# Spiderman, the left can't leave it alone...black actress won't enter National Monument, slavery....



## 2aguy

Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......

What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?

But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."

First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president. 

---


In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.

But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.

She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....


----------



## 2aguy

And this....

Why did the screenwriters feel compelled to have a young biracial woman say to her white debate coach that she won't go into buildings built by slaves? How did that add to the movie's narrative, help to move the story along?

The answer is, it didn't.

* It's in there just to be divisive. It serves no purpose whatsoever except to denigrate one of the world's great engineering feats (especially in the mid 1800s) and disrespect America's first president. *


----------



## BlackFlag

2aguy said:


> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?


It likely was built, in part, by slaves.  

That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.

Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.


----------



## Mr Natural

That's a shame.


----------



## Moonglow

2aguy said:


> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....


So feeling uncomfortable because of a personal feeling is now only a leftist issue, gheesh what an analogy..


----------



## 2aguy

BlackFlag said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
Click to expand...



Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....

The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......


----------



## Mr Natural

Time for the 2aguy daily whine.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

It was likely built by the same kind of Polish and Irish immigrants that built the White House.


----------



## Pete7469

That's why I contribute nothing to the "entertainment" industry. I ignore their movies and propaganda, I got rid of cable entirely, and I refuse to go to a theater.


----------



## Mr Natural

Pete7469 said:


> That's why I contribute nothing to the "entertainment" industry. I ignore their movies and propaganda, I got rid of cable entirely, and I refuse to go to a theater.




Good!

Better seats and shorter lines for the rest of us.


----------



## BlackFlag

2aguy said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
Click to expand...

The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.


----------



## Death Angel

You'd think real blacks would get tired of these "offended" mulattos speaking for them -- including Obama.


----------



## Pete7469

Death Angel said:


> You'd think real blacks would get tired of these "offended" mulattos speaking for them -- including Obama.



If the black people in this country had a collective epiphany about why after 150 years of "freedom" they find themselves contained primarily in inner city ghettos and in prisons, dependent on subsistence doled out by "the man"... they would probably feed sociopaths like obozo to stray dogs.

Until that time it seems most of the black community will continue to blindly serve their democrook masters every election day.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Why did the screenwriters feel compelled to have a young biracial woman say to her white debate coach that she won't go into buildings built by slaves? *. *



You seem to have a real problem with her being biracial.


----------



## Syriusly

Death Angel said:


> You'd think real blacks would get tired of these "offended" mulattos speaking for them -- including Obama.



I would think that 'real black' would get tired of bitter old white dudes telling African Americans how 'real blacks' should be acting.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
Click to expand...


'every core group in the party'

Core groups in the party include:

African Americans


Asian Americans
Latino Americans
Jewish Americans
Catholic Americans
These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.

The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?

Just good Republicans.




It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.

And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
Click to expand...


The Republicans did a great job in 1865. 

Not such a great job from 1965 onwards.


----------



## BlackFlag

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
Click to expand...

Dubya got over 70% of the Muslim vote.  Trump got 13%.  Whenever a Republican says whatever minority group they're complaining about only votes Democrat because of free stuff, point those Muslim stats out to them.  Those Muslims didn't vote for free stuff, they voted against the party that constantly trashes them.  Same goes for those other "core groups" you listed.


----------



## Harry Dresden

2aguy said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
Click to expand...

republicans are just as racist,they just go about it differently....we have enough examples here in this forum as to how racist they can be.....


----------



## 2aguy

Mr Clean said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I contribute nothing to the "entertainment" industry. I ignore their movies and propaganda, I got rid of cable entirely, and I refuse to go to a theater.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good!
> 
> Better seats and shorter lines for the rest of us.
Click to expand...



What lines.....these days you pre select your seats..there are no lines.


----------



## 2aguy

Harry Dresden said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> republicans are just as racist,they just go about it differently....we have enough examples here in this forum as to how racist they can be.....
Click to expand...



Except...no.  The democrat party is an organization based in racism from it's core groups to it's leadership..........


----------



## 2aguy

BlackFlag said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
Click to expand...



And none of what you just posted is true......got anything else?


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
Click to expand...



Core groups....

La raza......Hispanic racists....

Black lives matter....black racists....

Obama.....sat in an openly racist church for 20 years.

Bill Clinton....when he wasn't raping women and sexually assaulting them he was praising his racist friends and mentors.......


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans did a great job in 1865.
> 
> Not such a great job from 1965 onwards.
Click to expand...


Yeah...and how have minorities faired under the control of the democrat party since 1965?   The hell holes and shooting galleries........but, they do vote democrat every 2 years.....


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans did a great job in 1865.
> 
> Not such a great job from 1965 onwards.
Click to expand...



The democrats...sucked in 1865....and still suck for blacks and other minorities today.............


----------



## Harry Dresden

2aguy said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> republicans are just as racist,they just go about it differently....we have enough examples here in this forum as to how racist they can be.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Except...no.  The democrat party is an organization based in racism from it's core groups to it's leadership..........
Click to expand...

except yes.....are you going to tell me that the republicans show no racism towards minorities?..


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans did a great job in 1865.
> 
> Not such a great job from 1965 onwards.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats...sucked in 1865....and still suck for blacks and other minorities today.............
Click to expand...


Yet African Americans and other minorities choose Democrats- and reject the GOP.

Because of 1965 and onward.

Why do you think that America's minorities are stupid?


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans did a great job in 1865.
> 
> Not such a great job from 1965 onwards.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah...and how have minorities faired under the control of the democrat party since 1965?  ..
Click to expand...


Minorities have decided that they fair better under Democrats than Republicans- which is why they vote Democratic- and not Republican.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Core groups....
> 
> La raza......Hispanic racists....
> 
> Black lives matter....black racists....
> .
Click to expand...

Yep- to bitter old Republicans like you- all of the minorities are racists- and the lily white Republicans are the only non-racists

'every core group in the party'

Core groups in the party include:

African AmericansView attachment 138806
Asian Americans
Latino Americans
Jewish Americans
Catholic Americans
These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.

The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?

Just good Republicans.
View attachment 138804

It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.

And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bill Clinton....when he wasn't raping women and sexually assaulting them he was praising his racist friends and mentors.......
Click to expand...


Donald Trump- when he wasn't raping women and grabbing their pussies, was refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.


----------



## AvgGuyIA

BlackFlag said:


> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery


 The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats you're totally wrong. Even today  democrats treat blacks like they did on the old plantations. Bringing them out when there's work to be done like getting them elected and then sending them back to their urban shack's to be forgotten until the next time.


----------



## AvgGuyIA

They ran out of money and had to stop construction for decades.  Since when is the cost of labor an issue when you have "slaves" working?


----------



## AvgGuyIA

Syriusly said:


> Donald Trump- when he wasn't raping women and grabbing their pussies, was refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.


Probably a good business choice.  I know I'll never contract to own to a black again, not without three times the security deposit I'd require from a white family and then I would think it over again.

Shiftless no account stiffed me, missed payments and squatted for six months paying no rent whatsoever.


----------



## AvgGuyIA

Harry Dresden said:


> except yes.....are you going to tell me that the republicans show no racism towards minorities


 Not by your side's definition of racism.  You people are cartoons.


----------



## Pete7469

2aguy said:


> The democrats...sucked in 1865....and still suck for blacks and other minorities today.............



It's a little worse than "suck". Democrooks are lethal to black people. They came up with "3 strikes" while ramping up police depts with more militaristic gear and leaving them with nothing to do but kick in ghetto doors.

Thanks to democrooks the most dangerous place for a black baby is the womb of their liberal mother.


----------



## Pete7469

AvgGuyIA said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> except yes.....are you going to tell me that the republicans show no racism towards minorities
> 
> 
> 
> Not by your side's definition of racism.  You people are cartoons.
Click to expand...


----------



## BlueGin

2aguy said:


> And this....
> 
> Why did the screenwriters feel compelled to have a young biracial woman say to her white debate coach that she won't go into buildings built by slaves? How did that add to the movie's narrative, help to move the story along?
> 
> The answer is, it didn't.
> 
> * It's in there just to be divisive. It serves no purpose whatsoever except to denigrate one of the world's great engineering feats (especially in the mid 1800s) and disrespect America's first president. *


That's why the left puts African Americans in film ...so they can whine about racism.

Have you seen Timeless? That's all the black guy does every episode. "Waaa there's no place in time that I'm welcome waaa".

I guess they think they are being good SJW's or something.

Their not.


----------



## miketx

BlackFlag said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
Click to expand...

NO, this is EXACTLY how the lefttard pos in hollywood hurt our country and jackass like you play along like it's nothing.


----------



## Pete7469

AvgGuyIA said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Donald Trump- when he wasn't raping women and grabbing their pussies, was refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably a good business choice.  I know I'll never contract to own to a black again, not without three times the security deposit I'd require from a white family and then I would think it over again.
> 
> Shiftless no account stiffed me, missed payments and squatted for six months paying no rent whatsoever.
Click to expand...


You didn't get references and credit history? I long for the day when a hand shake was good enough but those are past with anyone.


----------



## Marion Morrison

Okay! Pass.

What's up with this thing that's supposed to be good like Avatar? Anyone know?


----------



## Divine Wind

2aguy said:


> And this....
> 
> Why did the screenwriters feel compelled to have a young biracial woman say to her white debate coach that she won't go into buildings built by slaves? How did that add to the movie's narrative, help to move the story along?
> 
> The answer is, it didn't.
> 
> * It's in there just to be divisive. It serves no purpose whatsoever except to denigrate one of the world's great engineering feats (especially in the mid 1800s) and disrespect America's first president. *


Or, it's there to be "hip", appeal to young, idealistic viewers who think it's awesome to tear down monuments built during an era of slavery in order to sell more tickets.  Hollywood is the modern Whore of Babylon.  They'll do anything to make a buck, but sometimes like to jerk themselves off doing it.


----------



## Death Angel

Syriusly said:


> Death Angel said:
> 
> 
> 
> You'd think real blacks would get tired of these "offended" mulattos speaking for them -- including Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would think that 'real black' would get tired of bitter old white dudes telling African Americans how 'real blacks' should be acting.
Click to expand...

Im not old. Sorry I stepped over the line onto the liberal white plantation.


----------



## Nia88

You gotta be a snowflake to be offended by a scene in a Spiderman movie. You conservatives talk so much crap about Hollywood. Why do you even bother going to the movies if you're going to whine about Hollywood leftist.


----------



## Nia88

Death Angel said:


> You'd think real blacks would get tired of these "offended" mulattos speaking for them -- including Obama.



Being biracial doesn't mean you cannot speak on black issues. Being black is a side of them. Even further, society still treats them as if they were fully black due to the 1 drop rule from back in the day. 

You conservatives don't think biracial people should speak on issues black issues because they're not fully black , but will call a biracial person a ****** or monkey in a heartbeat.


----------



## Divine Wind

Nia88 said:


> You gotta be a snowflake to be offended by a scene in a Spiderman movie. You conservatives talk so much crap about Hollywood. Why do you even bother going to the movies if you're going to whine about Hollywood leftist.


I rarely go to movies.  Not because they are made by flakes and pinkos, but because they are too expensive and too noisy.  Better for me to wait for the DVD to come out on Netflix.


----------



## blackhawk

Eh just sounds like someone trying to get their Hollywood PC rating upgraded just like they did in Star trek Beyond when after six movies with orginal cast and two with the new they decide to make the character of Sulu gay mainly it seems because the actor who orginally played him is gay. I really didn't give a flip about Sulu now being gay nor do I care about this in Spiderman it won't change my views on either topic.


----------



## Theowl32

The democrats still own those people and those people are still by owned by those people in that shit continent called Africa. 

Every country run by those people are nothing but disgusting cesspools. 

Personally, I think it is funny that those people still don't know they are owned by their massas. 

Fucking hilarious.  The best part is they always will be. Those people are such an embarrassing disaster to the world and they have no clue.

Lol..


----------



## Theowl32

blackhawk said:


> Eh just sounds like someone trying to get their Hollywood PC rating upgraded just like they did in Star trek Beyond when after six movies with orginal cast and two with the new they decide to make the character of Sulu gay mainly it seems because the actor who orginally played him is gay. I really didn't give a flip about Sulu now being gay nor do I care about this in Spiderman it won't change my views on either topic.


Don't forget the new disaster star wars movie directed by that jewish commie liberal jj abrams.

He just had to make the only conscientious objector stormtrooper to the evil empire  (whatever they call it) happened to be a black guy.

Of course the hero of the movie was a cute girl who 1 hour before never flew the Millennium falcon and all of a sudden an expert and best pilot in the galaxy and knew more about it than white Han solo.

She picks up the force faster than anyone, and is of course chased through the woods with the black man by an evil white guy with a saber that resembled a burning cross.

She of course is stronger than him and defeats him....

Liberals.....sigh


----------



## Divine Wind

Nia88 said:


> Being biracial doesn't mean you cannot speak on black issues. Being black is a side of them.* Even further, society still treats them as if they were fully black due to the 1 drop rule from back in the day.*
> 
> You conservatives don't think biracial people should speak on issues black issues because they're not fully black , but will call a biracial person a ****** or monkey in a heartbeat.


Society being "blacks" and their Liberal supporters.   We have racists on this forum who support the "1 drop rule".   

Remember when Tiger Woods first came to fame?  Racists wanted him to be "black" and support "black" causes, but being mostly Chinese and several cultural/racial background he came up with "'Cabalasian".  It pissed off the "black community" to no end.  Why?  Because they consider everyone with "one drop of black blood" to be black and if that person doesn't claim to be black, they consider him/her a race traitor.


----------



## BlueGin

Theowl32 said:


> blackhawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eh just sounds like someone trying to get their Hollywood PC rating upgraded just like they did in Star trek Beyond when after six movies with orginal cast and two with the new they decide to make the character of Sulu gay mainly it seems because the actor who orginally played him is gay. I really didn't give a flip about Sulu now being gay nor do I care about this in Spiderman it won't change my views on either topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget the new disaster star wars movie directed by that jewish commie liberal jj abrams.
> 
> He just had to make the only conscientious objector stormtrooper to the evil empire  (whatever they call it) happened to be a black guy.
> 
> Of course the hero of the movie was a cute girl who 1 hour before never flew the Millennium falcon and all of a sudden an expert and best pilot in the galaxy and knew more about it than white Han solo.
> 
> She picks up the force faster than anyone, and is of course chased through the woods with the black man by an evil white guy with a saber that resembled a burning cross.
> 
> She of course is stronger than him and defeats him....
> 
> Liberals.....sigh
Click to expand...

I liked Finn. Rey on the other hand was an annoying know it all. Let hope they tone her down a notch or two in the next one.


----------



## jknowgood

BlackFlag said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
Click to expand...

You're kidding, right?
Republicans celebrate our history on how we became the country, that everyone wants to come to.
What civil rights do we want to get rid of? I guess your talking about the right a girl doesn't have to change in front of a grown man?
It's liberals that celebrate the killings of black babies daily, through abortion. We want justice in cities like Chicago, you know the one that obama is from.


----------



## Death Angel

Nia88 said:


> Even further, society still treats them as if they were fully black due to the 1 drop rule from back in the day.


No, "society" doesn't. THEY choose that for themselves. Never understood why they'd choose that as their race, but they nearly always do, from Obama to Marriah Carrey to Halley Berry, they always consider themselves "black."


----------



## BlueGin

Divine.Wind said:


> Nia88 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being biracial doesn't mean you cannot speak on black issues. Being black is a side of them.* Even further, society still treats them as if they were fully black due to the 1 drop rule from back in the day.*
> 
> You conservatives don't think biracial people should speak on issues black issues because they're not fully black , but will call a biracial person a ****** or monkey in a heartbeat.
> 
> 
> 
> Society being "blacks" and their Liberal supporters.   We have racists on this forum who support the "1 drop rule".
> 
> Remember when Tiger Woods first came to fame?  Racists wanted him to be "black" and support "black" causes, but being mostly Chinese and several cultural/racial background he came up with "'Cabalasian".  It pissed off the "black community" to no end.  Why?  Because they consider everyone with "one drop of black blood" to be black and if that person doesn't claim to be black, they consider him/her a race traitor.
Click to expand...

Then you have the black racists who would whine every time Zoe Saldana was cast in "black roles" because she was too white.


----------



## jknowgood

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
Click to expand...


----------



## Death Angel

BlueGin said:


> Then you have the black racists who would whine every time Zoe Saldana was cast in "black roles" because she was too white.


Hey, are white people allowed to whine about the "crime" of "cultural appropriation"?

She's got WHITE hair! She's not allowed to have WHITE hair!!!


----------



## 2aguy

Nia88 said:


> You gotta be a snowflake to be offended by a scene in a Spiderman movie. You conservatives talk so much crap about Hollywood. Why do you even bother going to the movies if you're going to whine about Hollywood leftist.





Letting people know that the left will corrupt everything they touch...even something that is supposed to be innocent fun...that isn't being a snowflake, that is defining the fight that we have on our hands......the left does not stop.....they do not rest...they will attack from every direction they can find.......and this is a kids movie.....they know they need to start the America hate early.....


----------



## Divine Wind

Death Angel said:


> BlueGin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then you have the black racists who would whine every time Zoe Saldana was cast in "black roles" because she was too white.
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, are white people allowed to whine about the "crime" of "cultural appropriation"?
> 
> She's got WHITE hair! She's not allowed to have WHITE hair!!!
Click to expand...

"Cultural appropriation" is as big a bullshit con job as "white privilege".


----------



## Harry Dresden

AvgGuyIA said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> except yes.....are you going to tell me that the republicans show no racism towards minorities
> 
> 
> 
> Not by your side's definition of racism.  You people are cartoons.
Click to expand...

my side?....oh here it goes,the labeling....i dont agree with you so lets start the name calling....am i a lefty this week guy?....


----------



## Divine Wind

Harry Dresden said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> except yes.....are you going to tell me that the republicans show no racism towards minorities
> 
> 
> 
> Not by your side's definition of racism.  You people are cartoons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> my side?....oh here it goes,the labeling....i dont agree with you so lets start the name calling....am i a lefty this week guy?....
Click to expand...

Funny and agreed about name-calling.  Yes, some on the right, including Republicans, do show "racism towards minorities".  Do you agree Democrats do the same?  Neither side holds the moral high ground when it comes to avoiding divisive actions.


----------



## Harry Dresden

Divine.Wind said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> except yes.....are you going to tell me that the republicans show no racism towards minorities
> 
> 
> 
> Not by your side's definition of racism.  You people are cartoons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> my side?....oh here it goes,the labeling....i dont agree with you so lets start the name calling....am i a lefty this week guy?....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Funny and agreed about name-calling.  Yes, some on the right, including Republicans, do show "racism towards minorities".  Do you agree Democrats do the same?  Neither side holds the moral high ground when it comes to avoiding divisive actions.
Click to expand...

both sides have racist asswipes.....as i have said many a time here....Republicans tell you to your face they dont like you,Democrats tell the minorities how they are for you and are with you but please just dont move in next door....


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

BlackFlag said:


> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.



Exactly, so why inject unnecessary politics into it?


----------



## Harry Dresden

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, so why inject unnecessary politics into it?
Click to expand...

ask 2 a guy.....he would bring politics into a Documentary on making shoes....


----------



## Divine Wind

Harry Dresden said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> except yes.....are you going to tell me that the republicans show no racism towards minorities
> 
> 
> 
> Not by your side's definition of racism.  You people are cartoons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> my side?....oh here it goes,the labeling....i dont agree with you so lets start the name calling....am i a lefty this week guy?....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Funny and agreed about name-calling.  Yes, some on the right, including Republicans, do show "racism towards minorities".  Do you agree Democrats do the same?  Neither side holds the moral high ground when it comes to avoiding divisive actions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> both sides have racist asswipes.....as i have said many a time here....Republicans tell you to your face they dont like you,Democrats tell the minorities how they are for you and are with you but please just dont move in next door....
Click to expand...

Sad but true.  It's an old story; the rich and powerful taking advantage of those less fortunate.


----------



## bodecea

2aguy said:


> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....


Such a victim....


----------



## Divine Wind

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, so why inject unnecessary politics into it?
Click to expand...

To generate "buzz", like this thread, and, they hope, make a shitload of cash selling tickets.


----------



## bodecea

2aguy said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> republicans are just as racist,they just go about it differently....we have enough examples here in this forum as to how racist they can be.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Except...no.  The democrat party is an organization based in racism from it's core groups to it's leadership..........
Click to expand...

Keep telling yourself that......


----------



## bodecea

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bill Clinton....when he wasn't raping women and sexually assaulting them he was praising his racist friends and mentors.......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump- when he wasn't raping women and grabbing their pussies, was refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
Click to expand...

Hey!  That's not racist at all.


----------



## Death Angel

Divine.Wind said:


> To generate "buzz", like this thread, and, they hope, make a shitload of cash selling tickets.


Yeah, that'll get people lining up to see it.

Rush says you're being "too smart by half"


----------



## bodecea

BlueGin said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> And this....
> 
> Why did the screenwriters feel compelled to have a young biracial woman say to her white debate coach that she won't go into buildings built by slaves? How did that add to the movie's narrative, help to move the story along?
> 
> The answer is, it didn't.
> 
> * It's in there just to be divisive. It serves no purpose whatsoever except to denigrate one of the world's great engineering feats (especially in the mid 1800s) and disrespect America's first president. *
> 
> 
> 
> That's why the left puts African Americans in film ...so they can whine about racism.
> 
> Have you seen Timeless? That's all the black guy does every episode. "Waaa there's no place in time that I'm welcome waaa".
> 
> I guess they think they are being good SJW's or something.
> 
> Their not.
Click to expand...

That's not racist.


