# Which Party Put The First KKK Member On The Supreme Court?



## DarkFury (Feb 22, 2015)

*Democrat history is truly something one should learn because from their history you can see where their leadership takes you. Democrats tied to the KKK are long and strong.

It was the FIRST domestic terrorist group founded in America and founded by democrats. The rise of the KKK to even the Supreme Court IS tied to actions by the democrats as in THIS case FDR.

So how about a wee peek into THEIR history in TRUTH not the lies they feed people?
*


----------



## Pogo (Feb 22, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> *D*emocrat history is truly something one should learn because from their history you can see where their leadership takes you. Democrats tied to the KKK are long and strong.
> 
> It was the FIRST domestic terrorist group founded in America and founded by democrats. The rise of the KKK to even the Supreme Court IS tied to actions by the democrats as in THIS case FDR.
> 
> So how about a wee peek into THEIR history in TRUTH not the lies they feed people?



The KKK was neither the "first" domestic terrorist group, nor was it founded by a political party.  It was founded by six Confederate veteran soldiers, around a campfire on Christmas Day 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee.  It was one of several vigilante groups founded after the war by veteran soldiers.  None of them were founded by political parties.

The Klan was actually extinct by about 1880.  The reason we know it in more recent times and forget the Knights of the White Camellia and the other paramilitary jagoff groups like it is that the KKK was revived in 1915 by a Georgia salesman named William Simmons.  He's the assclown who came up with the white sheets and burning crosses after watching "Birth of a Nation".

But he wasn't a political party either.

Sorry to bust your bubble but I take history from history books rather than from YouTube.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 22, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > *D*emocrat history is truly something one should learn because from their history you can see where their leadership takes you. Democrats tied to the KKK are long and strong.
> ...


*You are right about the six but wrong about's political founding. I WILL provide proof of that as I HAVE posted such before. i never said Simmons was a political party I said IT WAS FOUNDED and FUNDED and FORMED by democrats.

And Simmons WAS a democrat.
Here is your documented recorded history.
*


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

*Civil rights just maybe the greatest lies ever told by democrats. SOOO how about a short walk in history right up until Bush1 to set the record right?
*


----------



## Pogo (Feb 23, 2015)

YouTube again.. sigh...  not interested.

Once again, William Simmons was a salesman, not a politician.  I'm not aware that we even have a political affiliation for either Simmons or the soldiers of 1865, or if they were even registered to vote.  

Actually Simmons' version worked on organizing and spreading the KKK and actually got a few of its people elected as Senators and Governors in Indiana, Colorado, the city of Anaheim, and the Pacific Northwest -- and they were all Republicans.  Does that mean the RP is the party of the Klan?  By your logic it should -- but it doesn't.  It means this social-justice vigilante group was going to use any available channel to access power.  Whereas in the South it meant the DP, in the midwest and west it meant the RP.  Whatever worked.

As for the South, _everybody _in the South was a Democrat; that means nothing.  And that was the case for exactly 99 years after the Civil War.  

My grandfather used to tell this story about counting votes in southern Mississippi in the election of 1940:

"Roosevelt..."
"Roosevelt"...
"Roosevelt"...
"Wilkie"...
"Roosevelt"...
"Wilkie??  Aw shoot, we gotta throw the ballot out.  Some damn fool voted twice!"

That's the way it was.  Until Strom Thurmond (my relative) bolted in 1964 after the CRA, being associated with the party of the President who defeated the South was unthinkable.  

So welcome to the site, but if YouTube is the best you can do to make your case, you're gonna get beat up.  Might wanna step up your game, this ain't the YouTube comment section.

Oh and ditch the bold font.  It's obnoxious.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

Pogo said:


> YouTube again.. sigh...  not interested.
> 
> Once again, William Simmons was a salesman, not a politician.  I'm not aware that we even have a political affiliation for either Simmons or the soldiers of 1865, or if they were even registered to vote.
> 
> ...


