Featured Post



Tuesday, January 31, 2012


Watching the GOP Presidential debate on CNN tonight (26 Jan. 2012) I was suddenly struck by the change in the Republican Party and also the US.  The Republican Party was established in the 1850s as a party opposed to slavery (and in some cases, opposed to the slaves too).  To some extent it grew out of the Whig Party, and then the Know-Nothing or American Party, which tended to be anti-Catholic.  The Republican Party was basically the party of Northern Protestants, and perhaps some of the small Northern Black population.
            In the South, the Republican Party did not exist.  Lincoln did not receive a single recorded vote from the South in the Presidential election of 1860.  Neither slaves nor free Blacks could vote.  In the South there were few Catholics – Louisiana being the exception; and fewer Jews, though Louisiana elected to the national Senate the first Jewish member, Judah Benjamin.
            While war against the South was popular in some areas of the North, not all shared the hostility to slavery.  New York City had a large Catholic population, many of whom were poor Irish who did not relish fighting in a war to free Blacks who might then compete with them for the same lowly jobs if slavery were abolished.    When the Lincoln Administration resorted to conscription to fill army ranks, an anti-draft riot was sparked in New York, with many blaming Blacks for the draft and the war; the angry mob even burned a Black orphanage.  The Democrats retained many Catholics in their ranks.  Some even suggested that New York City also secede from the Union, for then none would be drafted.  Meanwhile, General Grant’s order expelling Jews from his theater of war also tended to push Jews into the Democratic Party.  By contrast, in the South, Pres. Davis’ Cabinet member Judah Benjamin was sometimes referred to as “the brains of the Confederacy.”
After the defeat of the Confederacy, the victorious Northern Republicans feared that as the Southern States were restored into the Union, they would reelect their old rebel leaders, and indeed, some of the leaders of the rebellion now sought their old seats in the national Congress.  For the Republicans, it became imperative to allow Blacks to vote in the South so the anti-rebel party, the Republicans might stand a chance.  Almost all the Blacks were Protestants, except in Louisiana, and they voted the Republican ticket.  The Democrats demonstrated where they stood by making their national campaign song , “We Are the White Man’s Party.”
            By the 1870s the pattern was developed: generally in the South, Blacks (mainly Protestant) voted Republican, and whites (also mainly Protestant) voted Democrat.  By 1900, however, few Blacks in the South were still permitted to vote.
            In the North, the Republican Party remained the party of Protestants.  New immigrants, often Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, German, Hungarian, etc., might end in the Democratic fold, which also had some Protestants.
            The racist views of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson tended to reduce even more the role of Blacks in the US political sphere.  Entry into WWI roused new hatreds: of the Hun, the Red, the slacker, the Kraut, the radical.  A new Puritanism seemed to pervade both parties.  Sacrifice for the war!  And the drunken German-Americans and the anti-British Irish-Americans had to be punished.  Their beer gardens and saloons would vanish.  Victory in WWI and then Prohibition.  The Republicans could then enjoy the prosperity of the Harding- Coolidge years.  In 1928 the Democrats rejected their KuKlux candidate, whose appeal was not limited to the South, and spit at their white robes by nominating New York Governor Al Smith, a Catholic.  While Smith carried Massachusetts and Rhode Island, he lost many states of what had been the “solid South” to Republican Herbert Hoover, the humanitarian, Quaker, engineer who had organized relief to starving people in Europe.
            The Great Depression and massive unemployment altered the image of Hoover, and another New York Governor was chosen by the Democrats in 1932, the aristocratic Franklin Roosevelt.  Simultaneously, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor in Germany.  As the 1930s wore on, foreign policy grew in importance.  Many progressive Republicans, aware of how the media had fooled Americans into believing anti-German atrocity propaganda in 1914, were determined not to be duped into another foreign war.  Roosevelt, though speaking of peace, was determined to support Britain, as had been Wilson before him.  American Jews were moving even more solidly into the Democratic fold (except 1939-41) when some were neutral in the anti-imperialist war against Britain, France, Holland, and Belgium, conducted by Germany with its ally, the USSR.  Both Col. Charles Lindburgh and Paul Robeson could try to keep America out of war in 1940.  America First had a powerful ring in much of middle America.  Many German-. Italian-, Irisn- and other Americans began to question their allegiance to the Democrats.  But others did not like what they saw on Movietone News in the theaters – the rape of Nanking, the marching German armies into Austria, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, and finally into Poland.  FDR was conducting a small, undeclared war against Germany, when the Japanese attacked the American fleet at Pearl Harbor.  Overnight, the America First organization disbanded.  Most Americans went along with the war; some with more enthusiasm than others.