----------



## bodecea

Theowl32 said:


> The democrats still own those people and those people are still by owned by those people in that shit continent called Africa.
> 
> Every country run by those people are nothing but disgusting cesspools.
> 
> Personally, I think it is funny that those people still don't know they are owned by their massas.
> 
> Fucking hilarious.  The best part is they always will be. Those people are such an embarrassing disaster to the world and they have no clue.
> 
> Lol..


That's not racist either.


----------



## bodecea

Theowl32 said:


> blackhawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eh just sounds like someone trying to get their Hollywood PC rating upgraded just like they did in Star trek Beyond when after six movies with orginal cast and two with the new they decide to make the character of Sulu gay mainly it seems because the actor who orginally played him is gay. I really didn't give a flip about Sulu now being gay nor do I care about this in Spiderman it won't change my views on either topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget the new disaster star wars movie directed by that jewish commie liberal jj abrams.
> 
> He just had to make the only conscientious objector stormtrooper to the evil empire  (whatever they call it) happened to be a black guy.
> 
> Of course the hero of the movie was a cute girl who 1 hour before never flew the Millennium falcon and all of a sudden an expert and best pilot in the galaxy and knew more about it than white Han solo.
> 
> She picks up the force faster than anyone, and is of course chased through the woods with the black man by an evil white guy with a saber that resembled a burning cross.
> 
> She of course is stronger than him and defeats him....
> 
> Liberals.....sigh
Click to expand...

That's not racist, anti-semitic, or misgynist either.


----------



## bodecea

jknowgood said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> View attachment 138848
Click to expand...

Nice fake pin.


----------



## fncceo

Warning: Thar be spoilers y'ere!

OK ... I saw the film last night (finally).  I liked it.  I think they got the young Peter Parker persona down pretty well.  The low-level superhero caught up in a bigger game.  Good story.  Michael Keaton was actually scary as The Vulture.

The film didn't skimp on Avenger cameos like some Marvel stand-alone Avenger films ('Ant Man', 'Dead Pool' ... looking at you, guys.).  They brought back Pepper Potts!  I'm glad.  She was a major motivation for Tony Stark to become Ironman and he is ungrounded and angst-ridden without her.  Note to Marvel, malaise isn't an attractive personality trait in a super hero (just ask D.C.).  P.S.  Can't stand Gwyneth Paltrow as a person but she is a fine actor.

It looks to be one of Marvel's best and fresher franchises (and I've never been a Spider-Man fan).

As for the 'teachable moment' regarding the role of slaves in building our Nation's capitol, I don't believe it was done to preach.  It was done to establish MJ as a rebel and smarter than her teachers, important if she's going to become the conscience and confidant of Spiderman. I love her acerbic personality and suppressed sexuality.  I am excited that Spiderman's girlfriend is Daria Morgendorfer.  It's an established fact that then legal slaves did much of the construction of the White House and other capitol monuments.  I don't think we should deny it or bemoan it ... note that the moment in the film was handled with comedy, not priggish pedagogue.


----------



## Call Sign Chaos

2aguy said:


> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....



I'll be getting it off piratebay.  The post modernists have already infected the marvel comics for sometime, hopefully they won't be allowed to torch the MCU.


----------



## Call Sign Chaos

bodecea said:


> jknowgood said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> View attachment 138848
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nice fake pin.
Click to expand...


By her own admission sheets Byrd was Clintons mentor you Nazi fucks.


----------



## 2aguy

fncceo said:


> Warning: Thar be spoilers y'ere!
> 
> OK ... I saw the film last night (finally).  I liked it.  I think they got the young Peter Parker persona down pretty well.  The low-level superhero caught up in a bigger game.  Good story.  Michael Keaton was actually scary as The Vulture.
> 
> The film didn't skimp on Avenger cameos like some Marvel stand-alone Avenger films ('Ant Man', 'Dead Pool' ... looking at you, guys.).  They brought back Pepper Potts!  I'm glad.  She was a major motivation for Tony Stark to become Ironman and he is ungrounded and angst-ridden without her.  Note to Marvel, malaise isn't an attractive personality trait in a super hero (just ask D.C.).  P.S.  Can't stand Gwyneth Paltrow as a person but she is a fine actor.
> 
> It looks to be one of Marvel's best and fresher franchises (and I've never been a Spider-Man fan).
> 
> As for the 'teachable moment' regarding the role of slaves in building our Nation's capitol, I don't believe it was done to preach.  It was done to establish MJ as a rebel and smarter than her teachers, important if she's going to become the conscience and confidant of Spiderman. I love her acerbic personality and suppressed sexuality.  I am excited that Spiderman's girlfriend is Daria Morgendorfer.  It's an established fact that then legal slaves did much of the construction of the White House and other capitol monuments.  I don't think we should deny it or bemoan it ... note that the moment in the film was handled with comedy, not priggish pedagogue.




actually, no, it apparently isn't established fact....


----------



## Call Sign Chaos

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'every core group in the party'
> 
> Core groups in the party include:
> 
> African AmericansView attachment 138806
> Asian Americans
> Latino Americans
> Jewish Americans
> Catholic Americans
> These are the 'groups' 2aguy thinks are racists.
> 
> The white guys waving the Confederate flag at the Trump rally?
> 
> Just good Republicans.
> View attachment 138804
> 
> It must be fascinating to be African American in the United States have have the rather lily white Republicans say that the real racists are African Americans- and Latino Americans- and Asian Americans.
> 
> And then the GOP wonders why minorities overwhelmingly reject the Republican Party.
Click to expand...


Post modernist neo-Marxist propaganda, take your virtue signaling divide and conquer identity politics nonsense and shove it up your ass and enjoy not having a national party you irrelevant little nothing.


----------



## Call Sign Chaos

bodecea said:


> Theowl32 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blackhawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eh just sounds like someone trying to get their Hollywood PC rating upgraded just like they did in Star trek Beyond when after six movies with orginal cast and two with the new they decide to make the character of Sulu gay mainly it seems because the actor who orginally played him is gay. I really didn't give a flip about Sulu now being gay nor do I care about this in Spiderman it won't change my views on either topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget the new disaster star wars movie directed by that jewish commie liberal jj abrams.
> 
> He just had to make the only conscientious objector stormtrooper to the evil empire  (whatever they call it) happened to be a black guy.
> 
> Of course the hero of the movie was a cute girl who 1 hour before never flew the Millennium falcon and all of a sudden an expert and best pilot in the galaxy and knew more about it than white Han solo.
> 
> She picks up the force faster than anyone, and is of course chased through the woods with the black man by an evil white guy with a saber that resembled a burning cross.
> 
> She of course is stronger than him and defeats him....
> 
> Liberals.....sigh
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not racist, anti-semitic, or misgynist either.
Click to expand...


You're an Islam apologist you support an invasion of western civilization by tens of millions of misogynistic, anti-Semitic, theocratic, homophobes with a sizable proclivity for political violence so GFYS you illiberal post modernist scum.


----------



## AvgGuyIA

Pete7469 said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Donald Trump- when he wasn't raping women and grabbing their pussies, was refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably a good business choice.  I know I'll never contract to own to a black again, not without three times the security deposit I'd require from a white family and then I would think it over again.
> 
> Shiftless no account stiffed me, missed payments and squatted for six months paying no rent whatsoever.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn't get references and credit history? I long for the day when a hand shake was good enough but those are past with anyone.
Click to expand...

I knew his parents.  They lived across the street from the house I was contracting.  Decent, nice people so I was giving their son and his wife a break so they could own a house.  It was my deceased parents house and I'm the trustee.  I fucked up giving this black bastard a break.  Never again.


----------



## Syriusly

AvgGuyIA said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery
> 
> 
> 
> The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats .
Click to expand...


The Confederate flag is not being waved at Democratic rallys. It was being waved at Trump rallys.

The switch started happening in the 1930's- under FDR- as African Americans started to move from Republican to Democrat- but the switch was completed after 1964- when the GOP nominated for President a man who had voted against the Civil Rights Act.


----------



## Syriusly

Pete7469 said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats...sucked in 1865....and still suck for blacks and other minorities today.............
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a little worse than "suck". Democrooks are lethal to black people. T
Click to expand...


Another bitter old white dude who is telling African Americans that he is smarter than African Americans.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery
> 
> 
> 
> The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Confederate flag is not being waved at Democratic rallys. It was being waved at Trump rallys.
> 
> The switch started happening in the 1930's- under FDR- as African Americans started to move from Republican to Democrat- but the switch was completed after 1964- when the GOP nominated for President a man who had voted against the Civil Rights Act.
Click to expand...



They voted for the biggest racist in the race lyndon johnson who voted against every single Civil Rights act up until he realized that the klan wasn't able to murder enough blacks to keep them from voting.....then, when the toughest civil rights fights were over....he voted for the last of the Civil Rights acts...having also voted Against...yes, against the anti Lynching laws....

Berry Goldwater......was a Civil Rights Hero......

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign. Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.

Why did he vote against the 1964 Civil Rights act...after voting for the other Civil Rights acts to that point...?

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist,* Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *

Blacks voted for an actual racist....lyndon johnson, and failed to support an actual Civil Rights hero....genius...


----------



## 2aguy

Andrew Klavan explains why this crap actually matters.......news is here for a day, movies and art last forever...the left knows this...and they use it...just like this scene from Spiderman...

He talks about how they change history, how they demonize their enemies, and he brings up his actual experiences in Hollywood.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery
> 
> 
> 
> The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Confederate flag is not being waved at Democratic rallys. It was being waved at Trump rallys.
> 
> The switch started happening in the 1930's- under FDR- as African Americans started to move from Republican to Democrat- but the switch was completed after 1964- when the GOP nominated for President a man who had voted against the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They voted for the biggest racist
Click to expand...


Lyndon Johnson- pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Barry Goldwater- voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. 

And from 1964 onward, African Americans voted Democratic. 

You think that minorities are racists- everyone to you is a racist except of course the bitter old white dudes in the Republican Party.

And that explains why minorities think of the Republican Party as the party that welcomes racists


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> [
> Blacks voted for an actual racist....lyndon johnson, and failed to support an actual Civil Rights hero....genius...



So again- you just think blacks are stupider than you are. 

And then you proclaim how blacks are the real racists.


----------



## Correll

2aguy said:


> And this....
> 
> Why did the screenwriters feel compelled to have a young biracial woman say to her white debate coach that she won't go into buildings built by slaves? How did that add to the movie's narrative, help to move the story along?
> 
> The answer is, it didn't.
> 
> * It's in there just to be divisive. It serves no purpose whatsoever except to denigrate one of the world's great engineering feats (especially in the mid 1800s) and disrespect America's first president. *



Yep. 

Pure political anti-American propaganda.


Hollywood needs a good purging.


----------



## Correll

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery
> 
> 
> 
> The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Confederate flag is not being waved at Democratic rallys. It was being waved at Trump rallys.
> 
> The switch started happening in the 1930's- under FDR- as African Americans started to move from Republican to Democrat- but the switch was completed after 1964- when the GOP nominated for President a man who had voted against the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They voted for the biggest racist
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson- pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Barry Goldwater- voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> And from 1964 onward, African Americans voted Democratic.
> 
> You think that minorities are racists- everyone to you is a racist except of course the bitter old white dudes in the Republican Party.
> 
> And that explains why minorities think of the Republican Party as the party that welcomes racists
Click to expand...



Because barry goldwater?

That was sixty fucking years ago?

You really think that that is what is driving block voting by minorities?


----------



## PredFan

2aguy said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
Click to expand...


Exactly, no one is more racist than the Democrat Party, no one.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> Blacks voted for an actual racist....lyndon johnson, and failed to support an actual Civil Rights hero....genius...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So again- you just think blacks are stupider than you are.
> 
> And then you proclaim how blacks are the real racists.
Click to expand...



They voted for the actual racist and for the political party, at the time of that election, that was mirdering blacks and republicans to keep them from voting........and they voted against Barry Goldwater...a Civil Rights hero.......and they voted for Lyndon Johnson...a guy who voted against all the civil rights acts up till the last ones...and voted against the anti lynching law...

You tell us how that makes any sense...


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery
> 
> 
> 
> The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Confederate flag is not being waved at Democratic rallys. It was being waved at Trump rallys.
> 
> The switch started happening in the 1930's- under FDR- as African Americans started to move from Republican to Democrat- but the switch was completed after 1964- when the GOP nominated for President a man who had voted against the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They voted for the biggest racist
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson- pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Barry Goldwater- voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> And from 1964 onward, African Americans voted Democratic.
> 
> You think that minorities are racists- everyone to you is a racist except of course the bitter old white dudes in the Republican Party.
> 
> And that explains why minorities think of the Republican Party as the party that welcomes racists
Click to expand...



I posted the links...obj voted against all the civil rights acts until it was obvious that blacks were going to be able to vote...he voted against the law that would fight the hanging of black men.......Barry Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero........an actual fighter for Civil Rights...and as my link showed, he voted against giving government more power to attack citizens in this country.....


La Raza is racist.

BLack lives matter is racist.

The New Black Panthers are racist.

THe Southern Poverty Law Center is racist.....

They all support the democrat party.......


----------



## reconmark

Tipsycatlover said:


> It was likely built by the same kind of Polish and Irish immigrants that built the White House.


The D.C. commissioners, charged by Congress with building the new city under the direction of the president, initially planned to import workers from Europe to meet their labor needs. However, response to recruitment was dismal and soon they turned to *African Americans—both enslaved and free—to provide the bulk of labor that built the White House, the United States Capitol, and other early government buildings.*
Q&A: Did slaves build the White House?

You must really love being the dumbest kid on the block...


----------



## 2aguy

reconmark said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was likely built by the same kind of Polish and Irish immigrants that built the White House.
> 
> 
> 
> The D.C. commissioners, charged by Congress with building the new city under the direction of the president, initially planned to import workers from Europe to meet their labor needs. However, response to recruitment was dismal and soon they turned to *African Americans—both enslaved and free—to provide the bulk of labor that built the White House, the United States Capitol, and other early government buildings.*
> Q&A: Did slaves build the White House?
> 
> You must really love being the dumbest kid on the block...
Click to expand...



Dumb shit...the building in Question is the Washington Monument...and even Slate Magazine says they don't know.....since it was built in 1848.....

Spider-Man: Homecoming Says the Washington Monument Was Built by Slaves. Was It?






This part of the monument that Spidey is holding on to was not built by slaves.
CMTG, Inc.

_Spider-Man: Homecoming_ is very good, but it’s important to discuss the film’s glaring flaw. Sure, it gave us the opportunity to finally see a true teenage Peter Parker. Sure, we finally got to see Donald Glover in a Spider-Man movie. Sure, the movie uses Michael Keaton perfectly as a villain. Sure, seeing Spidey running through a golf course at night while being sprayed by sprinklers was one of the more fun Marvel moments in recent memory. But none of this can compensate for the scene where Zendaya’s character, Michelle, refuses to join her high-school peers inside of the Washington Monument because, she says, it was “built by slaves.” Her teacher, played by Martin Starr, assures her it’s not so and turns to a nearby guard for support, only for the guard to shrug and give him an expression that says, well, _kinda_.

Sorry, Michelle, but we don’t actually know that the Washington Monument was built by slaves. We only know that there’s a _very good chance_ it was. It’s kind of like how we’re not definitely sure Chicken McNuggets are made of undesirable chicken parts, we’re only _pretty sure_, so we just go ahead and eat them because they’re delicious, you can get 10 pieces for a very good price, and this is America, dammit.

Advertisement 

You see, Michelle, it’s very simple. Around 1832, the Washington National Monument Society—whose members included John Marshall and James Madison—became responsible for raising money to create a monument to honor of our nation’s first president, who never did anything that could be considered morally repugnant and was a terrific man by all accounts. After a couple of years raising money in one-dollar increments—just like the Bernie Sanders campaign—the society held a contest for the monument’s design.

ADVERTISING
The winner of that contest was Robert Mills, a famous architect and Freemason who is also responsible for the design of other beautiful American structures like the Treasury Building and the General Post Office, which every D.C. resident now knows as that weird hotel across the street from the Spy Museum and that Shake Shack that never has any seats open. Are you following me, Michelle?

Because of funding problems that had hindered the project from the beginning, only the obelisk part of Mills’ design was constructed. What we now call the “first phase” of the monument’s construction began in 1848, prior to abolition. This first phase saw the construction of the first 150 feet or so of the monument and ended in 1854 when the Washington National Monument Society’s funding ran out. If—_if—_slave labor was used during the monument’s construction it would have been during this phase. To spell it out for you, Michelle, let’s turn to Jesse Holland, a respected historian, journalist, and author of the book _Black Men Built the Capitol_, who wrote in an email:

*There has not been any clear evidence found to prove that slaves were used in the construction of the Washington Monument: no receipts, no log entries, no newspaper stories. We have all of those proving the use of slave construction on the U.S. Capitol and the White House. But we have yet to discover irrefutable evidence that slaves were used in the construction of the Washington Monument.*


----------



## BlueGin

MJ really has no purpose for being in this version of Spider man at all...other than to just be a sarcastic twat...n.o.n.e.


----------



## JimBowie1958

Moonglow said:


> So feeling uncomfortable because of a personal feeling is now only a leftist issue, gheesh what an analogy..


That is not what the OP is about, dude.

It is just one more pointless example of the Hate-America-Firsters like you taking a sucker punch at Uncle Sam.


----------



## BlackFlag

10 pages of conservative butthurt over 10 - 15 seconds of a kids movie.  Hilarious


----------



## JimBowie1958

2aguy said:


> Bill Clinton....when he wasn't raping women and sexually assaulting them he was praising his racist friends and mentors.......



This video says it all.


----------



## JimBowie1958

Nia88 said:


> You conservatives don't think biracial people should speak on issues black issues because they're not fully black , but will call a biracial person a ****** or monkey in a heartbeat.


It has been decades since I was in the presence of a white person that called another person a ******.

There are only three kinds of people who still drop the N-bomb all over the place; blacks who think it is cool to have a word that they can use and no one else, other minorities when talking about blacks in private, and white liberals trying to mimic what they think white conservatives sound like.


----------



## JimBowie1958

2aguy said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's an established fact that then legal slaves did much of the construction of the White House and other capitol monuments.  I don't think we should deny it or bemoan it ... note that the moment in the film was handled with comedy, not priggish pedagogue.
> 
> 
> 
> actually, no, it apparently isn't established fact....
Click to expand...

While it is not an established fact that some slaves were used as labor at times in everything built in slave state Maryland, DC, and Virginia prior to the Civil War, it is the odds on favorite that it was.

But so what?

Do people say that they wont enter the Colosseum in Rome or the Acropolis in Athens because some slave labor was used in some of its construction in all likelihood?

No, of course not, because white people are not trying to milk guilt from centuries ago like some are today.


----------



## bodecea

Syriusly said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats...sucked in 1865....and still suck for blacks and other minorities today.............
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a little worse than "suck". Democrooks are lethal to black people. T
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another bitter old white dude who is telling African Americans that he is smarter than African Americans.
Click to expand...

Aren't they the most sensitive snowflakes ever?


----------



## Syriusly

JimBowie1958 said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> So feeling uncomfortable because of a personal feeling is now only a leftist issue, gheesh what an analogy..
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what the OP is about, dude.
> 
> It is just one more pointless example of the Hate-America-Firsters like you taking a sucker punch at Uncle Sam.
Click to expand...


LOL.

To Jim Bowie- hating slavery is hating America.


----------



## Syriusly

bodecea said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats...sucked in 1865....and still suck for blacks and other minorities today.............
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a little worse than "suck". Democrooks are lethal to black people. T
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another bitter old white dude who is telling African Americans that he is smarter than African Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Aren't they the most sensitive snowflakes ever?
Click to expand...


Yep- they just want to play the victim card over and over.


----------



## Syriusly

Correll said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery
> 
> 
> 
> The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Confederate flag is not being waved at Democratic rallys. It was being waved at Trump rallys.
> 
> The switch started happening in the 1930's- under FDR- as African Americans started to move from Republican to Democrat- but the switch was completed after 1964- when the GOP nominated for President a man who had voted against the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They voted for the biggest racist
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson- pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Barry Goldwater- voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> And from 1964 onward, African Americans voted Democratic.
> 
> You think that minorities are racists- everyone to you is a racist except of course the bitter old white dudes in the Republican Party.
> 
> And that explains why minorities think of the Republican Party as the party that welcomes racists
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Because barry goldwater?
> 
> That was sixty fucking years ago?
> 
> You really think that that is what is driving block voting by minorities?
Click to expand...


No- what is driving voting by everyone is what they perceive to be their best interest. 

Minorities clearly identify far more with the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party- and have ever since the GOP nominated for President the influential Senator from Arizona who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> Blacks voted for an actual racist....lyndon johnson, and failed to support an actual Civil Rights hero....genius...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So again- you just think blacks are stupider than you are.
> 
> And then you proclaim how blacks are the real racists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They voted for the actual racist ...
> You tell us how that makes any sense...
Click to expand...


Because African Americans don't believe your version. Because African Americans are smart enough to make their own decisions and recognize that people like you- within the GOP ranks- considers African Americans to be the "real racists."

LBJ advocated for, pushed through, and signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The GOP nominated for President the man that tried to torpedo the 1964 Civil Rights Act- Barry Goldwater.

Who else opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act?

Ronald Reagan
George Bush 

Wow- look- thats three GOP Presidential nominees who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

You keep wanting to tell African Americans that they are all racists- and they are all stupid- because they are Democrats.

