in the fifth congressional district have a choice between Mo Brooks and Mo Brooks Lite.  My only hope is Mo Brooks Lite has the decency not to publicly disrespect the President of the United States of America, and if elected he will put his republican past behind him, and put people over party.  But I digress.

Before we return to the #WarOnWhites, there is one more word we have to define, and that word is psychological projection.

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against unpleasant impulses by denying their existence in themselves, while attributing them to others.^[1] For example, a person who is rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.

So, when Congressman Mo Brooks accuses democrats (blacks) of waging war on whites, he really means republicans (whites) are waging war on democrats (blacks).

Alabama has an ugly racial past that has taken decades to overcome. Still, for many outside the state, Alabama is remembered for Bloody Sunday in Selma and Bull Connor's fire hoses turned on peaceful protesters in Birmingham. Those images belong in the past in the wake of the civil rights movement, but Brooks' comments will only reinforce those images.The irony in Brooks' comments is he accuses Democrats of "... launching this war (by) claiming that whites hate everybody else." Really? With our first African-American president in his second term, is it he and his party fomenting hate? No.Brooks embodies all that is wrong with the contemporary Republican Party. He's too far right to understand ordinary people's problems, and he won't engage with Democrats to craft legislation — such as immigration — that has long needed to be addressed. He is mired in political theory and ideology, refusing to accept that others, even in his own party, have something to bring to the table. That is arrogance.Sadly, Brooks will find a willing audience for his incendiary views in a state and a nation increasingly divided against themselves.

Whites are waging a war on blacks, and the opening salvo was the certification of the 2000 election. 

Addendum

The real reason that I oppose the Republican Party has nothing to do with my being a Democrat. I'm not. I'm an independent, with no political party. I don't oppose the Republicans in order to support the Democrats, I oppose the Republicans because the kind of people who perpetrated the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing have joined the GOP. Prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Nixon's Southern Strategy, these people were loyal Democrats, partly because of the New Deal but mostly because of Reconstruction and the Civil War. When the Democratic Party split along sectional lines in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act, the Republicans reached out to the disaffected Southern Democrats, encouraged them to join the GOP. The party did not change the Dixiecrats, the Dixiecrats changed the party.

Whatever political party draws its strength from these people is the party I'm going to work to defeat
Whatever political party draws its strength from these people is the party I'm going to work to defeat.

The End.