            With victory against the Axis and imperial Japan, America suddenly faced a new threat – the Soviet Union.  Now German-Americans were determined to show how patriotic they were, and became active anti-Communist Republicans.  Meanwhile, many Jews, who had been delighted by the effort to smite Nazism, were less enthusiastic about the new crusade.  Indeed, some were members of the main anti-fascist movement as they saw it, and they joined the Communist Party.  It was not only the Rosenbergs who were Jewish and who sent American atomic secrets to the Soviets.  For example, the espionage of physicist Theodore Hall, who worked on the Manhattan Project, was not discovered until the 1990s.  Hall was born Theodore Holtzberg.
            By the 1950s it was clear that Republicans could once again construct a winning majority.  The Democrats were on the defensive, and the far Left was crumbling as its members, its unions, its fraternal organization, were blacklisted and isolated.
            But in the mid-1950s the initial steps were taken to transform America.  In part, it was a revolution from above; in part, from below.  From above, the US sought to take its place in the sun, not in the manner of Pres. McKinley, going to war against Spain in the Philippines “to Christianize them,” (they were mainly Roman Catholics), but to bring them freedom and democracy.  In the Cold War, the Communists could readily spotlight the hypocrisy of Americans who spoke of freedom, while denying the vote to Blacks in the South, segregating them into separate schools and other institutions.  Aware of how segregation damaged the image of America as freedom’s bulwark, there was demand for change, from above.  In 1948 Pres. Truman ordered the integration of the armed services, and in 1954 the US Supreme Court ruled against segregation in public schools.  From below, in 1955 Rosa Parks refused to yield her seat on a public bus to a white man, and the Montgomery bus boycott ensued.  From this boycott Rev. Martin Luther King emerged as a leader.  In 1960 the sit-in began, in 1961 the Freedom Rides, in 1964 Mississippi’s Freedom Summer.  Change was demanded from above and below.
            With the integration struggle in the South, over time white Protestants often abandoned the Democratic Party for the Republicans.  And the few Blacks who had been voting, were now suddenly swept up with the large numbers of new Black voters into the Democratic Party.  Both Blacks and whites remained mostly Protestant, but now they were switching parties.
            Northern Blacks had often been Democrats since the 1920s, but the percentage voting Democrat reached landslide proportions.  Most were Protestants.  With Black demonstrations of the early 1960s, and then riots, and the rise in crime, and anti-white racism, many ethnics groups in the North began to seek refuge in the Republican Party.  The change in immigration laws in the 1960s also led to large-scale numbers from Latin nations, and many of them joined the Democratic coalition.  Rural white America, shrinking in influence, remained a mainstay of the Republicans.
            In 1952 Republicans nominated Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, who had been raised as a Jehovah’s Witness, but who had left that church.  He joined the Presbyterians when elected President.  His opponent, Democrat Adlai Stevenson, had been a Unitarian.  The Democrats nominated Catholic John Kennedy for President in 1960, and he won, and he won even in many southern states.  In 1984 the Democrats nominated Walter Mondale for President and a Catholic woman, Geraldine Ferraro, for Vice-President.  In 1988 the Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis, was Greek Orthodox, and his wife Kitty was Jewish.  The Bush family included in-laws who came from a wealthy Mexican family.  In 2000 the Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate Joseph Lieberman, was a Jew.  In 2008 the Republicans chose Sarah Palin, a woman for the #2 place on the ticket; the Democrats nominated Barack Hussein Obama, for President.  Obama had a foster father who was a Muslim, and he himself was Black.
            Generally, the Republican Party was the Protestant party in the US.  Some may have been on the edge, like Quakers Hoover and Nixon, or a Unitarian like Taft, but overall it was the Protestant Party.  Protestants are still, barely, the majority religion in the US.
            In the Republican debate prior to the South Carolina GOP primary in January 2012, four candidates stood on the stage – Rick Santorum, a dedicated Roman Catholic who has had links to the extreme Opus Dei organization; Newt Gingrich, a convert to Roman Catholicism; Mitt Romney, a Mormon; and Ron Paul, a Baptist, is the only Protestant.  Yet, Paul is the least likely to win the Republican nomination.
Perhaps more telling in the illustrating change in America – the US Supreme Court is compose of nine members.  Today, six are Roman Catholics and three are Jews.  The majority religion is not at all represented on the highest court in the land.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Pres. Obama's State of the Union Speech - HYPOCRISY