You are an example of why minorities treat the GOP like a plague colony.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvgGuyIA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery
> 
> 
> 
> The roots of the Republican Party go back to anti-slavery. It's the reason for their formation. If you're suggesting that the parties switched places and today's Republicans are the former Democrats .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Confederate flag is not being waved at Democratic rallys. It was being waved at Trump rallys.
> 
> The switch started happening in the 1930's- under FDR- as African Americans started to move from Republican to Democrat- but the switch was completed after 1964- when the GOP nominated for President a man who had voted against the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They voted for the biggest racist
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson- pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Barry Goldwater- voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> And from 1964 onward, African Americans voted Democratic.
> 
> You think that minorities are racists- everyone to you is a racist except of course the bitter old white dudes in the Republican Party.
> 
> And that explains why minorities think of the Republican Party as the party that welcomes racists
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I posted the links...obj voted against all the civil rights acts until it was obvious that blacks were going to be able to vote...he voted against the law that would fight the hanging of black men.......Barry Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero.......
Click to expand...


LBJ fought for an passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Barry Goldwater fought against the single most important Civil Rights legislation of the era.

And the GOP nominated him for President. 

Which is why Martin Luther King Jr. called on African Americans to vote against Barry Goldwater.

But you also consider MLK Jr. to be stupid and ignorant.

Just as you consider African Americans to be the 'real racists'......


----------



## WEATHER53

It's the crutch that keeps on giving


----------



## Moonglow

Syriusly said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> So feeling uncomfortable because of a personal feeling is now only a leftist issue, gheesh what an analogy..
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what the OP is about, dude.
> 
> It is just one more pointless example of the Hate-America-Firsters like you taking a sucker punch at Uncle Sam.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL.
> 
> To Jim Bowie- hating slavery is hating America.
Click to expand...

You're just not hip if you're not into bondage and servitude..


----------



## jasonnfree

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans did a great job in 1865.
> 
> Not such a great job from 1965 onwards.
Click to expand...


I think both parties serve a purpose.   Democrats do a lot for the little guy, but then they need opposition (republicans) to curb their spending sometimes.   I'd hate to have either party in total control for any length of time.


----------



## LuckyDuck

BlackFlag said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
Click to expand...

The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it.
The "new" Democrats would like nothing better than to have statues of Che Guevera, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung (all nationalists) erected as a homage to their new Communist/Socialist agenda.


----------



## JimBowie1958

jasonnfree said:


> I think both parties serve a purpose.   Democrats do a lot for the little guy, but then they need opposition (republicans) to curb their spending sometimes.   I'd hate to have either party in total control for any length of time.


The Democrats have strayed quite a bit from them being the party of the working man any more.

Now they are the party of racial division, Identity Politics, and social marxism.


----------



## jasonnfree

JimBowie1958 said:


> jasonnfree said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think both parties serve a purpose.   Democrats do a lot for the little guy, but then they need opposition (republicans) to curb their spending sometimes.   I'd hate to have either party in total control for any length of time.
> 
> 
> 
> The Democrats have strayed quite a bit from them being the party of the working man any more.
> 
> Now they are the party of racial division, Identity Politics, and social marxism.
Click to expand...


No argument there.  They'd better change their ways and also get better candidates.


----------



## jasonnfree

LuckyDuck said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it.
> The "new" Democrats would like nothing better than to have statues of Che Guevera, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung (all nationalists) erected as a homage to their new Communist/Socialist agenda.
Click to expand...


The north and the republicans didn't need slaves.   They just imported poor europeans to compete  with the working poor of the north to keep wages down.  They didn't have to take care of slaves, who  were after all, an investment.  If a worker didn't like wages or working conditions, or got sick, he was just kicked out into the street and the industrialists hired another wage slave.


----------



## reconmark

2aguy said:


> reconmark said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was likely built by the same kind of Polish and Irish immigrants that built the White House.
> 
> 
> 
> The D.C. commissioners, charged by Congress with building the new city under the direction of the president, initially planned to import workers from Europe to meet their labor needs. However, response to recruitment was dismal and soon they turned to *African Americans—both enslaved and free—to provide the bulk of labor that built the White House, the United States Capitol, and other early government buildings.*
> Q&A: Did slaves build the White House?
> 
> You must really love being the dumbest kid on the block...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dumb shit...the building in Question is the Washington Monument...and even Slate Magazine says they don't know.....since it was built in 1848.....
> 
> Spider-Man: Homecoming Says the Washington Monument Was Built by Slaves. Was It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This part of the monument that Spidey is holding on to was not built by slaves.
> CMTG, Inc.
> 
> _Spider-Man: Homecoming_ is very good, but it’s important to discuss the film’s glaring flaw. Sure, it gave us the opportunity to finally see a true teenage Peter Parker. Sure, we finally got to see Donald Glover in a Spider-Man movie. Sure, the movie uses Michael Keaton perfectly as a villain. Sure, seeing Spidey running through a golf course at night while being sprayed by sprinklers was one of the more fun Marvel moments in recent memory. But none of this can compensate for the scene where Zendaya’s character, Michelle, refuses to join her high-school peers inside of the Washington Monument because, she says, it was “built by slaves.” Her teacher, played by Martin Starr, assures her it’s not so and turns to a nearby guard for support, only for the guard to shrug and give him an expression that says, well, _kinda_.
> 
> Sorry, Michelle, but we don’t actually know that the Washington Monument was built by slaves. We only know that there’s a _very good chance_ it was. It’s kind of like how we’re not definitely sure Chicken McNuggets are made of undesirable chicken parts, we’re only _pretty sure_, so we just go ahead and eat them because they’re delicious, you can get 10 pieces for a very good price, and this is America, dammit.
> 
> Advertisement
> 
> You see, Michelle, it’s very simple. Around 1832, the Washington National Monument Society—whose members included John Marshall and James Madison—became responsible for raising money to create a monument to honor of our nation’s first president, who never did anything that could be considered morally repugnant and was a terrific man by all accounts. After a couple of years raising money in one-dollar increments—just like the Bernie Sanders campaign—the society held a contest for the monument’s design.
> 
> ADVERTISING
> The winner of that contest was Robert Mills, a famous architect and Freemason who is also responsible for the design of other beautiful American structures like the Treasury Building and the General Post Office, which every D.C. resident now knows as that weird hotel across the street from the Spy Museum and that Shake Shack that never has any seats open. Are you following me, Michelle?
> 
> Because of funding problems that had hindered the project from the beginning, only the obelisk part of Mills’ design was constructed. What we now call the “first phase” of the monument’s construction began in 1848, prior to abolition. This first phase saw the construction of the first 150 feet or so of the monument and ended in 1854 when the Washington National Monument Society’s funding ran out. If—_if—_slave labor was used during the monument’s construction it would have been during this phase. To spell it out for you, Michelle, let’s turn to Jesse Holland, a respected historian, journalist, and author of the book _Black Men Built the Capitol_, who wrote in an email:
> 
> *There has not been any clear evidence found to prove that slaves were used in the construction of the Washington Monument: no receipts, no log entries, no newspaper stories. We have all of those proving the use of slave construction on the U.S. Capitol and the White House. But we have yet to discover irrefutable evidence that slaves were used in the construction of the Washington Monument.*
Click to expand...

I usually don't take the time to correct people as stupid as you...however, someone not quite as stupid as you may believe you scored some type of point...bitch.

The below quote is what I clearly responded to in which the poster referenced the WHITE HOUSE, you stupid bitch...


Tipsycatlover said:


> It was likely built by the same kind of Polish and Irish immigrants that *built the White House*



My response to her made her almost as stupid as I just made your post...

Further, from your own link concerning the the monument...



> Sorry, Michelle, but we don’t actually know that the Washington Monument was built by slaves. *We only know that there’s a *_*very good chance it was.*_





> *Excavation and initial construction[edit]*
> In early 1848, workers started to build the Washington Monument's foundation.[44] According to historian Jesse Holland, *it is very likely that African-American slaves were among the construction workers and stonecutters, given that slavery prevailed in Washington and its surrounding states at that time, and slaves were commonly used in public and private constructions.* However, unlike with respect to the White House, no documents attesting to the use of slave labor in the Monument's construction have been found.



It must hurt to be as stupid as you...


----------



## Syriusly

LuckyDuck said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it..
Click to expand...


Well lets look at that. Absolutely the Confederate States was composed essentially of Democrats- so to criticize the Democrats of that era as being racists(which they were) is to also criticize the Confederate States for being racist(which they were).

Who opposes the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? The opposition is driven by Democrats, with limited Republican support by more moderate Republicans(Niki Haley who changed her position only after the Charleston church shootings)- almost always bemoaned by the Conservatives here at USMB.

Who supports maintaining the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? That would be Republicans. 

A new Alabama law makes sure Confederate monuments are here to stay - CNN.com
Confederate monument removals stir backlash in statehouses - CNN.com

There is no argument that the Republican Party of 1860 was abolitionist- that was the main reason for the party to exist. And that the Confederacy consisted of Democrats(though there were also pro-Union Democrats in the North).

But neither the Republican Party or the Democratic Party today are the same parties they were in 1860.


----------



## Syriusly

LuckyDuck said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "new" Democrats would like nothing better than to have statues of Che Guevera, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung (all nationalists) erected as a homage to their new Communist/Socialist agenda.
Click to expand...


Really? Who are these 'new' Democrats calling for statues of Joseph Stalin?

I mean other than in your head?


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well lets look at that. Absolutely the Confederate States was composed essentially of Democrats- so to criticize the Democrats of that era as being racists(which they were) is to also criticize the Confederate States for being racist(which they were).
> 
> Who opposes the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? The opposition is driven by Democrats, with limited Republican support by more moderate Republicans(Niki Haley who changed her position only after the Charleston church shootings)- almost always bemoaned by the Conservatives here at USMB.
> 
> Who supports maintaining the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? That would be Republicans.
> 
> A new Alabama law makes sure Confederate monuments are here to stay - CNN.com
> Confederate monument removals stir backlash in statehouses - CNN.com
> 
> There is no argument that the Republican Party of 1860 was abolitionist- that was the main reason for the party to exist. And that the Confederacy consisted of Democrats(though there were also pro-Union Democrats in the North).
> 
> But neither the Republican Party or the Democratic Party today are the same parties they were in 1860.
Click to expand...


Wrong....they are the exact same parties as they were back then...the democrats have simply included racists of all colors, not just white democrat racists.   Those Republicans who support keeping monuments to Confederate heros aren't supporting their racism....they support the anti-federal government over reach of todays government...

the racism is still the heart and soul of the democrat party...you guys want those monuments torn down because they were democrat racists fighting to keep slavery.


----------



## LuckyDuck

Syriusly said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "new" Democrats would like nothing better than to have statues of Che Guevera, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung (all nationalists) erected as a homage to their new Communist/Socialist agenda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really? Who are these 'new' Democrats calling for statues of Joseph Stalin?
> 
> I mean other than in your head?
Click to expand...

You might want to check out the Che Guevera T-shirts worn by protesters.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well lets look at that. Absolutely the Confederate States was composed essentially of Democrats- so to criticize the Democrats of that era as being racists(which they were) is to also criticize the Confederate States for being racist(which they were).
> 
> Who opposes the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? The opposition is driven by Democrats, with limited Republican support by more moderate Republicans(Niki Haley who changed her position only after the Charleston church shootings)- almost always bemoaned by the Conservatives here at USMB.
> 
> Who supports maintaining the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? That would be Republicans.
> 
> A new Alabama law makes sure Confederate monuments are here to stay - CNN.com
> Confederate monument removals stir backlash in statehouses - CNN.com
> 
> There is no argument that the Republican Party of 1860 was abolitionist- that was the main reason for the party to exist. And that the Confederacy consisted of Democrats(though there were also pro-Union Democrats in the North).
> 
> But neither the Republican Party or the Democratic Party today are the same parties they were in 1860.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong....they are the exact same parties as they were back then..
Click to expand...


Yep- that is why Democrats are all waving Confederate Flags......LOL

The Republicans have been fighting to keep the Confederate Flags flying for the last 20 years- only now- after the Charleston church shooting- have some Republicans finally moved from a position of opposing removal of Confederate Flags to supporting it.

Remember you support the Republican Party- and you think that the racists are African Americans and Latinos.

You think Martin Luther King Jr. was an idiot.

And you think minorities are stupid- and you are not. 

If this was 1860- you would be wearing grey and proclaiming how African Americans deserve to be slave.


----------



## Syriusly

LuckyDuck said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "new" Democrats would like nothing better than to have statues of Che Guevera, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung (all nationalists) erected as a homage to their new Communist/Socialist agenda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really? Who are these 'new' Democrats calling for statues of Joseph Stalin?
> 
> I mean other than in your head?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might want to check out the Che Guevera T-shirts worn by protesters.
Click to expand...


And again- Who are these 'new' Democrats calling for statues of Joseph Stalin?


----------



## Syriusly

I like Barry Goldwater- but the GOP made a choice in 1964- to pick a candidate who voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act or someone who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The GOP chose against- as Martin Luther King Jr. noted:

“While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.

And of course that is exactly what 2aguy does- he articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
> 
> 
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well lets look at that. Absolutely the Confederate States was composed essentially of Democrats- so to criticize the Democrats of that era as being racists(which they were) is to also criticize the Confederate States for being racist(which they were).
> 
> Who opposes the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? The opposition is driven by Democrats, with limited Republican support by more moderate Republicans(Niki Haley who changed her position only after the Charleston church shootings)- almost always bemoaned by the Conservatives here at USMB.
> 
> Who supports maintaining the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? That would be Republicans.
> 
> A new Alabama law makes sure Confederate monuments are here to stay - CNN.com
> Confederate monument removals stir backlash in statehouses - CNN.com
> 
> There is no argument that the Republican Party of 1860 was abolitionist- that was the main reason for the party to exist. And that the Confederacy consisted of Democrats(though there were also pro-Union Democrats in the North).
> 
> But neither the Republican Party or the Democratic Party today are the same parties they were in 1860.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong....they are the exact same parties as they were back then..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- that is why Democrats are all waving Confederate Flags......LOL
> 
> The Republicans have been fighting to keep the Confederate Flags flying for the last 20 years- only now- after the Charleston church shooting- have some Republicans finally moved from a position of opposing removal of Confederate Flags to supporting it.
> 
> Remember you support the Republican Party- and you think that the racists are African Americans and Latinos.
> 
> You think Martin Luther King Jr. was an idiot.
> 
> And you think minorities are stupid- and you are not.
> 
> If this was 1860- you would be wearing grey and proclaiming how African Americans deserve to be slave.
Click to expand...



No...the racists are the members of the democrat party core groups....and the democrat party leadership....the entire party is racist to it's core....


----------



## Syriusly

*Caro:* _The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist,* but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*_

*No wonder 2aguy hates Johnson.*

*Johnson became a force for racial justice.*

*Something 2aguy despises.*


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> I like Barry Goldwater- but the GOP made a choice in 1964- to pick a candidate who voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act or someone who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> The GOP chose against- as Martin Luther King Jr. noted:
> 
> “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> And of course that is exactly what 2aguy does- he articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.




And King was wrong.....he supported the actual racist, Lyndon Johnson, and voted against a man who was a Civil Rights hero Berry Goldwater......Johnson voted against the anti lynching laws...and against all of the Civil Rights acts until the very end when it became obvious to him they needed black votes...

Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero the entire time...who voted for all the Civil Rights acts except for the 1964 act because it gave government the power to go after innocent people.....

This is what Goldwater objected to...and he was right.....this act was used by the democrats to increase their power....not to help blacks...

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. 


"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."

Breaking News at Newsmax.com NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There 
Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now!
============
The conservative ascendency of 1964 saw the nomination of Barry Goldwater, a western libertarian who had never been strongly identified with racial issues one way or the other, but who was a principled critic of the 1964 act and its extension of federal power. 

*Goldwater had supported the 1957 and 1960 acts but believed that Title II and Title VII of the 1964 bill were unconstitutional, based in part on a 75-page brief from Robert Bork. But far from extending a welcoming hand to southern segregationists, he named as his running mate a New York representative, William E. Miller, who had been the co-author of Republican civil-rights legislation in the 1950s. *


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> I like Barry Goldwater- but the GOP made a choice in 1964- to pick a candidate who voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act or someone who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> The GOP chose against- as Martin Luther King Jr. noted:
> 
> “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> And of course that is exactly what 2aguy does- he articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.



Blow it out your ass.....the democrats belong to an openly and proudly racist party.......every single core group is openly and proudly racist....and the entire leadership of the party is racist, including their last two Presidents........

The Republican party has no race agenda...that is why they keep losing.....the democrats use accustations of racism as a sword to attack and smear good people.......and as a shield to defend against their worst policies and behavors....


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> The modern Republican party celebrates the Confederacy, wants to get rid of civil rights, celebrates the murders of black children, and is openly and proudly racist.  Sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well lets look at that. Absolutely the Confederate States was composed essentially of Democrats- so to criticize the Democrats of that era as being racists(which they were) is to also criticize the Confederate States for being racist(which they were).
> 
> Who opposes the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? The opposition is driven by Democrats, with limited Republican support by more moderate Republicans(Niki Haley who changed her position only after the Charleston church shootings)- almost always bemoaned by the Conservatives here at USMB.
> 
> Who supports maintaining the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? That would be Republicans.
> 
> A new Alabama law makes sure Confederate monuments are here to stay - CNN.com
> Confederate monument removals stir backlash in statehouses - CNN.com
> 
> There is no argument that the Republican Party of 1860 was abolitionist- that was the main reason for the party to exist. And that the Confederacy consisted of Democrats(though there were also pro-Union Democrats in the North).
> 
> But neither the Republican Party or the Democratic Party today are the same parties they were in 1860.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong....they are the exact same parties as they were back then..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- that is why Democrats are all waving Confederate Flags......LOL
> 
> The Republicans have been fighting to keep the Confederate Flags flying for the last 20 years- only now- after the Charleston church shooting- have some Republicans finally moved from a position of opposing removal of Confederate Flags to supporting it.
> 
> Remember you support the Republican Party- and you think that the racists are African Americans and Latinos.
> 
> You think Martin Luther King Jr. was an idiot.
> 
> And you think minorities are stupid- and you are not.
> 
> If this was 1860- you would be wearing grey and proclaiming how African Americans deserve to be slave.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...the racists are the members of the democrat party core groups....and the democrat party leadership....the entire party is racist to it's core....
Click to expand...


LOL

Which party has nominated- and elected a person of color as President? The Democrats.

Which party has nominated three candidates for President who advocated against the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Republicans.

Which party has elected as President  a man who was sued by the Justice Department for racially discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans? The Republicans.

Which party has the support of minorities? The Democrats.
Which party doesn't have the support of minorities? The Republicans.

Which party does 2aguy call racist?

The party which has elected a black President, and is supported by minorities.

2aguy continues to advocate for a philosophy that encourages racism.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I like Barry Goldwater- but the GOP made a choice in 1964- to pick a candidate who voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act or someone who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> The GOP chose against- as Martin Luther King Jr. noted:
> 
> “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> And of course that is exactly what 2aguy does- he articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And King was wrong.....
Click to expand...


That is what the racists keep telling us. 

“While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.

And of course that is exactly what 2aguy does- he articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> *Caro:* _The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist,* but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*_
> 
> *No wonder 2aguy hates Johnson.*
> 
> *Johnson became a force for racial justice.*
> 
> *Something 2aguy despises.*




No....he was a political opportunist of the worst kind.....he voted against the anti-lynching laws......to prosecute democrats who hanged blacks from trees....and voted against all the Civil Rights acts up until they realized that blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks the democrat party murdered....so he simply changes in order to keep his power.....he was a racist through and through ........

He voted against every single civil rights act for 20 years...........

Berry Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero...an actual hero...dumbass....he didn't change his votes simply to get the black vote...he lived it...

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign. Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I like Barry Goldwater- but the GOP made a choice in 1964- to pick a candidate who voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act or someone who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> The GOP chose against- as Martin Luther King Jr. noted:
> 
> “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> And of course that is exactly what 2aguy does- he articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the democrats belong to an openly and proudly racist party.
Click to expand...


The Republican Party is the party of white supremacists- your President was sued for discriminating against Blacks and Puerto Ricans. 

Meanwhile- minorities in America know who the racists are- and they vote accordingly.

Despite the foot stomping of bitter old white dudes who keep telling them that they are all stupid.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Caro:* _The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist,* but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*_
> 
> *No wonder 2aguy hates Johnson.*
> 
> *Johnson became a force for racial justice.*
> 
> *Something 2aguy despises.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He voted against every single civil rights act for 20 years........
Click to expand...


*Caro:* _The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist,* but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*_

*No wonder 2aguy hates Johnson.*

*Johnson became a force for racial justice.*

*Something 2aguy despises.*
Click to expand...


----------



## Syriusly

Williamson sounds like 2aguy_
Conservatives Try to Rewrite Civil Rights History (Again)

*Williamson dismisses the Civil Rights Act of 1964—and Goldwater’s opposition to it—as a minor variable, something that shouldn’t discount the GOP’s history on civil rights.* But the fact of the matter is that the Act was a transformative piece of legislation, and a necessary step on the long road to racial equality. It is arguably the most important piece of civil rights legislation ever passed, and Goldwater’s opposition is correctly seen as a blemish on his legacy. Indeed, it’s correctly seen as a blemish on Williamson’s own magazine, which opposed the civil-rights movement and voiced solidarity with segregationists.

Conservatives Trying to Rewrite the History of Civil Rights – Mother Jones
But conservative Republicans — those represented politically by Goldwater, and intellectually by William F. Buckley and National Review — did oppose the civil rights movement. Buckley wrote frankly about his endorsement of white supremacy: “the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically.”  More often conservatives argued on grounds of states’ rights, or freedom of property, or that civil rights leaders were annoying hypocrites, or that they had undermined respect for the law.
_


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> Is that Irony?
> 
> 
> 
> It likely was built, in part, by slaves.
> 
> That aside, this is a movie about a teenager with spider powers.  You're a grown ass man.  Get over it.
> 
> Btw, it's your party that currently celebrates and defends the Democratic party as it existed under slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry....the racist party in this country is still the democrat party...every core group in the party and every leader in the party is a racist.....openly and proudly racist.....
> 
> The Republican party freed the slaves and fought to give them equal treatment under the Constitution......
Click to expand...