*Well at least YOU admit you are not interested in the truth but others are. You go right ahead and stay on the plantation if it makes you happy. 

OTHERS prefer education over ignorance and thought and study over arrogance.*


----------



## Tom Sweetnam (Feb 23, 2015)

No, no, no! You don't understand. All that bad stuff was the old democrat party. That all ended like...well, I dunno, last year or something like that. This is the NEW democrat party, a complete antithesis of the filthy retrograde shitbags they've been for 200 years.


----------



## Vigilante (Feb 23, 2015)

OCDPogo is never interested, the bitch has


----------



## Pogo (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > YouTube again.. sigh...  not interested.
> ...



And big bold fonts that make your words louder?  Poster please.

What I said was that I'm not interested in YouTube.  Anybody in the world can link to freaking videos spewing bullshit. Doesn't make them history books.  You said and I quote, "I will provide proof".  Still waiting on that.

I've been all the way down this road and back, kid.  You don't have a prayer.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 23, 2015)

Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?


----------



## Vigilante (Feb 23, 2015)

*FLEETING????*


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

Tom Sweetnam said:


> No, no, no! You don't understand. All that bad stuff was the old democrat party. That all ended like...well, I dunno, last year or something like that. This is the NEW democrat party, a complete antithesis of the filthy retrograde shitbags they've been for 200 years.


*Well at least you admit they were shit bags for 200 years. Thank you.
So just when do you think this change from shit bags to the treason party happen?*


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?


*So let me guess you are going to make the "party switch" argument? That is simply Not the fact.*


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

Vigilante said:


> *FLEETING????*


*Yeah, fleeting. Like 4 plus decades. He was a 
"Grand cyclops" Fleeting? Yeah right.*


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?
> ...


Yeah actually the fact is not only did the switch occur, the Republican party leaders admitted to the Southern strategy. Sorry but you lose with your failed OP.


----------



## Vigilante (Feb 23, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You got a problem Asslips... they started figuring you racist out!


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > *D*emocrat history is truly something one should learn because from their history you can see where their leadership takes you. Democrats tied to the KKK are long and strong.
> ...


"Birth of a nation"  now there is some interesting facts behind that as well. It was the FIRST movie ever shown in the White House by a democrat president AND it turned 100 years old this month.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?


*Well YOU say there was some awful plot by the GOP to switch sides. Lets go up to the 60's, surely democrats changed their ways by then right?
No party switch yet, YOU got a year handy?*


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


*I know you hate true history because it destroys you BUT facts are FACTS. Got a Tea Party member here AND oh gosh, he's BLACK and disagrees with you.
Let me guess. He is NOT the APPROVED democrat party idea of a black man BUT Al Sharpton is?*


----------



## NoNukes (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


That is one Black man as opposed to all of the Blacks who support the Democrats. Try again?


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 23, 2015)

NoNukes said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


*One? That's funny but okay.
Granted it ten minutes but he HATES Obama more then just about anybody.*


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> *Democrat history is truly something one should learn because from their history you can see where their leadership takes you. Democrats tied to the KKK are long and strong.
> 
> It was the FIRST domestic terrorist group founded in America and founded by democrats. The rise of the KKK to even the Supreme Court IS tied to actions by the democrats as in THIS case FDR.
> 
> ...



While this is true, it's worth mentioning (as I"m sure you already know OP) that over time, both parties' positions reversed themselves. The Dems positions became that of the Republicans, the Repubs became the Democrats.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 23, 2015)

"Mr. Byrd’s perspective on the world changed over the years. A former member of the Ku Klux Klan, he filibustered against the 1964 Civil Rights Act *only to come to back civil rights measures and Mr. Obama.* A supporter of the Vietnam War, he became a fierce critic, decades later, of the war in Iraq. In 1964, the Americans for Democratic Action, the liberal lobbying group, found that his views and the group’s aligned only 16 percent of the time. *In 2005, he got an A.D.A. rating of 95*."  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/us/politics/29byrd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Darkfury and StolenValorVigilante don't tell the fully story.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?
> ...