     "Let’s never forget:  Millions of Americans who work hard and play by the rules every day deserve a government and a financial system that do the same.  It’s time to apply the same rules from top to bottom.  No bailouts, no handouts, and no copouts.  An America built to last insists on responsibility from everybody." 
     So declared President Obama in his State of the Union Address on 24 January 2012.  He speaks of fairness.  He speaks of applying the same rules from top to bottom.  Well, what about affirmative action?  The means different rules for Blacks, for Hispanics, for Amerindians, for some Asians, and much harder rules for white men and other Asians.  Affirmative action is a bailout for the lazy, for the druggies, for the criminals, and an impediment to all who work hard.  It is a copout for schools who cannot bring some groups up to graduating.  It is a handout to those who vote Democrat.  It is unfair and an outrage.  It shows the utter hypocrisy of President Obama and the media who fail to expose his hypocrisy.  Too bad, this time no one in Congress shouted out "You lie!" 

Monday, January 16, 2012


Below are some short comments from December 2011 and January 2012 concerning stories on Yahoo, the New York Times, and USA Today, and personal encounters.  Topics include a training session for poll workers, King Day, illegal immigrants in Israel and France, campus diversity, Christopher Hitchins, and football player Tim Tebow.  Because I did not renew my NYT subscription, I will probably have far fewer comments on its website.
            On January, Friday the 13th, 2012, I took a bus in the snow to attend a training class for possible poll workers in Wisconsin.  I was such a worker for the November 2010 election, and the government will probably require many more this year.  In addition to the Presidential election in November, there are primaries, second primaries, a possible recall election of Republican Governor Walker, possible primaries to find who might oppose him, etc.  With so many elections in one year, one thinks of the last year of the Weimar Republic!
            Wisconsin Republicans also changed the requirements for voting – a photo ID is now required.  Naturally, the Democrats opposed the legislation alleging that there is no voter fraud, and the elderly and poor will not be allowed to vote.  Yet, a few days ago on The Blaze website, I saw reporters in New Hampshire, where no ID is required, asking for ballots using the names of the dead.  And they received the ballots.  Whether they voted or not is irrelevant, for they demonstrated how easy it is to commit voter fraud.
            The 2-hour training session in Wisconsin was led by a former police woman, probably in her 50s.  She was articulate, but only covered the new laws, rules, and regulations.  It was assume we all knew the old stuff.  A bad assumption (at least in my case).  But we spent 2 hours examining the new regulations, so to cover everything would have taken a full day.
            Toward the conclusion of the program, the trainer told us of an incident when she was working the polls during a popular election.  A gym was the voting venue and it was quite crowded for the election.  A woman approached the table, told the workers her name and address, and awaited them check in the 2 books to be certain she was registered.  Viewing the book upside down, she spotted her name, and the name of her sister.  She did not like her sister.  She began cursing and shouting.  Everything in the gym suddenly stopped.  All eyes were on her.  She surprisingly seized a pen from the worker and scratched out the name of her sister.  Then she moved to the second book and defaced her sister’s name in that book also.  Everyone continued to stare at her in her tantrum.
            Our trainer, a former policewoman, aware that someone might have a weapon, thought of calling 911, but decided to approach her gingerly.  Even though the woman continued shouting curses, our trainer got her the ticket, got her the ballot, and got her to a voting machine, where she cast her ballot.  The trainer then got her out.  She told us the story, and added that her supervisors commended her on her handling of the difficult woman.
            I raised my hand.  “I don’t understand.  You mean she got away with it.”  The session was about to close, and the trainer clearly was not happy with my comment.  Yet, it showed the gap between my views and liberalism.  A woman who disturbs the election process, who defaces government property, who shouts and curses and is out of control, is allowed to vote and leave without any punishment.  Meanwhile, the hundred onlookers can see how one can get away with things, without punishment.  And for her failure to maintain order, the trainer is commended!  And she uses this story to illustrate the proper actions of those who work the polls! 
            It is precisely this attitude that prevails in schools, in courts, in much of American society.  It is also precisely this attitude that, by not punishing misdeeds, encourages them.  In America, we have crime because we refuse to punish crime.  When I was young, this nonsense would not have been permitted at a polling place.  And I cannot imagine anyone entering a government agency in China, defacing government property, and then leaving on a merry way.  Liberalism fosters crime.
            I am sure my comment was not appreciated.  A minute later, when the session closed, the woman beside me began to speak of her petition to recall Gov. Walker.  I will be voting against the liberals again this year.
      A few weeks ago, I was dining with 2 newcomers from China.  They are 19 years old; Their English is weak, and they are taking an intensive program to learn English so they can enroll in an American university.  When we were eating on 6 January I asked them, "In a few weeks, in January, we will have a holiday in America.  What is it?"  One said, "Independence Day."  The waiter came and overheard the response, and began to laugh.  I usually try to keep a straight face, but the reply was so unexpected I had to struggle to keep from laughing myself.  I then informed them that Independence Day is July the 4th.  Then one asked, is it a President's Day.  I answered, Nooo, more like a king's day.  They looked at each other.  But America doesn't have a king.  Then one thought, Oh, Martin Luther King Day.  And so it is today, Martin Luther King Day.
       Hope everyone may have an inspirational day.-----------Hugh Murray
"Israel leads the way with sensible laws to protect itself from invasion. One hopes the US will enact similar laws to halt the millions of invaders in our nation. The article says most of the illegals came from Sudan and Eritrea through Egypt. If there were asylum seekers, why not remain in Egypt? Why did not the UN help them in Egypt? Instead they went to Israel for economic reasons to dilute the culture of Israel. Just as the illegals dilute American culture. Expel the illegals. Ignore the UN and its left-wing agenda."
5 Thumbs Up