^^^ mindless drivel.

The north fought to free the slaves from the racist Bible-thumping south; back in a time when the north was primarily Republican and the south primarily Democrat.

Today, the north is still more Liberal than the Bible-thumping south, but now the north is primarily Democrat while the south is primarily Republican.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only people that want to celebrate the Confederacy would be the Klan and southern racists and the Republican party isn't openly and proudly racist.  The Democrats were in power in the south during the Confederacy and it took the north and its Republican party to end it..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well lets look at that. Absolutely the Confederate States was composed essentially of Democrats- so to criticize the Democrats of that era as being racists(which they were) is to also criticize the Confederate States for being racist(which they were).
> 
> Who opposes the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? The opposition is driven by Democrats, with limited Republican support by more moderate Republicans(Niki Haley who changed her position only after the Charleston church shootings)- almost always bemoaned by the Conservatives here at USMB.
> 
> Who supports maintaining the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? That would be Republicans.
> 
> A new Alabama law makes sure Confederate monuments are here to stay - CNN.com
> Confederate monument removals stir backlash in statehouses - CNN.com
> 
> There is no argument that the Republican Party of 1860 was abolitionist- that was the main reason for the party to exist. And that the Confederacy consisted of Democrats(though there were also pro-Union Democrats in the North).
> 
> But neither the Republican Party or the Democratic Party today are the same parties they were in 1860.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong....they are the exact same parties as they were back then..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- that is why Democrats are all waving Confederate Flags......LOL
> 
> The Republicans have been fighting to keep the Confederate Flags flying for the last 20 years- only now- after the Charleston church shooting- have some Republicans finally moved from a position of opposing removal of Confederate Flags to supporting it.
> 
> Remember you support the Republican Party- and you think that the racists are African Americans and Latinos.
> 
> You think Martin Luther King Jr. was an idiot.
> 
> And you think minorities are stupid- and you are not.
> 
> If this was 1860- you would be wearing grey and proclaiming how African Americans deserve to be slave.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...the racists are the members of the democrat party core groups....and the democrat party leadership....the entire party is racist to it's core....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Which party has nominated- and elected a person of color as President? The Democrats.
> 
> Which party has nominated three candidates for President who advocated against the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has elected as President  a man who was sued by the Justice Department for racially discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has the support of minorities? The Democrats.
> Which party doesn't have the support of minorities? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party does 2aguy call racist?
> 
> The party which has elected a black President, and is supported by minorities.
> 
> 2aguy continues to advocate for a philosophy that encourages racism.
Click to expand...



The democrats nominated a black racist as President...he sat in an openly and proudly racist church for 20 years, he had al sharpton, racist, in the White House about 40 times and he also had the black racist group, black lives matter to the White House.....

The 1964 Civil Rights act had two provisions that were unConstitutional...that is what republicans voted against...the democrats knew that those two provisions would give the federal government massive power....which is why they voted for it....

The party of racism has been and still is the democrat party....racists of all colors need the democrat party because they need a powerful federal government to use to push their various racial give aways to their various racist groups....

Minorities started voting for democrats during the New Deal....for the money, the voted for johnson because of the Great Society....for the money.....and their children have been slaughtered in democrat controlled neighborhoods ever since.....


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> Williamson sounds like 2aguy
> _Conservatives Try to Rewrite Civil Rights History (Again)
> 
> *Williamson dismisses the Civil Rights Act of 1964—and Goldwater’s opposition to it—as a minor variable, something that shouldn’t discount the GOP’s history on civil rights.* But the fact of the matter is that the Act was a transformative piece of legislation, and a necessary step on the long road to racial equality. It is arguably the most important piece of civil rights legislation ever passed, and Goldwater’s opposition is correctly seen as a blemish on his legacy. Indeed, it’s correctly seen as a blemish on Williamson’s own magazine, which opposed the civil-rights movement and voiced solidarity with segregationists.
> 
> Conservatives Trying to Rewrite the History of Civil Rights – Mother Jones
> But conservative Republicans — those represented politically by Goldwater, and intellectually by William F. Buckley and National Review — did oppose the civil rights movement. Buckley wrote frankly about his endorsement of white supremacy: “the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically.”  More often conservatives argued on grounds of states’ rights, or freedom of property, or that civil rights leaders were annoying hypocrites, or that they had undermined respect for the law._




No....of course you are wrong......the 1964 Civil Rights act created the racial problems we have today, and the anti-1st Amendment problems we have with the accomodation law.....

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. *

With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. 


"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."

And the truth about Goldwater......
NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There 

The conservative ascendency of 1964 saw the nomination of Barry Goldwater, a western libertarian who had never been strongly identified with racial issues one way or the other, but who was a principled critic of the 1964 act and its extension of federal power

.* Goldwater had supported the 1957 and 1960 acts but believed that Title II and Title VII of the 1964 bill were unconstitutional, based in part on a 75-page brief from Robert Bork.*

 But far from extending a welcoming hand to southern segregationists, he named as his running mate a New York representative, William E. Miller, who had been the co-author of Republican civil-rights legislation in the 1950s.


----------



## 2aguy

Johnson was a racist to his core, and voted for the very last of the Civil Rights acts because Black Americans were going to be able to vote no matter what the democrats did....so he wanted to get in front of that to win those votes.....after 20 years of blocking every single Civil Rights act that the Republicans passed....

Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.



*For two decades in Congress he was a reliable member of the Southern bloc, helping to stonewall civil rights legislation. *

As Caro recalls, Johnson spent the late 1940s railing against the “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves” in East Asia. Buying into the stereotype that blacks were afraid of snakes (who isn’t afraid of snakes?) he’d drive to gas stations with one in his trunk and try to trick black attendants into opening it. Once, Caro writes, the stunt nearly ended with him being beaten with a tire iron.



Nor was it the kind of immature, frat-boy racism that Johnson eventually jettisoned. Even as president, Johnson’s interpersonal relationships with blacks were marred by his prejudice. As longtime Jet correspondent Simeon Booker wrote in his memoir_Shocks the Conscience_, early in his presidency, Johnson once lectured Booker after he authored a critical article for Jet Magazine, telling Booker he should “thank” Johnson for all he’d done for black people.

* In Flawed Giant, Johnson biographer Robert Dallek writes that Johnson explained his decision to nominate Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court rather than a less famous black judge by saying, “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a ******.”*

According to Caro, Robert Parker, Johnson’s sometime chauffer, described in his memoir _Capitol Hill in Black and White _a moment when Johnson asked Parker whether he’d prefer to be referred to by his name rather than “boy,” “******” or “chief.” When Parker said he would, Johnson grew angry and said, “As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, ******, you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture.”


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Williamson sounds like 2aguy
> _Conservatives Try to Rewrite Civil Rights History (Again)
> 
> *Williamson dismisses the Civil Rights Act of 1964—and Goldwater’s opposition to it—as a minor variable, something that shouldn’t discount the GOP’s history on civil rights.* But the fact of the matter is that the Act was a transformative piece of legislation, and a necessary step on the long road to racial equality. It is arguably the most important piece of civil rights legislation ever passed, and Goldwater’s opposition is correctly seen as a blemish on his legacy. Indeed, it’s correctly seen as a blemish on Williamson’s own magazine, which opposed the civil-rights movement and voiced solidarity with segregationists.
> 
> Conservatives Trying to Rewrite the History of Civil Rights – Mother Jones
> But conservative Republicans — those represented politically by Goldwater, and intellectually by William F. Buckley and National Review — did oppose the civil rights movement. Buckley wrote frankly about his endorsement of white supremacy: “the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically.”  More often conservatives argued on grounds of states’ rights, or freedom of property, or that civil rights leaders were annoying hypocrites, or that they had undermined respect for the law._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No....of course you are wrong......the 1964 Civil Rights act created the racial problems we have today,
Click to expand...


LOL.

And doesn't that say it all.

Not only do you believe that it is the blacks and other minorities that are the real racists- you believe that the 1964 Civil Rights Act 'created the racial problems we have today'.

Yeah- you are the party of racists.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Johnson was a racist to his core, and voted for the very last of the Civil Rights acts”



Johnson may have been a racist- but he supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and you don't- and you blame African Americans and Latino Americans for racism.

Yeah- you want to see a racist- go look in a mirror.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well lets look at that. Absolutely the Confederate States was composed essentially of Democrats- so to criticize the Democrats of that era as being racists(which they were) is to also criticize the Confederate States for being racist(which they were).
> 
> Who opposes the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? The opposition is driven by Democrats, with limited Republican support by more moderate Republicans(Niki Haley who changed her position only after the Charleston church shootings)- almost always bemoaned by the Conservatives here at USMB.
> 
> Who supports maintaining the symbols and legacy of the Confederacy today? That would be Republicans.
> 
> A new Alabama law makes sure Confederate monuments are here to stay - CNN.com
> Confederate monument removals stir backlash in statehouses - CNN.com
> 
> There is no argument that the Republican Party of 1860 was abolitionist- that was the main reason for the party to exist. And that the Confederacy consisted of Democrats(though there were also pro-Union Democrats in the North).
> 
> But neither the Republican Party or the Democratic Party today are the same parties they were in 1860.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong....they are the exact same parties as they were back then..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- that is why Democrats are all waving Confederate Flags......LOL
> 
> The Republicans have been fighting to keep the Confederate Flags flying for the last 20 years- only now- after the Charleston church shooting- have some Republicans finally moved from a position of opposing removal of Confederate Flags to supporting it.
> 
> Remember you support the Republican Party- and you think that the racists are African Americans and Latinos.
> 
> You think Martin Luther King Jr. was an idiot.
> 
> And you think minorities are stupid- and you are not.
> 
> If this was 1860- you would be wearing grey and proclaiming how African Americans deserve to be slave.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...the racists are the members of the democrat party core groups....and the democrat party leadership....the entire party is racist to it's core....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Which party has nominated- and elected a person of color as President? The Democrats.
> 
> Which party has nominated three candidates for President who advocated against the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has elected as President  a man who was sued by the Justice Department for racially discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has the support of minorities? The Democrats.
> Which party doesn't have the support of minorities? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party does 2aguy call racist?
> 
> The party which has elected a black President, and is supported by minorities.
> 
> 2aguy continues to advocate for a philosophy that encourages racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats nominated a black racist as President...
Click to expand...


The Republicans nominated a white racist as President- a man sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans. 

You want to see a real racist?

Look in a mirror.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist to his core, and voted for the very last of the Civil Rights acts”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson may have been a racist- but he supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and you don't- and you blame African Americans and Latino Americans for racism.
> 
> Yeah- you want to see a racist- go look in a mirror.
Click to expand...



Hey, shit stain......calling someone a racist is vile......especially when you support the party of racism, the democrat party.....you are a coward and an asshole....you have been shown that johnson voted against every piece of Civil Rights legislation he could vote against, and only started voting for Civil Rights when he realized that no matter how many blacks the democrats murdered, Blacks were still going to be able to vote...

Johnson was a racist to the core of his being but used Civil Rights as a way to get black votes.....and to give democrats massive government power through the 1964 Civil Rights act.....


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong....they are the exact same parties as they were back then..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- that is why Democrats are all waving Confederate Flags......LOL
> 
> The Republicans have been fighting to keep the Confederate Flags flying for the last 20 years- only now- after the Charleston church shooting- have some Republicans finally moved from a position of opposing removal of Confederate Flags to supporting it.
> 
> Remember you support the Republican Party- and you think that the racists are African Americans and Latinos.
> 
> You think Martin Luther King Jr. was an idiot.
> 
> And you think minorities are stupid- and you are not.
> 
> If this was 1860- you would be wearing grey and proclaiming how African Americans deserve to be slave.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...the racists are the members of the democrat party core groups....and the democrat party leadership....the entire party is racist to it's core....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Which party has nominated- and elected a person of color as President? The Democrats.
> 
> Which party has nominated three candidates for President who advocated against the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has elected as President  a man who was sued by the Justice Department for racially discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has the support of minorities? The Democrats.
> Which party doesn't have the support of minorities? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party does 2aguy call racist?
> 
> The party which has elected a black President, and is supported by minorities.
> 
> 2aguy continues to advocate for a philosophy that encourages racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats nominated a black racist as President...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans nominated a white racist as President- a man sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> You want to see a real racist?
> 
> Look in a mirror.
Click to expand...



Hilary was the real racist...who embraced the racist circle her rapist husband had when he came to power....j. william fulbright was his good friend and political mentor, she embraced the klan member robert byrd......the democrat party is the home of racism.......that is the truth, the fact and the reality.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist to his core, and voted for the very last of the Civil Rights acts”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson may have been a racist- but he supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and you don't- and you blame African Americans and Latino Americans for racism.
> 
> Yeah- you want to see a racist- go look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ...calling someone a racist is vile.....
Click to expand...


And yet you have no problem calling 90% of African Americans racists.

You poor little snow flake. 

You call millions of Americans racists- yet when I point out that the only race you don't seem to have problem with is pastey white in color, you get all whiny.


----------



## 2aguy

The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....


Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.



*For two decades in Congress he was a reliable member of the Southern bloc, helping to stonewall civil rights legislation. *

As Caro recalls, Johnson spent the late 1940s railing against the “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves” in East Asia. Buying into the stereotype that blacks were afraid of snakes (who isn’t afraid of snakes?) he’d drive to gas stations with one in his trunk and try to trick black attendants into opening it. Once, Caro writes, the stunt nearly ended with him being beaten with a tire iron.



Nor was it the kind of immature, frat-boy racism that Johnson eventually jettisoned. Even as president, Johnson’s interpersonal relationships with blacks were marred by his prejudice. As longtime Jet correspondent Simeon Booker wrote in his memoir_Shocks the Conscience_, early in his presidency, Johnson once lectured Booker after he authored a critical article for Jet Magazine, telling Booker he should “thank” Johnson for all he’d done for black people.

*In Flawed Giant, Johnson biographer Robert Dallek writes that Johnson explained his decision to nominate Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court rather than a less famous black judge by saying, “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a ******.”*

According to Caro, Robert Parker, Johnson’s sometime chauffer, described in his memoir _Capitol Hill in Black and White _a moment when Johnson asked Parker whether he’d prefer to be referred to by his name rather than “boy,” “******” or “chief.” When Parker said he would, Johnson grew angry and said, “As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, ******, you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture.”


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- that is why Democrats are all waving Confederate Flags......LOL
> 
> The Republicans have been fighting to keep the Confederate Flags flying for the last 20 years- only now- after the Charleston church shooting- have some Republicans finally moved from a position of opposing removal of Confederate Flags to supporting it.
> 
> Remember you support the Republican Party- and you think that the racists are African Americans and Latinos.
> 
> You think Martin Luther King Jr. was an idiot.
> 
> And you think minorities are stupid- and you are not.
> 
> If this was 1860- you would be wearing grey and proclaiming how African Americans deserve to be slave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...the racists are the members of the democrat party core groups....and the democrat party leadership....the entire party is racist to it's core....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Which party has nominated- and elected a person of color as President? The Democrats.
> 
> Which party has nominated three candidates for President who advocated against the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has elected as President  a man who was sued by the Justice Department for racially discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has the support of minorities? The Democrats.
> Which party doesn't have the support of minorities? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party does 2aguy call racist?
> 
> The party which has elected a black President, and is supported by minorities.
> 
> 2aguy continues to advocate for a philosophy that encourages racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats nominated a black racist as President...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans nominated a white racist as President- a man sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> You want to see a real racist?
> 
> Look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hilary was the real racist..lity.
Click to expand...


Donald Trump refused to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.

And the Justice Department sued him for it.

So yeah- tell African Americans again how it is Hillary who is the real racist.....


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”



Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.

He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.

Which is why you despise Johnson.

Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.

And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.

Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> No...the racists are the members of the democrat party core groups....and the democrat party leadership....the entire party is racist to it's core....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Which party has nominated- and elected a person of color as President? The Democrats.
> 
> Which party has nominated three candidates for President who advocated against the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has elected as President  a man who was sued by the Justice Department for racially discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has the support of minorities? The Democrats.
> Which party doesn't have the support of minorities? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party does 2aguy call racist?
> 
> The party which has elected a black President, and is supported by minorities.
> 
> 2aguy continues to advocate for a philosophy that encourages racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats nominated a black racist as President...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans nominated a white racist as President- a man sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> You want to see a real racist?
> 
> Look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hilary was the real racist..lity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump refused to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> And the Justice Department sued him for it.
> 
> So yeah- tell African Americans again how it is Hillary who is the real racist.....
Click to expand...



Everyone was sued back then by the race hustlers.......moron.    Yes...hilary was the real racist....


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
Click to expand...



Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...


NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. 


"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."

Breaking News at Newsmax.com NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There 
Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now!
============
The conservative ascendency of 1964 saw the nomination of Barry Goldwater, a western libertarian who had never been strongly identified with racial issues one way or the other, but who was a principled critic of the 1964 act and its extension of federal power. 

*Goldwater had supported the 1957 and 1960 acts but believed that Title II and Title VII of the 1964 bill were unconstitutional, based in part on a 75-page brief from Robert Bork. But far from extending a welcoming hand to southern segregationists, he named as his running mate a New York representative, William E. Miller, who had been the co-author of Republican civil-rights legislation in the 1950s.*

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign. Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, *Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.*


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
Click to expand...

So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
Click to expand...



The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
Click to expand...







You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.





*'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*

“Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”

That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”

Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
Click to expand...



The kkk supported hilary.....moron.

KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.

“For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.

Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron..
Click to expand...


The KKK supported Trump 

KKK’s official newspaper supports Donald Trump for president
*KKK’s official newspaper supports Donald Trump for president*

*KKK leader disavows violent past, declares Trump 'best' for president*

*The leader of the Rebel Brigade Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, identified only as their “Imperial Wizard,” told a reporter for Richmond, Virginia-area news outlet WWBT in a wide-ranging interview on 28 April 2016 that he (like many KKK members) supports Trump for President of the United States:*


Not a surprise that the KKK would support the candidate who had been sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent to minorities.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists
Click to expand...


The majority of African Americans in the South are Democrats.

Once again we have 2aguy saying that African Americans are the real racists.

Not those good ol' boys fighting to keep the Confederate flags flying on the State capitals...
Cruz's SC point men fight to keep Confederate flag flying at state capital | Politics | Dallas News
WASHINGTON--Two of Sen. Ted Cruz's presidential campaign chairmen in South Carolina are fighting to keep a Confederate flag flying at the state's capitol grounds, according to Politico.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democrat hero...he is all yours.....racism is the core of the democrat party...and all of their Presidents are vile racists....
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> *.*
Click to expand...


Goldwater was  Civil Rights hero- to who?

 Here is what MLK Jr. said of the Republican National Convention:
_*The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism. All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.*_


Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.

He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.

Which is why you despise Johnson.

Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an fool. 

And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.

Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> Which party has nominated- and elected a person of color as President? The Democrats.
> 
> Which party has nominated three candidates for President who advocated against the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has elected as President  a man who was sued by the Justice Department for racially discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party has the support of minorities? The Democrats.
> Which party doesn't have the support of minorities? The Republicans.
> 
> Which party does 2aguy call racist?
> 
> The party which has elected a black President, and is supported by minorities.
> 
> 2aguy continues to advocate for a philosophy that encourages racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The democrats nominated a black racist as President...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Republicans nominated a white racist as President- a man sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> You want to see a real racist?
> 
> Look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hilary was the real racist..lity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump refused to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> And the Justice Department sued him for it.
> 
> So yeah- tell African Americans again how it is Hillary who is the real racist.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone was sued back then by the race hustlers....
Click to expand...

Not everyone was sued by the DOJ for discriminating against minorities- Donald Trump was sued personally for discrimination.

Donald Trump refused to rent apartments to African Americans and Puerto Ricans.

And the Justice Department sued him for it. And you call anyone who tried to stop racial discrimination the 'race hustlers'

If you want to see the real racist- look in the mirror.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson is a civil right hero.
> 
> He pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act- which you despise.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Which is why you consider MLK Jr. to be an idiot.
> 
> And why you consider 90% of African Americans to be racists.
> 
> Look in the mirror if you want to see a real racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
Click to expand...

LOLOL

That's fake news, ya schmuck.

Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.

Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.

KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'


----------



## Syriusly

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Johnson was a racist, political operative ....Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero...
> 
> 
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
Click to expand...


Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.

2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act. 

2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.


----------



## Syriusly

By the way- I saw Spiderman last night- fun movie. 

The moment that this OP is about is literally about 5 seconds worth of dialogue. 
Complaining that something was factually incorrect- 
in a movie about a guy who gets super powers after being bitten by a spider.

LOL


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what? LBJ was half a century ago. Today, the racist confederate south is mostly Republican.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
Click to expand...



Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....

King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......

Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
Click to expand...

That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.

Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.






In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.

In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.

It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.

The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
Click to expand...


The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
Click to expand...

Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
Click to expand...



No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....

The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
Click to expand...

Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.

That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.

That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.

And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> 
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
Click to expand...



Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
Click to expand...

Nope, not wrong. Unlike you, I posted evidence confirming the KKK endorsed the Republican candidate. Whereas you'd spouting delusions.


----------



## theHawk

2aguy said:


> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....




I saw the movie and thought that was a really strange thing to put in there.  I thought the kid playing Peter Parker was good and Michael Keaton was good too.  Seemed like they went out of their way to "diversify" the rest of the cast.  It may be why the movie fell off so much starting in week two at the box office.  As of now it sits behind War for the Planet of the Apes on the worldwide all time box office.  Not a good sign for a big Marvel movie, although this was actually made by Sony.  Hopefully they all learn their lesson, but I doubt they will.