I know you have a hard time thinking for yourself so I will help you out.  Nothing really ever occurs in a certain year. Its a gradual movement to sway opinion. The SS was put in place by the Repubs to swing voters over to their side. Here are some links. You may have to have someone read them to you so you can understand the import of what they are saying.

USATODAY.com - GOP We were wrong to play racial politics

RNC Chair Michael Steele Confesses to Race-Based Southern Strategy Mediaite


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


Theres more than one. The point is that there are not many.


----------



## Pogo (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Vigilante said:
> 
> 
> > *FLEETING????*
> ...



'Fraid not.  He quit the Klan before he even ran for office.  That was IN the 1940s -- four decades INTO the 20th century -- not four decades' _duration_.
This is where getting your history from YouTube and Photoshop instead of the historical record leads.

The KKK was by its own description a "fraternal" organisation.  It purported to be a social/morals cop.  It took on a lot of members in the first half of the 20th century once Simmons restarted it, and those included Democrats, Republicans, and those with no political affiliation at all.  Mostly it included WASPs.  In Indiana at its peak Klan membership included _one-third of all white males in the state_.1

Take David Stevenson.  He actually _was _involved in politics.  Who's David Stevenson?  He's the guy who maneuvered himself into a Grand Dragon (state leader) and subsequently split from Simmons' Klan to start his own rival Klan.  He's also the guy who kidnapped a schoolteacher and brutally raped and tortured her on a railroad car, which put a big dent in the Klan's image and curtailed its rising membership.

And he started out as a political operative, which training helped him rise to power in the organisation.  And unlike Willliam Simmons and unlike the six Confederate soldiers, we actually *do* know David Stevenson's political affiliations.

He was with the Socialist Party.
Then he joined the Democratic Party.
Then he joined the Republican Party2 -- this would be 1923, when he backed and helped get elected one Edward Jackson to the Governorship.  A Republican.  And another KKK.

Now where the fuck do you put D.C. Stevenson in your childish little football game?  Where do you put Edward Jackson?  Here's a guy who wasn't Klan before running for office; he was KKK while IN office.

You see son, political parties are tools used for the occasion.  Their purpose is to organize energy to the goal of acquiring power.  It is not to represent an ideology and it certainly doesn't bestow personal characteristics on its members.  Only an idiot sycophant on his knees slobbing the knob of such an organisation would go to these dishonest lengths to rhetorically fellate it, which I guess tells us all we need to know about your principles.

Signing on to a message board and trying to poison the well with football-score demagoguery is not only transparent, it's been run out on the field before.  And got stopped in its tracks then too.

_FOOTNOTE_
1 - "Structural incentives for conservative mobilization: Power devaluation and the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, 1915–1925" _Social Forces_ (1999) 77#4 pp: 1461-1496.
2- The Ku Klux Klan: Beneath the Superficial -- Oakwood University


----------



## mudwhistle (Feb 23, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > *D*emocrat history is truly something one should learn because from their history you can see where their leadership takes you. Democrats tied to the KKK are long and strong.
> ...


So why do you liberals talk about the klan like they still exist?

If you can't rivet the klan to the GOP.....The klan ended in 1880 all of the sudden


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 23, 2015)

mudwhistle said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


Because they still do exist.

Ku Klux Klan hands out candy in South Carolina during recruitment drive Fox News


----------



## Pogo (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



 Hey, you finally got one right.  And you left out that Woodrow Wilson, who was a meglomaniac racist asshole, liked the film and considered it realistic.

But again that's because he was a racist asshole, not because of his political party.  And again, in that time the entire South was Democratic-affiliated, just as today it's Republican.  And Wilson was from the South.  Therein lies your reality: "Democrat" here, "Republican" there -- meaningless.  But "Northerner" here, "Southerner" there -- now you're on to something.  Take that bullshit about the 1964 CRA vote: perfect example.  Political parties are interchangeable and indistinguishable in their opportunism; _culture _is where the action is.