"Israel just enacted a new law to round up illegal invaders. France expels more invaders than ever. Other nations are waking up. We can only hope that in the US this year we defeat pro invasion, pro-amnesty candidates like Obama and Gingrich."
3 Thumbs Up

"Commentary? This is smear. Guinta refused to endorse a candidate so he is gutless. If you disagree with me you lack courage. #$%$ I hope Rep. Guinta is given equal time to reply."
http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/soc/updts/y_news.pngResearchers, tribes clash over Native bones http://l.yimg.com/a/i/identity2/profile_48c.png"There is no proof that the remains are related to various tribes. Recall when someone stumbled upon a skeleton in the state of Washington, and the sheriff thought it was a dead white man. Then scientists believed it to be the oldest skeleton found in North America - Kennewick man. What was a white man doing in the Pacific area as the earliest man in North America. Immediately, the Amerindians demanded the remains, though if he were white, he may have been the victim of the Amerindians. Clinton eventually gave away the skeleton to the Amerindians and destroyed the site so one cannot discover other politically incorrect facts. If whites were here before the Amerindians, why do the Amerindians have so many privileges like owning casinos, etc. The bones should be saved for further research by scientists. The law is anti-scientific, as are most left-wing policies. Keep the bones so in future, with scientific advance, we may learn more about the history of humans in North America."
Lawsuit Pits Political Activism Against Campus Diversity
Published: January 9, 2012

·         Hugh Murray
·         Milwaukee
Why just law schools? If you look at application forms for lower posts teaching at community colleges, often one is required to write an essay on diversity. This is in reality a political requirement to teach. Conservatives are weeded out in the application process. Perhaps this fall, most colleges will add a second essay topic: "Is Obama a Great or Merely a Very Good President?"
The point is we have a political test to be hired in most fields at most colleges and universities in the US. I had more freedom teaching in the classrooms in China than I would have had in America.
·                     Jan. 10, 2012 at 9:23 p.m.

New YOrk Times
Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely, With Wit
Published: December 16, 2011

·         Comments
·         Hugh Murray
·         Milwaukee
Note the great contrast between the treatment of Hitchins, who wrote attacking religion, and Rushdie, who was deemed anti-Muslim. Though Hitchins offended the beliefs and sensibilities of many, he could still appear in public and even on TV. Rushdie was hounded into hiding by the fanatical Islamofascists, including those who have invaded and reside in the UK and America.
Hitchins popularized the word Islamofascist. It is a good word for a growing danger.
·                     Dec. 16, 2011 at 7:23 a.m.

Column: When Tim Tebow loses, does God, too?
By Tom Krattenmaker

Catholics usually enter a contest making the sign of the cross. Some also do it when the exit. This has been custom since I was young, and probably for centuries prior. What is different about Tebow is he is making an open Protestant gesture, and suddenly it's big news. Does God lose if Real Madrid loses to the Dutch Ajax? Or if Celtic loses to Rangers?
Don't make a mountain of a mole hill. Catholics have been doing this for centuries. No big deal just because a Protestant decides to make a religious gesture too.