----------



## jillian

2aguy said:


> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....



was that thread title supposed to be English?

I'd say you probably should worry more about your own actions and the actions of the orange sociopath than this person's choice not to go into a building that was built by slaves.

not that you'd understand her point, lowlife.

white supremacists really need to be quiet.


----------



## theHawk

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, not wrong. Unlike you, I posted evidence confirming the KKK endorsed the Republican candidate. Whereas you'd spouting delusions.
Click to expand...



So what?  La Raza, the Latino version of the KKK, endorsed Clinton.  Did the media demand she denounce them?


National Council of La Raza Action PAC Endorses Hillary Clinton


----------



## jillian

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, not wrong. Unlike you, I posted evidence confirming the KKK endorsed the Republican candidate. Whereas you'd spouting delusions.
Click to expand...


is he still pretending that the KKK didn't endorse the orange sociopath.

amazing how delusional or what a compulsive liar he is.


----------



## 2aguy

jillian said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> was that thread title supposed to be English?
> 
> I'd say you probably should worry more about your own actions and the actions of the orange sociopath than this person's choice not to go into a building that was built by slaves.
> 
> not that you'd understand her point, lowlife.
> 
> white supremacists really need to be quiet.
Click to expand...



The white supremacists in the democrat party won't be quiet....they run the cities controlled by democrats...and you can tell their racism by the plight of the minorities under their control...


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
Click to expand...


Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.

Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you can't just go see a spiderman movie without the left wing pushing it's crap all over the experience......there you are, watching a film...and then you get to hear about slavery and the nations capital.......from an actress who likely votes for the political party that owned slaves and actually started a war to keep blacks as slaves......
> 
> What's With The Really Weird Racial Thing In 'Spider-Man: Homecoming'?
> 
> But one member refuses to go into the obelisk. Zendaya's character, Michelle, says she won’t go into a building built by slaves. The team's coach, who is white, says he’s pretty sure slaves didn't build the monument, but then the camera pans over to a nearby security guard, who looks at the coach and wiggles one hand in a so-so gesture than means, "Uh, maybe so, maybe not."
> 
> First, the facts: No one really knows if slaves were used to build the monument to America's first president.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> In the movie, Zendaya's Michelle never revisits the issue, never, say, Googles the claim and says, "Huh, turns out no one really knows for sure." The claim just hangs there like a dark cloud over an otherwise jaunty fun movie.
> 
> But it does fit right in with Hollywood's desire to take American down a peg. And now, a whole new generation — who also likely won't bother to check the facts — will blurt out the claim at will.
> 
> She won't enter a building that might have been built by slaves in a time of slavery....but will likely vote for the political party that was built on slavery.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> was that thread title supposed to be English?
> 
> I'd say you probably should worry more about your own actions and the actions of the orange sociopath than this person's choice not to go into a building that was built by slaves.
> 
> not that you'd understand her point, lowlife.
> 
> white supremacists really need to be quiet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The white supremacists in the democrat party won't be quiet.
Click to expand...


If you want to see a real white supremacist- just look in your mirror any morning.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
Click to expand...


Hmmm 2aguy thinks that 90% of African Americans are racists, that our African American President is a racist, thinks that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool, and despises the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

But he thinks that the guy who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act is a hero- and that our current President- who was sued for discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans is not a racist.

2aguy imagines he sees racists whenever he sees anyone who is not pasty white.

But all he has to do is look in his mirror to see the real racist.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
Click to expand...



No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.......they know the federal government is too big...but they are embracing racist icons to express those beliefs...this isn't about race, asshole...this is about standing up to a too powerful federal government.....

The democrat party is the racist party...they want those statues taken down so no one remembers that democrats started a war to keep blacks as slaves....

You are completely wrong on all of your points.


----------



## Syriusly

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it..
Click to expand...


Actually that is not quite correct eigher. 

Democrats voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Democrats voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Republicans voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The majority of both Democrats and Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The Congressman and Senators who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act were virtually all Southerners- both Republicans and Democrats.

Barry Goldwater was one of the very few non-southerners to vote against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Of course Ronald Reagan and George Bush also both opposed it- though neither was in a position to vote for it.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
Click to expand...


You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists. 
90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
Hence
You think 90% of African Americans are racists. 

Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.

Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Southern Republicans aren't the racists....the democrats in the South still are the racists.....the Confederate South ended when the Republicans defeated the democrats and freed their black slaves......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
Click to expand...


Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support. 

Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.

LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.

2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, including the anti lynching law......it was only after realizing that democrats couldn't hang enough black men to keep them from voting that they decided they had to pretend to support Civil Rights.....and in the 1964 act...they used that to increase the power of the Central Government.....
> 
> King was a fool....he voted for the racist LBJ over the Civil Rights hero Goldwater...and his followers have been trapped in poverty and murder ever since......
> 
> Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights Acts except the 64  act...because of the two parts that increased the power of the federal government...the ones that have perpetuated racism in this country.....not ended it.....
> 
> 
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmm 2aguy thinks that 90% of African Americans are racists, that our African American President is a racist, thinks that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool, and despises the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> But he thinks that the guy who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act is a hero- and that our current President- who was sued for discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans is not a racist.
> 
> 2aguy imagines he sees racists whenever he sees anyone who is not pasty white.
> 
> But all he has to do is look in his mirror to see the real racist.
Click to expand...



No...shithead......blacks vote 95% for the party of racism......

te democrat party is the party of racism....the last 3 out of 4 democrat Presidents were racists......johnson, clinton and obama....

King supported Johnson, an actual racist who voted against all the civil rights acts until the last ones....20 years of voting against Civil Rights for blacks and voting against the anti lynching laws....and at the end, when the Civil Rights battles were won, then he voted for the last bills to get black votes to stay in power.....

King didn't support Goldwater, the actual Civil Rights hero....a man who voted for all of the Civil Rights acts when he was in office, who desegregated the Arizona national guard, who desegregated his department stores, who desegregated the Congressional Cafeteria, funded the first Arizona Chapter of the NAACP and the Urban league  and who stated that the reason he didn't vote for the 64 act was the public accomodation law, which we see today is being used to attack bakers and pizza makers.......and because of the racism inherent in affirmative action.....both of which were unConstitiutional.....

*Here...the real Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...*

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign. Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.

*Why he didn't support the 1964 Civil Rights act...*

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed.*

 With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. 


"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."

Obama sat in an openly and proudly racist church for 20 years and called jeremiah wright, the openly and proudly racist pastor his good friend and who married obama and michelle and baptized their daughters.....a racist who sat in a racist church for 20 years....who had racist al sharpton to the White House about 40 times and who had the racist group, black lives matter to the White House....obama is a racist....


And for decades in public life....Trump was never accused of racism...until he ran for President as a Republican....


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
Click to expand...



This is the man syriously supports...the actual racist....lyndon johnson who tried to block every Civil Rights act for 20 years.......including the anti-lynching law.....

Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.

* For two decades in Congress he was a reliable member of the Southern bloc, helping to stonewall civil rights legislation.*

As Caro recalls, Johnson spent the late 1940s railing against the “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves” in East Asia. Buying into the stereotype that blacks were afraid of snakes (who isn’t afraid of snakes?) he’d drive to gas stations with one in his trunk and try to trick black attendants into opening it. Once, Caro writes, the stunt nearly ended with him being beaten with a tire iron.



Nor was it the kind of immature, frat-boy racism that Johnson eventually jettisoned. Even as president, Johnson’s interpersonal relationships with blacks were marred by his prejudice. As longtime Jet correspondent Simeon Booker wrote in his memoir_Shocks the Conscience_, early in his presidency, Johnson once lectured Booker after he authored a critical article for Jet Magazine, telling Booker he should “thank” Johnson for all he’d done for black people.


*In Flawed Giant, Johnson biographer Robert Dallek writes that Johnson explained his decision to nominate Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court rather than a less famous black judge by saying, “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want *everybody to know he’s a ******.”

According to Caro, Robert Parker, Johnson’s sometime chauffer, described in his memoir _Capitol Hill in Black and White _a moment when Johnson asked Parker whether he’d prefer to be referred to by his name rather than “boy,” “******” or “chief.” When Parker said he would, Johnson grew angry and said, “As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, ******, you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture.”


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're funny. Again, Republicans freed the slaves way back when the north was primarily Republican. The conservative south was, and is, way more racist. Now they're Republicans. That's why it's primarily Republicans who fight to keep the confederate flag and why the most prominent white supremacists supported Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'Hail Trump!': White Nationalists Salute the President-Elect*
> 
> “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!”
> 
> That’s how Richard B. Spencer saluted more than 200 attendees on Saturday, gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., for the annual conference of the National Policy Institute, which describes itself as “an independent organization dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of  people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.”
> 
> Spencer has popularized the term “alt-right” to describe the movement he leads. Spencer has said his dream is “a new society, an ethno-state that would be a gathering point for all Europeans,” and has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
Click to expand...



The man Syriously supports.....showing he is a racist pig...

lyndon johnson.....the hero of syriously....

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

* against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


 "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

------

*--In his 1948 speech in Austin kicking off his Senate campaign, Johnson declared he was against Truman’s attempt to end the poll tax because, Johnson said, "it is the province of the state to run its own elections." Johnson also was against proposals against lynching "because the federal government," Johnson said, "has no more business enacting a law against one form of murder than against another."*


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This is the man syriously supports.
Click to expand...


LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and signed it into law- which you despise.

You consider 90% of African American voters to be racists.

If you want to see the real racist- look in the mirror.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The man Syriously supports.....showing he is a racist pig...
> 
> lyndon johnson.....the hero of syriously....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> * against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> ------
> 
> *--In his 1948 speech in Austin kicking off his Senate campaign, Johnson declared he was against Truman’s attempt to end the poll tax because, Johnson said, "it is the province of the state to run its own elections." Johnson also was against proposals against lynching "because the federal government," Johnson said, "has no more business enacting a law against one form of murder than against another."*
Click to expand...


Quoting your own citation- Caro

*Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
Click to expand...



95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's correct that in the mid-60's, Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act while Republicans voted for it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, when you break the vote down by north vs south, we see that it was the racist Bible-thumping conservative south who voted against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the north, *96% of Democrats* voted for it, along with *85% of Republicans*.
> 
> In the south, *92% of Democrats* voted against it, along with *100% of Republicans*.
> 
> It was a southern thing, not a Democrat thing.
> 
> The Bible Belt was primarily Democrat in those days. Now it's primarily Republican. The people haven't changed; but their political party has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The South has changed dipshit......it is no longer the racist party of democrats controlling the South.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it has changed. The racist south now primarily supports the Republican party and not the Democrat party. That's all that's changed. The south is still the heartbeat of racism in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....the South is Republican and the racists stayed in the democrat party.......the racists of all colors black, white, hispanic and even Asian (George Takai, this means you) are all in the democrat party...and the last two democrat Presidents were racists...both clinton and obama.....
> 
> The heart of racism is any city controlled by democrats...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmm 2aguy thinks that 90% of African Americans are racists, that our African American President is a racist, thinks that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool, and despises the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> But he thinks that the guy who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act is a hero- and that our current President- who was sued for discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans is not a racist.
> 
> 2aguy imagines he sees racists whenever he sees anyone who is not pasty white.
> 
> But all he has to do is look in his mirror to see the real racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No...shithead......blacks vote 95% for the party of racism.......
Click to expand...


Sorry- 2aguy thinks that 95% of African Americans are racist.

Hmmm 2aguy thinks that 95% of African Americans are racists, that our African American President is a racist, thinks that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool, and despises the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

But he thinks that the guy who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act is a hero- and that our current President- who was sued for discriminating against African Americans and Puerto Ricans is not a racist.

2aguy imagines he sees racists whenever he sees anyone who is not pasty white.

But all he has to do is look in his mirror to see the real racist


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The man Syriously supports.....showing he is a racist pig...
> 
> lyndon johnson.....the hero of syriously....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> * against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> ------
> 
> *--In his 1948 speech in Austin kicking off his Senate campaign, Johnson declared he was against Truman’s attempt to end the poll tax because, Johnson said, "it is the province of the state to run its own elections." Johnson also was against proposals against lynching "because the federal government," Johnson said, "has no more business enacting a law against one form of murder than against another."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quoting your own citation- Caro
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*
Click to expand...



Yes....shit for brains.....johnson knew that blacks were going to be able to vote, and if the democrats didn't get those votes they wouldn't have power....so the racist, lyndon johnson, lied and supported the last Civil Rights acts out of pure political calculation........


Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.

*For two decades in Congress he was a reliable member of the Southern bloc, helping to stonewall civil rights legislation.*

As Caro recalls, Johnson spent the late 1940s railing against the “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves” in East Asia. Buying into the stereotype that blacks were afraid of snakes (who isn’t afraid of snakes?) he’d drive to gas stations with one in his trunk and try to trick black attendants into opening it. Once, Caro writes, the stunt nearly ended with him being beaten with a tire iron.



Nor was it the kind of immature, frat-boy racism that Johnson eventually jettisoned. Even as president, Johnson’s interpersonal relationships with blacks were marred by his prejudice. As longtime Jet correspondent Simeon Booker wrote in his memoir_Shocks the Conscience_, early in his presidency, Johnson once lectured Booker after he authored a critical article for Jet Magazine, telling Booker he should “thank” Johnson for all he’d done for black people.


*In Flawed Giant, Johnson biographer Robert Dallek writes that Johnson explained his decision to nominate Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court rather than a less famous black judge by saying, “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want *everybody to know he’s a ******.”

According to Caro, Robert Parker, Johnson’s sometime chauffer, described in his memoir _Capitol Hill in Black and White _a moment when Johnson asked Parker whether he’d prefer to be referred to by his name rather than “boy,” “******” or “chief.” When Parker said he would, Johnson grew angry and said, “As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, ******, you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture.”

------

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

------


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The kkk supported hilary.....moron.
> 
> KKK has given $20K to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Klan leader
> 
> Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has received more than $20,000 in donations contributed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, a prominent member of the hate group said Monday.
> 
> “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice,” said Will Quigg, California Grand Dragon for the Loyal White Knights, Vocativ reported.
> 
> Mr. Quigg, the leader of the Klan’s California chapter, announced last month that he had abandoned supporting Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump in lieu of backing his likely Democratic opponent. The Klansman claims that members have raised more than $20,000 for Mrs. Clinton and have donated it anonymously to her campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> That's fake news, ya schmuck.
> 
> Some yahoo made that unsubstantiated claim. Meanwhile, there's no record to back his bullshit up. Campaign donations are on public record and his claimed $20K donation is not.
> 
> Meanwhile, the KKK endorsed Donald Trump.
> 
> KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet 'Repulsive'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This is the man syriously supports..”
Click to expand...


2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise

Of course you consider 95% of voting African Americans to be racists.

If you want to see a real racist- look in the mirror.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- and lets not forget- he is the candidate who was sued by the DOJ for refusing to rent to blacks and Puerto Ricans.
> 
> 2aguy is pissed off because the Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act- and he despises the Civil Rights Act- and thinks that 90% of African American voters are racists- and that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool- and that Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero for opposing the Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy thinks he sees racists every time he sees a Democrat- but in reality he sees a racist every morning when he looks in a mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The man Syriously supports.....showing he is a racist pig...
> 
> lyndon johnson.....the hero of syriously....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> * against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> ------
> 
> *--In his 1948 speech in Austin kicking off his Senate campaign, Johnson declared he was against Truman’s attempt to end the poll tax because, Johnson said, "it is the province of the state to run its own elections." Johnson also was against proposals against lynching "because the federal government," Johnson said, "has no more business enacting a law against one form of murder than against another."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quoting your own citation- Caro
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....shit for brains.
Click to expand...


Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.

Citing the author you cited again:


*Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dip shit...the Republicans passed all of the Civil Rights acts.....the democrats fought all of the Civil Rights acts...and LBJ fought them all for 20 years, i..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The man Syriously supports.....showing he is a racist pig...
> 
> lyndon johnson.....the hero of syriously....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> * against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> ------
> 
> *--In his 1948 speech in Austin kicking off his Senate campaign, Johnson declared he was against Truman’s attempt to end the poll tax because, Johnson said, "it is the province of the state to run its own elections." Johnson also was against proposals against lynching "because the federal government," Johnson said, "has no more business enacting a law against one form of murder than against another."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quoting your own citation- Caro
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.
> 
> Citing the author you cited again:
> 
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*
Click to expand...



You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power.......he was a racist, and died a racist.......


Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.

*For two decades in Congress he was a reliable member of the Southern bloc, helping to stonewall civil rights legislation.*

As Caro recalls, Johnson spent the late 1940s railing against the “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves” in East Asia. Buying into the stereotype that blacks were afraid of snakes (who isn’t afraid of snakes?) he’d drive to gas stations with one in his trunk and try to trick black attendants into opening it. Once, Caro writes, the stunt nearly ended with him being beaten with a tire iron.



Nor was it the kind of immature, frat-boy racism that Johnson eventually jettisoned. Even as president, Johnson’s interpersonal relationships with blacks were marred by his prejudice. As longtime Jet correspondent Simeon Booker wrote in his memoir_Shocks the Conscience_, early in his presidency, Johnson once lectured Booker after he authored a critical article for Jet Magazine, telling Booker he should “thank” Johnson for all he’d done for black people.


*In Flawed Giant, Johnson biographer Robert Dallek writes that Johnson explained his decision to nominate Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court rather than a less famous black judge by saying, “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want *everybody to know he’s a ******.”

According to Caro, Robert Parker, Johnson’s sometime chauffer, described in his memoir _Capitol Hill in Black and White _a moment when Johnson asked Parker whether he’d prefer to be referred to by his name rather than “boy,” “******” or “chief.” When Parker said he would, Johnson grew angry and said, “As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, ******, you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture.”

------

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

------


----------



## Syriusly

Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.

Nor should Johnson’s racism overshadow what he did to push America toward the unfulfilled promise of its founding. When Republicans say they’re the Party of Lincoln, they don’t mean they’re the party of deporting black people to West Africa, or the party of opposing black suffrage, or the party of allowing states the authority to bar freedmen from migrating there, all options Lincoln considered. They mean they’re the party that crushed the slave empire of the Confederacy and helped free black Americans from bondage. 

But we shouldn’t forget Johnson’s racism, either. After Johnson’s death, Parker would reflect on the Johnson who championed the landmark civil rights bills that formally ended American apartheid, and write, “I loved that Lyndon Johnson.” Then he remembered the president who called him a ******, and he wrote, “I hated that Lyndon Johnson.”

That sounds about right.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.
> 
> Nor should Johnson’s racism overshadow what he did to push America toward the unfulfilled promise of its founding. When Republicans say they’re the Party of Lincoln, they don’t mean they’re the party of deporting black people to West Africa, or the party of opposing black suffrage, or the party of allowing states the authority to bar freedmen from migrating there, all options Lincoln considered. They mean they’re the party that crushed the slave empire of the Confederacy and helped free black Americans from bondage.
> 
> But we shouldn’t forget Johnson’s racism, either. After Johnson’s death, Parker would reflect on the Johnson who championed the landmark civil rights bills that formally ended American apartheid, and write, “I loved that Lyndon Johnson.” Then he remembered the president who called him a ******, and he wrote, “I hated that Lyndon Johnson.”
> 
> That sounds about right.




Yes... he was a racist, political opportunist who used the last of the Civil Rights acts to hook black Americans on government welfare, and we see the results of their 95% voting record for democrats in every democrat controlled city....blacks suffer poverty, lack of education, murder and the destruction of their families.....all under the control of the democrat party....all started by the racist LBJ.....


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Democrats passed the essential and iconic Civil Rights Act- with Republican support.
> 
> Republicans- and Democrats- from the South- fought all of the Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> LBJ engineered the passage not only of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- but also of spearheaded the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> 2aguy is just pissed off that LBJ passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act- that he- and modern Republicans despise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The man Syriously supports.....showing he is a racist pig...
> 
> lyndon johnson.....the hero of syriously....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> * against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> ------
> 
> *--In his 1948 speech in Austin kicking off his Senate campaign, Johnson declared he was against Truman’s attempt to end the poll tax because, Johnson said, "it is the province of the state to run its own elections." Johnson also was against proposals against lynching "because the federal government," Johnson said, "has no more business enacting a law against one form of murder than against another."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quoting your own citation- Caro
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.
> 
> Citing the author you cited again:
> 
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
Click to expand...


I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.

The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.
> 
> Nor should Johnson’s racism overshadow what he did to push America toward the unfulfilled promise of its founding. When Republicans say they’re the Party of Lincoln, they don’t mean they’re the party of deporting black people to West Africa, or the party of opposing black suffrage, or the party of allowing states the authority to bar freedmen from migrating there, all options Lincoln considered. They mean they’re the party that crushed the slave empire of the Confederacy and helped free black Americans from bondage.
> 
> But we shouldn’t forget Johnson’s racism, either. After Johnson’s death, Parker would reflect on the Johnson who championed the landmark civil rights bills that formally ended American apartheid, and write, “I loved that Lyndon Johnson.” Then he remembered the president who called him a ******, and he wrote, “I hated that Lyndon Johnson.”
> 
> That sounds about right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes... he was a racist, political opportunist who used the last of the Civil Rights acts .....
Click to expand...


'the last of the Civil Rights Act'?

The very Civil Rights Act you despise. 

The very reason you despise LBJ and Democrats- they passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The man Syriously supports.....showing he is a racist pig...
> 
> lyndon johnson.....the hero of syriously....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> * against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> ------
> 
> *--In his 1948 speech in Austin kicking off his Senate campaign, Johnson declared he was against Truman’s attempt to end the poll tax because, Johnson said, "it is the province of the state to run its own elections." Johnson also was against proposals against lynching "because the federal government," Johnson said, "has no more business enacting a law against one form of murder than against another."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting your own citation- Caro
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.
> 
> Citing the author you cited again:
> 
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
Click to expand...