And yes, "Birth of a Nation" was born 100 years ago as one of our racist asshole posters, Steve McRacist, noted in a thread he created on that day.  William Simmons' rebirth of the Klan followed soon after in the same year, without which the KKK would have been an obscure historical sidebar confined to fifteen years in the 19th century.

You remember Simmons -- the guy you were going to bring "proof" about last night but never did?  Anyway it's always good to mark these occasions, as those who forget their own history are doomed to repeat it.


----------



## Pogo (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?
> ...



STILL leaing on YouTube as research tool??  

I told you last night, and you agreed, *Confederate veterans  of the Civil War* started the KKK -- not a political party.  We just did this not two hours before you posted this bullshit.

They say the memory is the second thing to go...


----------



## Pogo (Feb 23, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



Do you simply not understand that anyone with video software -- which can be had for free -- can make a freaking YouTube video?  That YouTube has no "vet" procedure?  That the mere presence on the internets of a video, or anything else, does not make it factual?

It seems you do not.

Eat a lot of lead paint as a child then?


----------



## Pogo (Feb 23, 2015)

mudwhistle said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



The first iteration of the Klan was defunct by 1880.  It could have stayed that way but for Simmons restarting his own version in 1915 after seeing the film.  1915 and the few decades on either side of it were the most racist, most prejudiced, most riotous times this nation has ever had.  That's exactly what my thread on lynching is all about-- have a look at the peak dates.

Simmons' Klan fell into decline with the onset of World War II, being a time of all hands on deck for the cause including black ones and we hadn't yet developed Doublethink to the point where we could entertain both moral disequivalents simultaneously.  Some historians count a "third" Klan as the one that developed after the war was over, but to me there's a difference; both the original Confederate soldier KKK and the Simmons version, especially the latter, were well organized, with hierarchies and officers.  The postwar Klan is more decentralized (and autonomous) local groups recalling the practices of the former days, but not a national organisation _per se_.  So I only count two "official" Klans; what still exists today is based on tradition rather than organization.

None of these Klans, including the present upstarts playing dress-up, were ever linked to political parties.  Where they dabbled in politics at all, which was fortunately not that much, they did so as Democrats in the South and Republicans elsewhere, simply based on what would work in that particular time and place.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 23, 2015)

The white racists in the South were *conservatives*.  White racists are almost always *conservatives*.  They may be Dems at times, or Pubs at times, but they will always be *conservatives*.


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 23, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?


Yes, many are, and the rest lie about it.


----------



## mudwhistle (Feb 23, 2015)

Pogo said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


You keep blowing up other liberal's favorite argument brother.

Thanks


----------



## regent (Feb 24, 2015)

It had to hurt but it probably had to be done, so the Democratic party began easing the conservative southern Democrats out of the party. The breakup of the "solid south"  was probably started with the FDR regime. slowly at first, then Truman with the integration of the armed forces and the change was on.  
The southern conservatives started their own party and it didn't work so they joined the Republican party and that's where they are today. Could the Republicans have survived without the former southern Democrats, who knows. But with the change the conservatives in the Republican party they were now stronger, and the parties more pure.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte (Feb 25, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?



dear, todays conservatives support freedom from govt as Aristotle Cicero Locke Jefferson and Friedman did.

Surprise, dear, the world did not start in America. Do you understand?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 25, 2015)

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?
> ...


Must be off your meds again. What does that have to do with who started the KKK?


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte (Feb 25, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



dear, you said "yesteryear". Do you understand?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 25, 2015)

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > EdwardBaiamonte said:
> ...


I know I said yesteryear. I asked you what does Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Jefferson, and Freidman have to do with the KKK? You do know what yesteryear means dont you dear?


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte (Feb 25, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



dear, do you?



_oun_ yes·ter·year \ˈyes-tər-ˌyir\
*Definition of YESTERYEAR*
1
*:*  last year


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 25, 2015)

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > EdwardBaiamonte said:
> ...