No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine....

The 1964 Civil Rights act ....... they gave their votes to johnson, the racist, and their children have been paying the price in blood in democrat controlled inner cities ever since......


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting your own citation- Caro
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....shit for brains.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.
> 
> Citing the author you cited again:
> 
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine......
Click to expand...


If you want to see a real racist- just look in the mirror. 

LBJ was instrumental in passing the single most important Civil Rights legislation the last 100 years- and all you want to do is label him a racist. 

LBJ was certainly a racist- as was Abraham Lincoln.

But regardless of their racism they were leaders in Civil Rights for African Americans.

What have you done?


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....shit for brains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.
> 
> Citing the author you cited again:
> 
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want to see a real racist- just look in the mirror.
> 
> LBJ was instrumental in passing the single most important Civil Rights legislation the last 100 years- and all you want to do is label him a racist.
> 
> LBJ was certainly a racist- as was Abraham Lincoln.
> 
> But regardless of their racism they were leaders in Civil Rights for African Americans.
> 
> What have you done?
Click to expand...



johnson was a racists who was a political opportunist.....he used the Civil Rights votes...at the end....when all of the important votes were done, to win support from Martin Luther King......and condemned blacks to poverty, murder and misery under the democrat party to this day.....

Lincoln lived in the 1860s....johnson in the 1960s.......get real....Barry Goldwater also lived at the same time as johnson and was a Civil Rights hero.......


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.
> 
> Citing the author you cited again:
> 
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want to see a real racist- just look in the mirror.
> 
> LBJ was instrumental in passing the single most important Civil Rights legislation the last 100 years- and all you want to do is label him a racist.
> 
> LBJ was certainly a racist- as was Abraham Lincoln.
> 
> But regardless of their racism they were leaders in Civil Rights for African Americans.
> 
> What have you done?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lincoln lived in the 1860s....johnson in the 1960s.......get real....Barry Goldwater also lived at the same time as johnson and was a Civil Rights hero.......
Click to expand...

Lincoln was a racist- and you are okay with that.
LBJ was a racist- and that is not acceptable to you.
Of course LBJ was a Democrat- and Lincoln was a Republican- hence your position.

Barry Goldwater didn't pass a single significant piece of federal Civil Rights legislation - LBJ passed the single most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years. 

_To many, Mr. Goldwater was a man of contradictions. He ended racial segregation in his family department stores, and he was instrumental in ending it in Phoenix schools and restaurants and in the Arizona National Guard. But he also voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, contending that it was unconstitutional,* and he backed restrictive amendments to earlier civil rights legislation. *Blacks voted overwhelmingly against him in 1964._


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want to see a real racist- just look in the mirror.
> 
> LBJ was instrumental in passing the single most important Civil Rights legislation the last 100 years- and all you want to do is label him a racist.
> 
> LBJ was certainly a racist- as was Abraham Lincoln.
> 
> But regardless of their racism they were leaders in Civil Rights for African Americans.
> 
> What have you done?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lincoln lived in the 1860s....johnson in the 1960s.......get real....Barry Goldwater also lived at the same time as johnson and was a Civil Rights hero.......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lincoln was a racist- and you are okay with that.
> LBJ was a racist- and that is not acceptable to you.
> Of course LBJ was a Democrat- and Lincoln was a Republican- hence your position.
> 
> Barry Goldwater didn't pass a single significant piece of federal Civil Rights legislation - LBJ passed the single most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> _To many, Mr. Goldwater was a man of contradictions. He ended racial segregation in his family department stores, and he was instrumental in ending it in Phoenix schools and restaurants and in the Arizona National Guard. But he also voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, contending that it was unconstitutional,* and he backed restrictive amendments to earlier civil rights legislation. *Blacks voted overwhelmingly against him in 1964._
Click to expand...



No, shit for brains....

Lincoln freed the slaves.....johnson used the civil rights act to get personal power 

Barry Goldwater was a Civil Rights hero and opposed unConstitutional power in the Federal Government.....as my links have shown over and over.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, the south is still the bastion of racism and is now dominated by Republicans.
> 
> That's why white nationalists endorsed Trump.
> 
> That's why it's folks on the right who fight to keep the confederate flag.
> 
> And Trump is a racist as evidenced by him trying to keep blacks out of his buildings until he was sued to let them in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
Click to expand...

LOLOL

Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.

Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love the language of the racist who is pissed off at LBJ for getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed.
> 
> Citing the author you cited again:
> 
> 
> *Caro:* The reason it’s questioned is that for no less than 20 years in Congress, from 1937 to 1957, Johnson’s record was on the side of the South. He not only voted with the South on civil rights, but he was a southern strategist, but in 1957, he changes and pushes through the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction. He always had this true, deep compassion to help poor people and particularly poor people of color, but even stronger than the compassion was his ambition. *But when the two aligned, when compassion and ambition finally are pointing in the same direction, then Lyndon Johnson becomes a force for racial justice, unequalled certainly since Lincoln*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want to see a real racist- just look in the mirror.
> 
> LBJ was instrumental in passing the single most important Civil Rights legislation the last 100 years- and all you want to do is label him a racist.
> 
> LBJ was certainly a racist- as was Abraham Lincoln.
> 
> But regardless of their racism they were leaders in Civil Rights for African Americans.
> 
> What have you done?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> johnson was a racists who was a political opportunist.....he used the Civil Rights votes...at the end....when all of the important votes were done, to win support from Martin Luther King......and condemned blacks to poverty, murder and misery under the democrat party to this day.....
> 
> Lincoln lived in the 1860s....johnson in the 1960s.......get real....Barry Goldwater also lived at the same time as johnson and was a Civil Rights hero.......
Click to expand...

And how did racist southern Democrats get even with LBJ for stabbing them in the back by supporting civil rights for blacks?

.... they became Republicans.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep qouting the fact that lyndon johnson was a racist who saw a political opportunity to get black votes....in order to stay in power....-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want to see a real racist- just look in the mirror.
> 
> LBJ was instrumental in passing the single most important Civil Rights legislation the last 100 years- and all you want to do is label him a racist.
> 
> LBJ was certainly a racist- as was Abraham Lincoln.
> 
> But regardless of their racism they were leaders in Civil Rights for African Americans.
> 
> What have you done?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> johnson was a racists who was a political opportunist.....he used the Civil Rights votes...at the end....when all of the important votes were done, to win support from Martin Luther King......and condemned blacks to poverty, murder and misery under the democrat party to this day.....
> 
> Lincoln lived in the 1860s....johnson in the 1960s.......get real....Barry Goldwater also lived at the same time as johnson and was a Civil Rights hero.......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how did racist southern Democrats get even with LBJ for stabbing them in the back by supporting civil rights for blacks?
> 
> .... they became Republicans.
Click to expand...



So......the racists who didn't like lbj passing civil rights legislation, joined the political party that whole heartedly created and pushed the civil rights legislation.......are you really this stupid, or are you just pretending to be this stupid....?


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
Click to expand...



No....they don't...if they did they wouldn't be voting for the party of racism, the democrat party.   They have been educated in government schools controlled by the eductation wing of the democrat party....the democrats schools they attend in inner cities are barely graduating students who can read and do math, and yet you think they are getting an accurate understanding of which political party is the racist party?  That is funny.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I keep pointing out that the reason why you are pissed at LBJ is because he passed the 1964 Civil Right Act.
> 
> The Civil Rights Act that is considered crucial by African Americans- and  you- and modern Republicans despise the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> This moment here- is why you despise LBJ- and African American voters.
> View attachment 139753
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No....I don't like johnson because he was a racist....I don't like 2 provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights act.....the rest was fine......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want to see a real racist- just look in the mirror.
> 
> LBJ was instrumental in passing the single most important Civil Rights legislation the last 100 years- and all you want to do is label him a racist.
> 
> LBJ was certainly a racist- as was Abraham Lincoln.
> 
> But regardless of their racism they were leaders in Civil Rights for African Americans.
> 
> What have you done?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> johnson was a racists who was a political opportunist.....he used the Civil Rights votes...at the end....when all of the important votes were done, to win support from Martin Luther King......and condemned blacks to poverty, murder and misery under the democrat party to this day.....
> 
> Lincoln lived in the 1860s....johnson in the 1960s.......get real....Barry Goldwater also lived at the same time as johnson and was a Civil Rights hero.......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how did racist southern Democrats get even with LBJ for stabbing them in the back by supporting civil rights for blacks?
> 
> .... they became Republicans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So......the racists who didn't like lbj passing civil rights legislation, joined the political party that whole heartedly created and pushed the civil rights legislation.......are you really this stupid, or are you just pretending to be this stupid....?
Click to expand...

Again, the division over civil rights was north/south, not Republican/Democrats. And again, only southern Democrats *(along with southern Republicans)* were against it. 

Again, more Democrats in th north supported it than Republican in the north. In the south, more Democrats supported it than Republicans. And it was pushed through by a Democrat president. It was Democrats, with support from Republicans, who got civil rights passed. The southern Democrat voters revolted by becoming Republicans.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....they don't...if they did they wouldn't be voting for the party of racism, the democrat party.   They have been educated in government schools controlled by the eductation wing of the democrat party....the democrats schools they attend in inner cities are barely graduating students who can read and do math, and yet you think they are getting an accurate understanding of which political party is the racist party?  That is funny.
Click to expand...

They're not voting for the party of racism, they're voting for Democrats; who once were the party of racism, but that was before the racist southern Democrats became the racist southern Republicans.

And blacks are smarter than you as they recognize that even though you can't.


----------



## Syriusly

The hilarious thing about this thread is you have a wingnut Conservative whining that a  statement by an African American about slavery being historically inaccurate- in a film about a guy with super powers because he was bitten by a radioactive spider- also starring Captain America- who in the movie's universe fought in World War 2.

Because of course in that universe...there is no way that slaves built the Washington Monument......

LOL


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No....they don't...if they did they wouldn't be voting for the party of racism,
Click to expand...


Once again we have you- telling African Americans that they are stupid- and you are smarter than them.

You want to see who belongs to the party of racism?

Look in the mirror.


----------



## Syriusly

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong......racism is concentrated in democrat run cities....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
Click to expand...


Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.

And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not. 

And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool. 

And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.

Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
Click to expand...



Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....

The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....

95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.

King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> The hilarious thing about this thread is you have a wingnut Conservative whining that a  statement by an African American about slavery being historically inaccurate- in a film about a guy with super powers because he was bitten by a radioactive spider- also starring Captain America- who in the movie's universe fought in World War 2.
> 
> Because of course in that universe...there is no way that slaves built the Washington Monument......
> 
> LOL




The left never rests.......if it wasn't important...why put it in the movie?   There was no reason for it to be in the movie...yet, there it was....

From my college history classes where we studied communist propaganda films...they didn't take anything for granted......


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> The hilarious thing about this thread is you have a wingnut Conservative whining that a  statement by an African American about slavery being historically inaccurate- in a film about a guy with super powers because he was bitten by a radioactive spider- also starring Captain America- who in the movie's universe fought in World War 2.
> 
> Because of course in that universe...there is no way that slaves built the Washington Monument......
> 
> LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The left never rests.......if it wasn't important...why put it in the movie?  ...
Click to expand...


And by 'the left'....you mean the people who wrote a movie about a guy who gets superpowers because he was bitten by a radioactive spider.....and included Captain America- hero of World War 2.

You on the Right never can resist your impulse to be a victim- even when it comes to stories about guys bitten by radioactive.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves.....
Click to expand...


95% of African American voters are registered Democrats- and to you- that makes them racists.

Yep- you are the guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.

And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.

And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.

And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- you believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.

Any time you want to see a real racist- all you have to do  is look in a mirror.


----------



## Syriusly

Michael Gerson: Barry Goldwater’s warning to the GOP

But some political choices are symbolic and more than symbolic. Following Goldwater’s vote, a young Colin Powell went out to his car and affixed a Lyndon Johnson bumper sticker. “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.

In the 1960 election, Richard Nixon had won 32 percent of the African American vote. Goldwater got 6 percent in 1964. No Republican presidential candidate since has broken 15 percent.

There is much to be written on the dangers and diminishing utility of a Republican electoral strategy based on maximizing the turnout of white voters. My concern here is with the tone and approach of the Goldwater movement. The candidate and his supporters regarded his vote against the Civil Rights Act not primarily as a political maneuver but as the evidence of ideological courage in the cause of liberty.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 95% of African American voters are registered Democrats- and to you- that makes them racists.
> 
> Yep- you are the guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- you believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time you want to see a real racist- all you have to do  is look in a mirror.
Click to expand...



95% of blacks vote democrat out of ignorance......they don't realize that the party is the party of racism.....and it isn't just black democrats...it is democrats of all colors moron......

Obama sat in a racist church for 20 years.....obama supports al sharpton and the black panthers...who he refused to prosecute for voter intimidation, Eric holder stated they weren't going to prosecute because of their race......Obama had the racist al sharp ton to the White House and black lives matter...he is an actual racist

The democrats want those monuments down....before people realize that the democrats are the ones who owned the salves...


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> Michael Gerson: Barry Goldwater’s warning to the GOP
> 
> But some political choices are symbolic and more than symbolic. Following Goldwater’s vote, a young Colin Powell went out to his car and affixed a Lyndon Johnson bumper sticker. “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> In the 1960 election, Richard Nixon had won 32 percent of the African American vote. Goldwater got 6 percent in 1964. No Republican presidential candidate since has broken 15 percent.
> 
> There is much to be written on the dangers and diminishing utility of a Republican electoral strategy based on maximizing the turnout of white voters. My concern here is with the tone and approach of the Goldwater movement. The candidate and his supporters regarded his vote against the Civil Rights Act not primarily as a political maneuver but as the evidence of ideological courage in the cause of liberty.




No...Johnson was the racist...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....you can lie about a good man all you want...that you choose to smear a good man like Goldwater shows you are truly a vile scumbag........

The links I provided show you are lying about the man....you are an asshole.....and a shot for brains....


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> No..they have a misguided understanding of states Rights.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....
> 
> The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.
> 
> King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...
Click to expand...

Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Michael Gerson: Barry Goldwater’s warning to the GOP
> 
> But some political choices are symbolic and more than symbolic. Following Goldwater’s vote, a young Colin Powell went out to his car and affixed a Lyndon Johnson bumper sticker. “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> In the 1960 election, Richard Nixon had won 32 percent of the African American vote. Goldwater got 6 percent in 1964. No Republican presidential candidate since has broken 15 percent.
> 
> There is much to be written on the dangers and diminishing utility of a Republican electoral strategy based on maximizing the turnout of white voters. My concern here is with the tone and approach of the Goldwater movement. The candidate and his supporters regarded his vote against the Civil Rights Act not primarily as a political maneuver but as the evidence of ideological courage in the cause of liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...Johnson was the racist...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....
Click to expand...


Who was Goldwater a Civil Rights hero too? 

White nationalists? 

Like Lincoln, Johnson was a racist- and like Lincoln- Johnson was responsible for the passing of one of the greatest acts of Civil Rights in American history.

Which is why you despise Johnson.


----------



## Syriusly

The White Nationalists like 2aguy would have you believe that white Southerners were all racists from 1860 to 1964.

But suddenly- and miraculously- white Southerners stopped being racists after 1965. While white Northerners were overwhelmingly racists. 

If 2aguy wants to see someone who is member of the party of racists- all he has to do is look in the mirror.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 95% of African American voters are registered Democrats- and to you- that makes them racists.
> 
> Yep- you are the guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- you believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time you want to see a real racist- all you have to do  is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote democrat out of ignorance......they don't realize that the party is the party of racism.....and it isn't just black democrats...it is democrats of all colors moron......
> 
> Obama sat in a racist church for 20 years.....obama supports al sharpton and the black panthers...who he refused to prosecute for voter intimidation, Eric holder stated they weren't going to prosecute because of their race......Obama had the racist al sharp ton to the White House and black lives matter...he is an actual racist
> 
> The democrats want those monuments down....before people realize that the democrats are the ones who owned the salves...
Click to expand...

Who doesn't know that Democrats owned slaves??


----------



## Syriusly

Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.




Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.

For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.


----------



## Syriusly

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 95% of African American voters are registered Democrats- and to you- that makes them racists.
> 
> Yep- you are the guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- you believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time you want to see a real racist- all you have to do  is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote democrat out of ignorance......they don't realize that the party is the party of racism.....and it isn't just black democrats...it is democrats of all colors moron......
> 
> Obama sat in a racist church for 20 years.....obama supports al sharpton and the black panthers...who he refused to prosecute for voter intimidation, Eric holder stated they weren't going to prosecute because of their race......Obama had the racist al sharp ton to the White House and black lives matter...he is an actual racist
> 
> The democrats want those monuments down....before people realize that the democrats are the ones who owned the salves...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who doesn't know that Democrats owned slaves??
Click to expand...


I love how 2aguy calls 95% of African American voters 'ignorant'.

Meanwhile- Donald Trump - who refused to rent to African Americans and Puerto Ricans- now Trump is 2aguy's hero.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have said repeatedly that you believe that Democrats are all racists.
> 90% of voting African Americans are Democrats.
> Hence
> You think 90% of African Americans are racists.
> 
> Yep- because to you- 90% of African Americans are the real racists.
> 
> Those white dudes in the GOP in the South who have fought to keep the Confederate flags flying are just good old boys who don't have a racist bone in their body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....
> 
> The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.
> 
> King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.
Click to expand...



Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country......their out of wedlock birth rate is close to 70%....their education in democrat controlled schools sometimes reaches 50% graduation rates....the poverty, crime and murder rates...yes, voting for the racist democrat party and their racist policies has helped blacks in the United States.......

The racists in the south stayed with the democrat party, those who grew up, and didn't want to obsess about race became Republicans.....racism is the core of the democrat party, racists of all colors belong to the party, and their racist parties have destroyed minority communities throughout the United States....


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.




This is who King supported....

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.



This is who King voted against......

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*

 Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.


NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *


"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."


So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Michael Gerson: Barry Goldwater’s warning to the GOP
> 
> But some political choices are symbolic and more than symbolic. Following Goldwater’s vote, a young Colin Powell went out to his car and affixed a Lyndon Johnson bumper sticker. “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> In the 1960 election, Richard Nixon had won 32 percent of the African American vote. Goldwater got 6 percent in 1964. No Republican presidential candidate since has broken 15 percent.
> 
> There is much to be written on the dangers and diminishing utility of a Republican electoral strategy based on maximizing the turnout of white voters. My concern here is with the tone and approach of the Goldwater movement. The candidate and his supporters regarded his vote against the Civil Rights Act not primarily as a political maneuver but as the evidence of ideological courage in the cause of liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...Johnson was the racist...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who was Goldwater a Civil Rights hero too?
> 
> White nationalists?
> 
> Like Lincoln, Johnson was a racist- and like Lincoln- Johnson was responsible for the passing of one of the greatest acts of Civil Rights in American history.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
Click to expand...



Karma is a bitch.....and here you are smearing the name of a good man to protect actual racists...lyndon johnson and the democrat party........when the Karma train runs you over......let me just say you brought it on yourself....


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....
> 
> The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.
> 
> King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country......their out of wedlock birth rate is close to 70%....their education in democrat controlled schools sometimes reaches 50% graduation rates....the poverty, crime and murder rates...yes, voting for the racist democrat party and their racist policies has helped blacks in the United States.......
> 
> The racists in the south stayed with the democrat party, those who grew up, and didn't want to obsess about race became Republicans.....racism is the core of the democrat party, racists of all colors belong to the party, and their racist parties have destroyed minority communities throughout the United States....
Click to expand...

Nope, Republicans control most of that. In the racist south, they control most governorships, state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, local school boards. The southern racists, who were once Democrats a long time ago, haven't changed their views on blacks, only their political party; which is now Republican. Because LBJ stabbed them in the back for supporting civil rights for blacks.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
Click to expand...

LOLOLOL

You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.



You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....
> 
> The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.
> 
> King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country......their out of wedlock birth rate is close to 70%....their education in democrat controlled schools sometimes reaches 50% graduation rates....the poverty, crime and murder rates...yes, voting for the racist democrat party and their racist policies has helped blacks in the United States.......
> 
> The racists in the south stayed with the democrat party, those who grew up, and didn't want to obsess about race became Republicans.....racism is the core of the democrat party, racists of all colors belong to the party, and their racist parties have destroyed minority communities throughout the United States....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, Republicans control most of that. In the racist south, they control most governorships, state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, local school boards. The southern racists, who were once Democrats a long time ago, haven't changed their views on blacks, only their political party; which is now Republican. Because LBJ stabbed them in the back for supporting civil rights for blacks.
Click to expand...



The South isn't racist...there are too many Republicans there now....the real racism is in democrat controlled cities....especially democrat controlled neighborhoods.....that is where minorities suffer...under democrat control.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
Click to expand...



He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career....Goldwater would have delivered the 64 Act without these .... they gave the government too much power..... which is why the democrats came on board......votes and power, that is all they wanted...and now, the blacks suffer under their control...

As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> The South isn't racist.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career....Goldwater would have delivered the 64 Act without these .... they gave the government too much power..... which is why the democrats came on board......votes and power, that is all they wanted...and now, the blacks suffer under their control...
> 
> As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed.
Click to expand...

Moron..., no one knows what Goldwater would have done for blacks had he become president since, thankfully, he was thoroughly and resoundingly rejected by America. We do know what LBJ did -- he delivered them civil rights.

And you idiotically attack MLK Jr. for supporting him.


----------



## 2aguy

Why was this thread moved to the T.V section?  If anything move it to the movie section...


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the party of racism...are they individual racists?  Or do they simply not understand the history and present of the the democrat party?  That is the question...the democrat party is the party of racism........how they vote reveals they don't know their own history...
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Look at the ^^^ racist ^^^ calling 95% of Black Americans, ignorant about racism leveled against them.
> 
> Racist moron.... blacks know which party was the party of racism then and they know which is the party of racism now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....
> 
> The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.
> 
> King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country....
Click to expand...


Why do you insist on telling African Americans that they are stupid? 

Seems like a pretty racist thing to tell them.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported.....
Click to expand...


Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.

Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.

2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.
> 
> Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> 2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.
Click to expand...



You are a coward..........very brave of you......calling someone a racist when you sit behind a computer screen.....


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Michael Gerson: Barry Goldwater’s warning to the GOP
> 
> But some political choices are symbolic and more than symbolic. Following Goldwater’s vote, a young Colin Powell went out to his car and affixed a Lyndon Johnson bumper sticker. “While not himself a racist,” concluded Martin Luther King Jr., “Mr. Goldwater articulates a philosophy which gives aid and comfort to the racists.” Jackie Robinson, after attending the GOP convention in 1964, helped launch Republicans for Johnson.
> 
> In the 1960 election, Richard Nixon had won 32 percent of the African American vote. Goldwater got 6 percent in 1964. No Republican presidential candidate since has broken 15 percent.
> 
> There is much to be written on the dangers and diminishing utility of a Republican electoral strategy based on maximizing the turnout of white voters. My concern here is with the tone and approach of the Goldwater movement. The candidate and his supporters regarded his vote against the Civil Rights Act not primarily as a political maneuver but as the evidence of ideological courage in the cause of liberty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No...Johnson was the racist...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who was Goldwater a Civil Rights hero too?
> 
> White nationalists?
> 
> Like Lincoln, Johnson was a racist- and like Lincoln- Johnson was responsible for the passing of one of the greatest acts of Civil Rights in American history.
> 
> Which is why you despise Johnson.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Karma is a bitch.....and here you are smearing the name of a good man to protect actual racists....
Click to expand...


Who am I smearing? 

You? You are a racist who believes that minorities are virtually all racists and those good old boys waving the Southern flags and lining up to protect Confederate monuments are of course- the non-racists.

You despise Johnson and spend so much of your time trying to smear him because you are pissed off that he managed to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.
> 
> Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> 2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are a coward..........very brave of you......calling someone a racist when you sit behind a computer screen.....
Click to expand...


You are a coward......you have called every Democrats a racist.....including every Black and Latino Democrats- while hiding behind your computer screen.

And you are a whiny snowflake racist too.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
Click to expand...


I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.

Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.

But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.

And that pisses 2aguy off.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- this is a guy who claims that Democrats are all racists- when 95% of African American voters are Democrats.
> 
> And believes that President Obama is a racist- but President Trump is not.
> 
> And that Martin Luther King Jr. was a fool.
> 
> And that all of the people who have fought to keep the Confederate flag flying and Confederate monuments in place- those people are not the racists- he believes the racists are the ones who want the Confederate flags taken down.
> 
> Any time he wants to see a real racist- all he has to do is look in a mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....
> 
> The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.
> 
> King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country......their out of wedlock birth rate is close to 70%....their education in democrat controlled schools sometimes reaches 50% graduation rates....the poverty, crime and murder rates...yes, voting for the racist democrat party and their racist policies has helped blacks in the United States.......
> 
> The racists in the south stayed with the democrat party, those who grew up, and didn't want to obsess about race became Republicans.....racism is the core of the democrat party, racists of all colors belong to the party, and their racist parties have destroyed minority communities throughout the United States....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, Republicans control most of that. In the racist south, they control most governorships, state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, local school boards. The southern racists, who were once Democrats a long time ago, haven't changed their views on blacks, only their political party; which is now Republican. Because LBJ stabbed them in the back for supporting civil rights for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The South isn't racist..
Click to expand...


Amazing isn't it?

From the beginning of the United States until 1964, the South was 'racist', but suddenly after 1964 Southerners were no longer racists(except of course Southern blacks)

Was there a massive migration that we missed?


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
Click to expand...



Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act.....johnson spent 20 years blocking them, including the anti-lynching laws ......he didn't mind blacks being hung in trees.....till he realized he needed their votes....here is the truth...again...

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

*"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…*Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.*
=============

*Goldwater.....*

Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] 

Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.

*
Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
---
NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There


*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...some Republicans have mistakenly taken those monuments as symbols against federal government over reach.....
> 
> The democrats...want those statues taken down as fast as possible so no one realizes that all those guys...were democrats who fought to keep blacks as slaves.....
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the political party that owned slaves....fought to keep slaves, fought against every Civil Rights act that was important until the very end when blacks were going to vote no matter how many blacks democrats lynched and fire bombed......they mainly vote democrat because they are being educated in schools controlled by the democrat controlled teachers union.
> 
> King supported the racist LBJ over the actual Civil Rights hero Barry Goldwater...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country......their out of wedlock birth rate is close to 70%....their education in democrat controlled schools sometimes reaches 50% graduation rates....the poverty, crime and murder rates...yes, voting for the racist democrat party and their racist policies has helped blacks in the United States.......
> 
> The racists in the south stayed with the democrat party, those who grew up, and didn't want to obsess about race became Republicans.....racism is the core of the democrat party, racists of all colors belong to the party, and their racist parties have destroyed minority communities throughout the United States....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, Republicans control most of that. In the racist south, they control most governorships, state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, local school boards. The southern racists, who were once Democrats a long time ago, haven't changed their views on blacks, only their political party; which is now Republican. Because LBJ stabbed them in the back for supporting civil rights for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The South isn't racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazing isn't it?
> 
> From the beginning of the United States until 1964, the South was 'racist', but suddenly after 1964 Southerners were no longer racists(except of course Southern blacks)
> 
> Was there a massive migration that we missed?
Click to expand...



Here you go asswipe......even you can understand this....

Why Did the Democratic South Become Republican?


----------



## Syriusly

Here are who 2aguy considers to be the southern racists of 1968...
.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> Here are who 2aguy considers to be the southern racists of 1968...
> .
> View attachment 140343




Oh.....that's right.....you are really fucking stupid.....here you go......this is the difference between the racist, johnson....and the Civil Rights Hero, Barry Goldwater......


Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

*"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –*

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…*Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.*
=============

*Goldwater.....*


Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] 

Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*


Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
---
NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There


*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.
> 
> Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> 2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are a coward..........very brave of you......calling someone a racist when you sit behind a computer screen.....
Click to expand...

LOLOL

Projects the idiot calling 95% of blacks, "ignorant," while stationed behind his.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.
> 
> Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> 2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are a coward..........very brave of you......calling someone a racist when you sit behind a computer screen.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Projects the idiot calling 95% of blacks, "ignorant," while stationed behind his.
Click to expand...



Please....explain to us what blacks voting 95% for democrats, the racist party, has done for their community....please....give us details......the body count in Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, L.A.......and all the other democrat controlled areas is rising......


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
Click to expand...


Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964

LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote. 
Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957

Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.

But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.

And that pisses 2aguy off


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
Click to expand...



Wow....you really are stupid.......Goldwater always fought for Civil Rights...of all people....for johnson...it was a political trick....

here, since you are so fucking stupid.....I guess you have to read the truth again...

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
=============

Goldwater.....

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics


Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] 

Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.
*
Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
---
NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There


*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
Click to expand...


Since you are a stupid human being...here is some more on the Civil Rights Hero Barry Goldwater....

Urban Legend: Goldwater Against Civil Rights



More specifically, Goldwater had problems with title II and title VII of the 1964 bill. He felt that constitutionally the federal government had no legal right to interfere in who people hired, fired; or to whom they sold their products, goods and services. He felt that “power” laid in the various states, and with the people. He was a strong advocate of the tenth amendment. Goldwater’s constitutional stance did not mean he agreed with the segregation and racial discrimination practiced in the South. To the contrary, he fought against these kinds of racial divides in his own state of Arizona. He supported the integration of the Arizona National guard and Phoenix public schools.[4] Goldwater was, also, a member of the NAACP and the Urban League.[5]

His personal feelings about discrimination are enshrined in the congressional record where he states, “_I am unalterably opposed to discrimination or segregation on the basis of race, color, or creed or on any other basis; not only my words, but more importantly my actions through years have repeatedly demonstrated the sincerity of my feeling in this regard_…”[6]. And, he would continued to holdfast to his strongly felt convictions that constitutionally the federal government was limited in what it could do, believing that the amoral actions of those perpetuating discrimination and segregation would have to be judged by those in that community. Eventually, the states government and local communities would come to pressure people to change their minds. Goldwater’s view was that the civil disobedience by private citizens against those business establishments was more preferable than intervention by the feds. He, optimistically, believed that racial intolerance would soon buckle under the economic and societal pressure.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
Click to expand...



And johnson, the racist....also knew this would happen...

Many would argue that the advent of the Great Society initiates the decline of the Black family. What Blacks gained from Civil Rights legislation and government largess, they lost in individual liberty and fidelity. They became more dependent on government programs; and less dependent on their own ability to improve themselves by the work of their own hands, and the sweat of their brow. If you read Barry Goldwater’s _Conscience of a Conservative_you’ll see that he understood this dynamic [see my article Conservatism vs The Borg (liberalism)].


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
Click to expand...



Hey...shit bird........johnson was a racist....

The Party of Civil Rights

The depth of Johnson’s prior opposition to civil-rights reform must be digested in some detail to be properly appreciated.

 In the House, he did not represent a particularly segregationist constituency (it “made up for being less intensely segregationist than the rest of the South by being more intensely anti-Communist,” as the New York Times put it), but Johnson was practically antebellum in his views.

 Never mind civil rights or voting rights: In Congress, Johnson had consistently and repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching. 


*As a leader in the Senate, Johnson did his best to cripple the Civil Rights Act of 1957; not having votes sufficient to stop it, he managed to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by excising the enforcement provisions before sending it to the desk of President Eisenhower. *


Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill. The reformers came back in 1960 with an act to remedy the deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Johnson’s Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster. 

*In both cases, the “master of the Senate” petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had taken the teeth out of the legislation. *



*Johnson would later explain his thinking thus: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”
*
Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported....
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> 
> "He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –
> 
> *against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*
> 
> 
> "Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King voted against......
> 
> Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
> 
> Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
> 
> In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
> 
> *That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
> 
> Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
> 
> 
> NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
> 
> *As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *
> 
> 
> "He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
> 
> 
> So tell us why King voted for the racist and not the actual Civil Rights Hero.....
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
Click to expand...



Goldwater .....suppored all the Civil Rights acts....and the 64 act except for those two provisions.......

Goldwater had supported the 1957 and 1960 acts but believed that Title II and Title VII of the 1964 bill were unconstitutional, based in part on a 75-page brief from Robert Bork. 

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again.... blacks are smarter than you. They know it was 150 years when Democrats owned slaves. They also know they were racist southerners who are now mostly Republicans. That's why they're primarily Democrat now even though they they used to be primarily Republican.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country......their out of wedlock birth rate is close to 70%....their education in democrat controlled schools sometimes reaches 50% graduation rates....the poverty, crime and murder rates...yes, voting for the racist democrat party and their racist policies has helped blacks in the United States.......
> 
> The racists in the south stayed with the democrat party, those who grew up, and didn't want to obsess about race became Republicans.....racism is the core of the democrat party, racists of all colors belong to the party, and their racist parties have destroyed minority communities throughout the United States....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, Republicans control most of that. In the racist south, they control most governorships, state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, local school boards. The southern racists, who were once Democrats a long time ago, haven't changed their views on blacks, only their political party; which is now Republican. Because LBJ stabbed them in the back for supporting civil rights for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The South isn't racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazing isn't it?
> 
> From the beginning of the United States until 1964, the South was 'racist', but suddenly after 1964 Southerners were no longer racists(except of course Southern blacks)
> 
> Was there a massive migration that we missed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go asswipe......
> ]
Click to expand...

'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?


A Republican propaganda piece?

Surely you can do better than that. 

"At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
"Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History

The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.

But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.

In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.

But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:

Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”

I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:

Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”

The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.

Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”

Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.

It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:

The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)

Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)

Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)

Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)

The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)

Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)

Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)

Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)

Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.

Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.

What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.

Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:

“I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”

It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.

For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.

But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.

Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.

Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.

At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”

Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.

Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.

“From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”

-Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist

“You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”

-Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act.....


Liar...

*Nay*   R  Goldwater, Barry AZ

If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes....you can tell voting for democrats has done a lot for blacks in this country......their out of wedlock birth rate is close to 70%....their education in democrat controlled schools sometimes reaches 50% graduation rates....the poverty, crime and murder rates...yes, voting for the racist democrat party and their racist policies has helped blacks in the United States.......
> 
> The racists in the south stayed with the democrat party, those who grew up, and didn't want to obsess about race became Republicans.....racism is the core of the democrat party, racists of all colors belong to the party, and their racist parties have destroyed minority communities throughout the United States....
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, Republicans control most of that. In the racist south, they control most governorships, state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, local school boards. The southern racists, who were once Democrats a long time ago, haven't changed their views on blacks, only their political party; which is now Republican. Because LBJ stabbed them in the back for supporting civil rights for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The South isn't racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazing isn't it?
> 
> From the beginning of the United States until 1964, the South was 'racist', but suddenly after 1964 Southerners were no longer racists(except of course Southern blacks)
> 
> Was there a massive migration that we missed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go asswipe......
> ]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?
> 
> 
> A Republican propaganda piece?
> 
> Surely you can do better than that.
> 
> "At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
> "Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History
> 
> The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.
> 
> But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.
> 
> In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.
> 
> But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”
> 
> I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”
> 
> The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.
> 
> It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:
> 
> The original House version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)
> 
> The Senate version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
> 
> Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.
> 
> Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.
> 
> What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.
> 
> Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:
> 
> “I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”
> 
> It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.
> 
> For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.
> 
> But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.
> 
> Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.
> 
> Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.
> 
> At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”
> 
> Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.
> 
> Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.
> 
> “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
> 
> -Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist
> 
> “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”
> 
> -Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
Click to expand...


You really are stupid....


The Party of Civil Rights

The depth of Johnson’s prior opposition to civil-rights reform must be digested in some detail to be properly appreciated.

In the House, he did not represent a particularly segregationist constituency (it “made up for being less intensely segregationist than the rest of the South by being more intensely anti-Communist,” as the New York Times put it), but Johnson was practically antebellum in his views.

Never mind civil rights or voting rights: In Congress, Johnson had consistently and repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching. 


*As a leader in the Senate, Johnson did his best to cripple the Civil Rights Act of 1957; not having votes sufficient to stop it, he managed to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by excising the enforcement provisions before sending it to the desk of President Eisenhower. *


Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill. The reformers came back in 1960 with an act to remedy the deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Johnson’s Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster. 

*In both cases, the “master of the Senate” petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had taken the teeth out of the legislation. *



*Johnson would later explain his thinking thus: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”*


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're actually criticizing Martin Luther King Jr. for supporting the president who delivered civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> You really can't get any dumber. You've reached your apex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hey...shit bird........johnson was a racist....
Click to expand...


'shit bird'- more and more I am fairly certain I am educating a 13 year old boy.

Of course Johnson was a racist- so was Lincoln- the single most important Republican ever elected President.

Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.


----------



## 2aguy

Faun said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act.....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar...
> 
> 
> Nay   R  Goldwater, Barry AZ
> 
> If truth and reality were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie like that.
Click to expand...



Asshole.....I have linked to that vote over and over....and linked to why he voted against the 64 act.....it had nothing to do with race...as the repeated link shows.......and everything to do with too much power given to the federal government......

The racist johnson wanted that federal power......even it if meant helping blacks, who he hated, get something out of the deal....


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote from the man who 2aguy calls a fool- but whom the rest of America calls a Civil Rights hero.
> View attachment 139919
> 
> Why does 2aguy consider Goldwater to be a Civil Rights hero- but African Americans don't.
> 
> For the same reason- Goldwater voted against the pivotal Civil Rights legislation of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.
> 
> Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> 2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are a coward..........very brave of you......calling someone a racist when you sit behind a computer screen.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Projects the idiot calling 95% of blacks, "ignorant," while stationed behind his.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Please....explain to us what blacks voting 95% for democrats,..
Click to expand...


Please explain to us all why you think that 95% of African Americans are racists against themselves?

And why you think you are smarter than all of those 95%.

And how that is not racism.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> He delivered more power to the federal government....and fought against Civil Rights for blacks his entire career..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hey...shit bird........johnson was a racist....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'shit bird'- more and more I am fairly certain I am educating a 13 year old boy.
> 
> Of course Johnson was a racist- so was Lincoln- the single most important Republican ever elected President.
> 
> Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.
Click to expand...



Wow....you still can't seem to read......here...

Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

=========

The Party of Civil Rights

*The Party of Civil Rights*

*The depth of Johnson’s prior opposition to civil-rights reform must be digested in some detail to be properly appreciated.*

* In the House, he did not represent a particularly segregationist constituency (it “made up for being less intensely segregationist than the rest of the South by being more intensely anti-Communist,” as the New York Times put it), but Johnson was practically antebellum in his views.*

* Never mind civil rights or voting rights: In Congress, Johnson had consistently and repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching.*


*As a leader in the Senate, Johnson did his best to cripple the Civil Rights Act of 1957; not having votes sufficient to stop it, he managed to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by excising the enforcement provisions before sending it to the desk of President Eisenhower.*


*Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill. The reformers came back in 1960 with an act to remedy the deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Johnson’s Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster.*

*In both cases, the “master of the Senate” petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had taken the teeth out of the legislation.*



*Johnson would later explain his thinking thus: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”*

*Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights*
=============

Goldwater.....

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics


Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
---
NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
Urban Legend: Goldwater Against Civil Rights



More specifically, Goldwater had problems with title II and title VII of the 1964 bill. He felt that constitutionally the federal government had no legal right to interfere in who people hired, fired; or to whom they sold their products, goods and services. He felt that “power” laid in the various states, and with the people. He was a strong advocate of the tenth amendment. Goldwater’s constitutional stance did not mean he agreed with the segregation and racial discrimination practiced in the South. To the contrary, he fought against these kinds of racial divides in his own state of Arizona. He supported the integration of the Arizona National guard and Phoenix public schools.[4] Goldwater was, also, a member of the NAACP and the Urban League.[5]

His personal feelings about discrimination are enshrined in the congressional record where he states, “_I am unalterably opposed to discrimination or segregation on the basis of race, color, or creed or on any other basis; not only my words, but more importantly my actions through years have repeatedly demonstrated the sincerity of my feeling in this regard_…”[6]. And, he would continued to holdfast to his strongly felt convictions that constitutionally the federal government was limited in what it could do, believing that the amoral actions of those perpetuating discrimination and segregation would have to be judged by those in that community. Eventually, the states government and local communities would come to pressure people to change their minds. Goldwater’s view was that the civil disobedience by private citizens against those business establishments was more preferable than intervention by the feds. He, optimistically, believed that racial intolerance would soon buckle under the economic and societal pressure.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, Republicans control most of that. In the racist south, they control most governorships, state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, local school boards. The southern racists, who were once Democrats a long time ago, haven't changed their views on blacks, only their political party; which is now Republican. Because LBJ stabbed them in the back for supporting civil rights for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The South isn't racist..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazing isn't it?
> 
> From the beginning of the United States until 1964, the South was 'racist', but suddenly after 1964 Southerners were no longer racists(except of course Southern blacks)
> 
> Was there a massive migration that we missed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go asswipe......
> ]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?
> 
> 
> A Republican propaganda piece?
> 
> Surely you can do better than that.
> 
> "At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
> "Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History
> 
> The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.
> 
> But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.
> 
> In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.
> 
> But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”
> 
> I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”
> 
> The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.
> 
> It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:
> 
> The original House version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)
> 
> The Senate version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
> 
> Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.
> 
> Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.
> 
> What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.
> 
> Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:
> 
> “I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”
> 
> It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.
> 
> For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.
> 
> But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.
> 
> Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.
> 
> Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.
> 
> At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”
> 
> Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.
> 
> Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.
> 
> “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
> 
> -Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist
> 
> “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”
> 
> -Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really are stupid....
> 
> 
> The Party of Civil Rights
Click to expand...


LBJ- instrumental in the passage of the 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.

Your hero?

Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is who King supported.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.
> 
> Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> 2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are a coward..........very brave of you......calling someone a racist when you sit behind a computer screen.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Projects the idiot calling 95% of blacks, "ignorant," while stationed behind his.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Please....explain to us what blacks voting 95% for democrats,..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please explain to us all why you think that 95% of African Americans are racists against themselves?
> 
> And why you think you are smarter than all of those 95%.
> 
> And how that is not racism.
Click to expand...



95% of blacks vote for the democrat party, a party that is the home of racists of all colors......racism is the core of the democrat party......racist groups, openly and proudly racist groups vote and support the democrat party......racist politicians were their last two Presidents....bill clinton, and barak obama.....

racist groups, racist leaders in a racist party....


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can't even tell if this confusing statement is 2aguy attacking Martin Luther King Jr.- or LBJ.
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hey...shit bird........johnson was a racist....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'shit bird'- more and more I am fairly certain I am educating a 13 year old boy.
> 
> Of course Johnson was a racist- so was Lincoln- the single most important Republican ever elected President.
> 
> Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....you still can't seem to read......here...
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> .
Click to expand...


Wow- you still can't seem to read....here

Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.

Johnson stepped up to the plate.
Goldwater stepped away.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The South isn't racist..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing isn't it?
> 
> From the beginning of the United States until 1964, the South was 'racist', but suddenly after 1964 Southerners were no longer racists(except of course Southern blacks)
> 
> Was there a massive migration that we missed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go asswipe......
> ]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?
> 
> 
> A Republican propaganda piece?
> 
> Surely you can do better than that.
> 
> "At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
> "Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History
> 
> The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.
> 
> But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.
> 
> In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.
> 
> But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”
> 
> I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”
> 
> The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.
> 
> It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:
> 
> The original House version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)
> 
> The Senate version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
> 
> Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.
> 
> Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.
> 
> What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.
> 
> Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:
> 
> “I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”
> 
> It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.
> 
> For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.
> 
> But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.
> 
> Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.
> 
> Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.
> 
> At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”
> 
> Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.
> 
> Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.
> 
> “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
> 
> -Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist
> 
> “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”
> 
> -Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really are stupid....
> 
> 
> The Party of Civil Rights
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LBJ- instrumental in the passage of the 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> Your hero?
> 
> Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Click to expand...



And the truth....since you leave out the truth...to smear Barry Goldwater while defending the racist LBJ...


Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

=========

The Party of Civil Rights

*The Party of Civil Rights*

*The depth of Johnson’s prior opposition to civil-rights reform must be digested in some detail to be properly appreciated.*

*In the House, he did not represent a particularly segregationist constituency (it “made up for being less intensely segregationist than the rest of the South by being more intensely anti-Communist,” as the New York Times put it), but Johnson was practically antebellum in his views.*

*Never mind civil rights or voting rights: In Congress, Johnson had consistently and repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching.*


*As a leader in the Senate, Johnson did his best to cripple the Civil Rights Act of 1957; not having votes sufficient to stop it, he managed to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by excising the enforcement provisions before sending it to the desk of President Eisenhower.*


*Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill. The reformers came back in 1960 with an act to remedy the deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Johnson’s Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster.*

*In both cases, the “master of the Senate” petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had taken the teeth out of the legislation.*



*Johnson would later explain his thinking thus: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”*

*Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights*
=============

Goldwater.....

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics


Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
---
NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
Urban Legend: Goldwater Against Civil Rights



More specifically, Goldwater had problems with title II and title VII of the 1964 bill. He felt that constitutionally the federal government had no legal right to interfere in who people hired, fired; or to whom they sold their products, goods and services. He felt that “power” laid in the various states, and with the people. He was a strong advocate of the tenth amendment. Goldwater’s constitutional stance did not mean he agreed with the segregation and racial discrimination practiced in the South. To the contrary, he fought against these kinds of racial divides in his own state of Arizona. He supported the integration of the Arizona National guard and Phoenix public schools.[4] Goldwater was, also, a member of the NAACP and the Urban League.[5]

His personal feelings about discrimination are enshrined in the congressional record where he states, “_I am unalterably opposed to discrimination or segregation on the basis of race, color, or creed or on any other basis; not only my words, but more importantly my actions through years have repeatedly demonstrated the sincerity of my feeling in this regard_…”[6]. And, he would continued to holdfast to his strongly felt convictions that constitutionally the federal government was limited in what it could do, believing that the amoral actions of those perpetuating discrimination and segregation would have to be judged by those in that community. Eventually, the states government and local communities would come to pressure people to change their minds. Goldwater’s view was that the civil disobedience by private citizens against those business establishments was more preferable than intervention by the feds. He, optimistically, believed that racial intolerance would soon buckle under the economic and societal pressure.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King Jr. 'supported' (not really but close enough) the man who was responsible for  the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- and that is why 2aguy hates LBJ.
> 
> Martin Luther King. Jr. opposed Goldwater- and the Republicans who nominated him for President- because Goldwater opposed the most important Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years.
> 
> 2aguy can see a racist any time he wants- he just needs to look in a mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a coward..........very brave of you......calling someone a racist when you sit behind a computer screen.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOLOL
> 
> Projects the idiot calling 95% of blacks, "ignorant," while stationed behind his.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Please....explain to us what blacks voting 95% for democrats,..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please explain to us all why you think that 95% of African Americans are racists against themselves?
> 
> And why you think you are smarter than all of those 95%.
> 
> And how that is not racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 95% of blacks vote for the democrat party, a party that is the home of racists of all colors......racism is the core of the democrat party......racist groups, openly and proudly racist groups vote and support the democrat party......racist politicians were their last two Presidents....bill clinton, and barak obama.....
> 
> racist groups, racist leaders in a racist party....
Click to expand...


Yep- once again- to you- its the minorities that are the racists.

Want to see a real racist? 

Look in the mirror.


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shit stain.....Goldwater voted for all of the Civil Rights act..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hey...shit bird........johnson was a racist....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'shit bird'- more and more I am fairly certain I am educating a 13 year old boy.
> 
> Of course Johnson was a racist- so was Lincoln- the single most important Republican ever elected President.
> 
> Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....you still can't seem to read......here...
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow- you still can't seem to read....here
> 
> Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.
> 
> Johnson stepped up to the plate.
> Goldwater stepped away.
Click to expand...


Liars like you......how do you live with yourself....


Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker

"He had been a congressman, beginning in 1937, for eleven years, and for eleven years he had voted against every civil rights bill –

*against not only legislation aimed at ending the poll tax and segregation in the armed services but even against legislation aimed at ending lynching: a one hundred percent record," Caro wrote.*


"Running for the Senate in 1948, he had assailed President" Harry "Truman’s entire civil rights program (‘an effort to set up a police state’)…Until 1957, in the Senate, as in the House, his record – by that time a twenty-year record – against civil rights had been consistent," Caro wrote.

=========

The Party of Civil Rights

*The Party of Civil Rights*

*The depth of Johnson’s prior opposition to civil-rights reform must be digested in some detail to be properly appreciated.*

*In the House, he did not represent a particularly segregationist constituency (it “made up for being less intensely segregationist than the rest of the South by being more intensely anti-Communist,” as the New York Times put it), but Johnson was practically antebellum in his views.*

*Never mind civil rights or voting rights: In Congress, Johnson had consistently and repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching.*


*As a leader in the Senate, Johnson did his best to cripple the Civil Rights Act of 1957; not having votes sufficient to stop it, he managed to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by excising the enforcement provisions before sending it to the desk of President Eisenhower.*


*Johnson’s Democratic colleague Strom Thurmond nonetheless went to the trouble of staging the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a futile attempt to block the bill. The reformers came back in 1960 with an act to remedy the deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Johnson’s Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster.*

*In both cases, the “master of the Senate” petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had taken the teeth out of the legislation.*



*Johnson would later explain his thinking thus: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”*

*Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights*
=============

Goldwater.....

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics


Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.
Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.
In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]
*That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign.*
Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.
---
NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There
*As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action. *

"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."
Urban Legend: Goldwater Against Civil Rights



More specifically, Goldwater had problems with title II and title VII of the 1964 bill. He felt that constitutionally the federal government had no legal right to interfere in who people hired, fired; or to whom they sold their products, goods and services. He felt that “power” laid in the various states, and with the people. He was a strong advocate of the tenth amendment. Goldwater’s constitutional stance did not mean he agreed with the segregation and racial discrimination practiced in the South. To the contrary, he fought against these kinds of racial divides in his own state of Arizona. He supported the integration of the Arizona National guard and Phoenix public schools.[4] Goldwater was, also, a member of the NAACP and the Urban League.[5]

His personal feelings about discrimination are enshrined in the congressional record where he states, “_I am unalterably opposed to discrimination or segregation on the basis of race, color, or creed or on any other basis; not only my words, but more importantly my actions through years have repeatedly demonstrated the sincerity of my feeling in this regard_…”[6]. And, he would continued to holdfast to his strongly felt convictions that constitutionally the federal government was limited in what it could do, believing that the amoral actions of those perpetuating discrimination and segregation would have to be judged by those in that community. Eventually, the states government and local communities would come to pressure people to change their minds. Goldwater’s view was that the civil disobedience by private citizens against those business establishments was more preferable than intervention by the feds. He, optimistically, believed that racial intolerance would soon buckle under the economic and societal pressure.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing isn't it?
> 
> From the beginning of the United States until 1964, the South was 'racist', but suddenly after 1964 Southerners were no longer racists(except of course Southern blacks)
> 
> Was there a massive migration that we missed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go asswipe......
> ]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?
> 
> 
> A Republican propaganda piece?
> 
> Surely you can do better than that.
> 
> "At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
> "Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History
> 
> The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.
> 
> But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.
> 
> In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.
> 
> But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”
> 
> I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”
> 
> The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.
> 
> It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:
> 
> The original House version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)
> 
> The Senate version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
> 
> Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.
> 
> Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.
> 
> What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.
> 
> Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:
> 
> “I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”
> 
> It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.
> 
> For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.
> 
> But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.
> 
> Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.
> 
> Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.
> 
> At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”
> 
> Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.
> 
> Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.
> 
> “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
> 
> -Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist
> 
> “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”
> 
> -Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really are stupid....
> 
> 
> The Party of Civil Rights
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LBJ- instrumental in the passage of the 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> Your hero?
> 
> Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And the truth....since you leave out the truth...to smear Barry Goldwater while defending the racist LBJ...
Click to expand...


The truth is that LBJ made the 1964 Civil Rights Act pass.
Goldwater voted against it.

And that is why you idolize Goldwater.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
> HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964
> 
> LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
> Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
> HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957
> 
> Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.
> 
> But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.
> 
> And that pisses 2aguy off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey...shit bird........johnson was a racist....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 'shit bird'- more and more I am fairly certain I am educating a 13 year old boy.
> 
> Of course Johnson was a racist- so was Lincoln- the single most important Republican ever elected President.
> 
> Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....you still can't seem to read......here...
> 
> Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights proposal considered in his first 20 years as lawmaker
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow- you still can't seem to read....here
> 
> Yet Johnson was responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act- and your hero voted against it.
> 
> Johnson stepped up to the plate.
> Goldwater stepped away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liars like you......how do you live with yourself..
Click to expand...

Feel free to quote my 'lie'

Goldwater voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act- LBJ supported it- and signed it into law
HR. 7152. PASSAGE. -- Senate Vote #409 -- Jun 19, 1964

LBJ cosponsored- and voted for the 1960 Civil Rights Act.- I can't find Goldwater's vote.
Goldwater- and LBJ- both voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act
HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. -- Senate Vote #75 -- Aug 7, 1957

Considering that LBJ was involved in passing the only significant Civil Rights legislation in the last 100 years- in 1957, in 1960, in 1964 and in 1965- it would seem that if he is speaking about LBJ- he would be lying.

But then again- LBJ was working to help African Americans.

And that pisses 2aguy of


----------



## Syriusly

Quote from the man that 2aguy calls a 'fool'


----------



## 2aguy

Syriusly said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here you go asswipe......
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> 'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?
> 
> 
> A Republican propaganda piece?
> 
> Surely you can do better than that.
> 
> "At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
> "Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History
> 
> The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.
> 
> But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.
> 
> In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.
> 
> But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”
> 
> I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”
> 
> The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.
> 
> It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:
> 
> The original House version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)
> 
> The Senate version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
> 
> Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.
> 
> Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.
> 
> What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.
> 
> Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:
> 
> “I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”
> 
> It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.
> 
> For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.
> 
> But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.
> 
> Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.
> 
> Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.
> 
> At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”
> 
> Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.
> 
> Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.
> 
> “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
> 
> -Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist
> 
> “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”
> 
> -Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really are stupid....
> 
> 
> The Party of Civil Rights
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LBJ- instrumental in the passage of the 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> Your hero?
> 
> Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And the truth....since you leave out the truth...to smear Barry Goldwater while defending the racist LBJ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The truth is that LBJ made the 1964 Civil Rights Act pass.
> Goldwater voted against it.
> 
> And that is why you idolize Goldwater.
Click to expand...



The stupid is strong with this one...........

Go back....read what actually happened, read about the two men.....and if you want to support the racist LBJ, go ahead, you likely vote for the racist democrat party anyway, why would you stop when you hear the truth?


----------



## Syriusly

For 2aguy- White Southerners were all racists- from Thomas Jefferson through the Confederacy up till 1964. 

But in his world- there was a magical shift- and White Southerners suddenly shed their racists coats and looked upon African Americans as their brothers- but again in his world- the Southern blacks became racists from 1965 on.

2aguy has even announced that the South is no longer racist. 

Is that true?

I have relatives in the South and lived their briefly- and to a certain extent that is somewhat true- the South is not the place it was in 1964- and of course nowhere else is either. The open racism that was tolerated then is not in evidence now.

But how can we measure 'racism'? 

Attitudes towards inter-racial marriage.

Attitudes towards inter-racial marriage has shifted dramatically since 1958- when approximately 5% of Americans were in favor of legal inter-racial marriage to roughly 88% now. 

But that isn't necessary how all Americans think about inter-racial marriage.

Polling Republicans in Georgia and Mississippi in 2011, the results were dramatically different from national averages
.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_SouthernSwing_312.pdf





Members of which party in the South thinks inter-racial marriage should be legal? Only the Democratic Party.

But Republicans in the south by more than a 2:1 margin think it should be illegal.

But of course to 2aguy- that must mean that Democrats are the party of 'racism'


LOL


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?
> 
> 
> A Republican propaganda piece?
> 
> Surely you can do better than that.
> 
> "At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
> "Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History
> 
> The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.
> 
> But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.
> 
> In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.
> 
> But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”
> 
> I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”
> 
> The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.
> 
> It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:
> 
> The original House version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)
> 
> The Senate version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
> 
> Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.
> 
> Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.
> 
> What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.
> 
> Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:
> 
> “I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”
> 
> It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.
> 
> For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.
> 
> But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.
> 
> Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.
> 
> Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.
> 
> At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”
> 
> Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.
> 
> Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.
> 
> “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
> 
> -Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist
> 
> “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”
> 
> -Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really are stupid....
> 
> 
> The Party of Civil Rights
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LBJ- instrumental in the passage of the 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> Your hero?
> 
> Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And the truth....since you leave out the truth...to smear Barry Goldwater while defending the racist LBJ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The truth is that LBJ made the 1964 Civil Rights Act pass.
> Goldwater voted against it.
> 
> And that is why you idolize Goldwater.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The stupid is strong with this one...........
> 
> Go back....read what actually happened, read about the two men.....and if you want to support the racist LBJ, go ahead, you likely vote for the racist democrat party anyway, why would you stop when you hear the truth?
Click to expand...


LBJ- instrumental in the passage of the 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.

Your hero?

Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act

You want to see a real racist?

Look in a mirror.


----------



## Syriusly

2aguy said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 'asswipe'- lol- what are you 13 years old?
> 
> 
> A Republican propaganda piece?
> 
> Surely you can do better than that.
> 
> "At one time the Democrats were the racists of the south, while the kindly Republicans held the North- until the 1960's..."
> "Prager U" Misleads, Then Ignores Modern History
> 
> The headline: “The Inconvenient Truth About The Democratic Party,” accentuated with cartoonish images of a clansman and the stars and bars horizontally aligning with the Democratic Donkey- the imagery not too dissimilar from a slot machine missing on three different symbols.
> 
> But Prager U did indeed hit the jackpot here. For it’s hard enough for them to find a respectable university professor to voice an opinion to coincide with their mostly unfound and misleading political hackery, but to find one that is African-American, speaking about issues pertaining to the black community is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball after months of an unclaimed prize.
> 
> In watching the first four minutes of this almost six-minute clip, Professor Carol Swain is actually very accurate. In the distant past, the Democratic Party was the party of racism, defending the unconscionable act of owning slaves. Democrats largely resided in the south and were willing to go so far as to commit treason and split from the nation to form a confederacy to defend their â€œrightâ€ to continue to practice slave labor.
> 
> But from that point on, her commentary becomes misplaced and evasive:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Since it’s founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination.”
> 
> I seem to remember the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being the creation of JFK (a Democrat), and then finished and implemented under LBJ (a Democrat). And as for Congress, the support for the legislation had nothing to do with party affiliation and everything to do with whether the congressmen represented the north or the south. This indisputable fact of voting correlation is one that she does not even acknowledge. Instead, she untruthfully affixes vote direction to political party:
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “Democratic Senator’s fillibusted for 75 days..”
> 
> The Senator’s who filibustered the legislation were Richard Russell (Georgia), Strom Thurmund (South Carolina), Robert Byrd (West Virginia) and Sam Ervin (North Carolina). Bringing the argument into the more modern era â€“ those are all states that Republican’s enjoy comfortable dominance in. Those men who represented those states are appropriately referred to as “Dixiecrats”, and their constituency swung to the Republican Party during the late 1960’s when Democratic presidents created and passed the Civil Rights Act Of 1964- a swing that was solidified even further when Nixon decided to pander to the “states rights” racists in the south. These states have voted predominantly Republican since then.
> 
> Professor Swain’s quote: “..the only serious Congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. 80 percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill, less than 70 percent of Democrats did.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that a little bit more than 10 percent separating the respective parties support of the legislation is hardly constitutes one side being fully supportive, and the other being the “serious Congressional opposition”, let’s move on to the her more egregious representation of vote correlation.
> 
> It is a completely misleading implication to state that the “yeas” and “nays” had any correlation whatsoever to political party. Her claim can be discarded just by looking at the actual vote tallies. The verified fact regarding the way in which a congressman voted has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with the region they were representing. As the vote tallies show below, if you were in the south, you very likely opposed the legislation. If you were representing a northern state, you generally favored it with few exceptions. Whether you were a Democrat or Republican mattered little as seen by the voting tallies below for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by region:
> 
> The original House version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 8-87 (7-93%)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0-100%)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94-6%)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85-15%)
> 
> The Senate version:
> 
> Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5-95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
> 
> Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0-100%) (John Tower of Texas)
> 
> Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98-2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
> 
> Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84-16%)
> 
> Notice the actual fact of which you’d never be privy to in watching this Prager video – ” the “Northern Democrats” actually supported the bill in a larger proportion than the “Northern Republicans” in both chambers of Congress.
> 
> Perhaps most startling of all, there was not a single vote cast in favor of the legislation by southern Republicans by any of their 11 total representatives in both chambers.
> 
> What you see above is clear and undisputed – a strong correlation of how a congressmen voted can be drawn from the region they representation, with no correlation drawn from the political party they were affiliated with.
> 
> Perhaps a decade ago, a Conservative may have examined the above voting tally, showing that Professor Swain purposely made a completely erroneous correlation to promote a political ideology (I say purposely because she’s a history professor at Vanderbilt University- of course she’d be familiar with the fact that party representation of Congressmen had no correlation with how they voted). And now knowing that this video is propaganda not designed to inform and educate accurately, maybe they say to themselves:
> 
> “I’m not going to absorb any more information from this video clip, and will take future Prager U videos with a grain of salt, as it’s representation of the voting tally was completely misleading. Using my own analysis, I can easily see that there is little correlation in how members of the two political parties voted, but a very strong correlation based on the region they represented. This wasn’t a Democrat vs. Republican issue, but a North vs. South issue.”
> 
> It doesn’t mean the reader should cease to have conservative principals. It simply means that they’ve utilized a bit of common sense and rationale to determine that the way the voting was represented in this clip was completely disingenuous. And then upon arriving at that conclusion, they make an educated decision to perhaps learn about this issue from a different source.
> 
> For this would benefit the Conservative party. It would create more informed, honest debate – absorbing information from reputable outlets to become better educated instead of mislead.
> 
> But today we have a president and his cabinet appointees, along with certain members of Congress who are insisting that 1 + 1 = 3 is completely acceptable. In this world, ideology trumps pragmatism, and rewrites and alternate portrayals of history are valid as long as there are people out there who want to believe in it. And if those who are paying attention, unabated by any ideological binders or pseudo-patriotism have the gall to question this obvious nonsense, we’re labeled as an outside infiltrating source full of fake convictions and one of “the others”.
> 
> Inexplicably, Professor Swain makes no attempt to address the state of race-relations of each political party as it pertains to the last 50 years of American history, other than to taint the modern Democratic party with broad generalizations that exist only in the deep caverns of the echo chamber that Rush Limbaugh carved out seemingly eons ago.
> 
> Although one would think perhaps the greatest amount of time should be spent on Nixon’s Southern Strategy, as it was a monumental sea change which has the single most bearing on where each party stands today on this issue, she instead chooses to wrap up the commentary.
> 
> At a certain point in the video, Swain informs all the students at Prager U of a racist comment that Lyndon B. Johnson “purportedly” said. Nothing like students garnering an extensive knowledge base on statements “purportedly” made. If Prager U is the alternative to a “liberal education,” than I’m more than proud to have been “liberally indoctrinated.”
> 
> Because in a fact-free environment, the word “purportedly” is free to exist anywhere and everywhere.
> 
> Let me conclude by allowing serious political players of the Republican Party to explain the”Southern Strategy” since Professor Swain decided to end her history lesson at around 1964. This are not statements “purportedly” made, but are actual verified statements from interviews.
> 
> “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
> 
> -Kevin Philips, Richard Nixon political strategist
> 
> “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni***r, ni***r, ni***r.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni***r’ as that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states- rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites… We want to cut this, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni***r, ni***r.'”
> 
> -Lee Atwater, consultant and strategist to the Republican party, adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really are stupid....
> 
> 
> The Party of Civil Rights
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LBJ- instrumental in the passage of the 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.
> 
> Your hero?
> 
> Voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And the truth....since you leave out the truth...to smear Barry Goldwater while defending the racist LBJ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The truth is that LBJ made the 1964 Civil Rights Act pass.
> Goldwater voted against it.
> 
> And that is why you idolize Goldwater.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The stupid is strong with this one...........
> , you likely vote for the racist democrat party anyway, why would you stop when you hear the truth?
Click to expand...


I will vote for the party that managed to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act and opposes Confederate symbols.
You will vote for the party that nominated 3 Presidential candidates that opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Goldwater
Reagan 
Bush

And you will continue to label the majority of African Americans as racists....but not these guys.....


----------



## orbi

Go Learn History, 2gui...political parties change according to time and/or place...Focus on ideologies. 

conservatives supported slavery, Liberals Opposed it.


----------