Yes I do. I think you left some of the definition off.

last year or the recent past, especially as nostalgically recalled.

You still havent explained how you fucked up badly and started talking about Aristotle in regards to the KKK dear?


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte (Feb 25, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I was responding directly to you when you mistakenly said todays conservatives were related to KKK rather than Aristotle Cicero Locke Jefferson and Friedman. 
Do you understand?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 25, 2015)

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > EdwardBaiamonte said:
> ...


You shouldnt have said something that stupid dear. The KKK and today conservatives are family. Does that make sense to you?


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte (Feb 25, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> The KKK and today conservatives are family. Does that make sense to you?



can you explain how you came to this conclusion?


----------



## Jroc (Feb 25, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The white racists in the South were *conservatives*.  White racists are almost always *conservatives*.  They may be Dems at times, or Pubs at times, but they will always be *conservatives*.




Simple minded response, from a simple minded person. We conservatives stand for the liberty of the individual. unlike you group think, leftist nutjobs.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 25, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The white racists in the South were *conservatives*.  White racists are almost always *conservatives*.  They may be Dems at times, or Pubs at times, but they will always be *conservatives*.
> ...


Says a far right reactionary neo-con conservative who can't confront the truth.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 25, 2015)

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Are these people really that illiterate that they dont understand that the Dems of yesteryear are todays conservatives?
> ...


That type of simplistic wordage is why your books fail, Eddy.  Jefferson and Aristotle and Cicero were slave owners, and Locke had investments economically in slavery.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 25, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Neo -statists like you are the worst kind of trash.


----------



## Pogo (Feb 25, 2015)

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > EdwardBaiamonte said:
> ...



 
Excellent.  Now Thomas Jefferson not only founded the Republican Party 28 years after his own death, he then came back 11 years later to found the KKK, along with the corpses of Aristotle, Cicero, Locke and the as-yet-unborn Milton Friedman.

This is what makes Special Ed.... well, _special._


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 25, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


Irony strikes deep, it points to you as a creep, since you as a neo-con become, ispo facto, a neo-statist.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 25, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


if it were left up to people like you we'd have negotiated with the south to keep slavery in place, instead of fighting to liberate them. No we dont need scum like you running anything in this country


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 25, 2015)

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > The KKK and today conservatives are family. Does that make sense to you?
> ...


History and the dictionary.  You should try both but concentrate on the dictionary since you seem to be pretty bad at definitions dear.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 25, 2015)

Pogo said:


> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Dont be so harsh on her. She forgot to take her meds today.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 25, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


Says the neo-con right wing progressive fascist who believes in big government.  Yeah, you are, because you can't invade other nations half way around the world without progressive big government


----------



## whitehall (Feb 25, 2015)

Justice Black was raised with a hatred for "Papists" which was reinforced by his membership in the KKK. FDR appointed him to the Supreme Court and he wrote the majority opinion that created the modern version of "separation of church and state" which relied on an exaggerated version of Jeffersonian opinion that did not appear in the Constitution. Black hated Catholics so he fabricated Constitutional law that did not exist that paved the way for the modern persecution of Christian beliefs by mostly democrat politicians since the late 40's. It should be noted that Harry Truman also joined the KKK in Kansas when it became mandatory for democrats to have support from the Klan.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 26, 2015)

Thanks goes to whitehall for a far right revisionist perversion of American history.  wh's upset with the legal enforcement of separation of far right reactionary church and state.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 26, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




It's because of people like you so many died in WWII, so many were slaughtered in the Holocaust. People like you who didn't want to bother. You're an embarrassment to this country.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 26, 2015)

"It's because of people like you so many died in WWII, so many were slaughtered in the Holocaust. People like you who didn't want to bother."

Because of people like me, Jroc, who served many years on active duty in the Army, protecting your freedoms, to which you have added pouting, that "You're an embarrassment to this country."


----------



## Jroc (Feb 26, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> "It's because of people like you so many died in WWII, so many were slaughtered in the Holocaust. People like you who didn't want to bother."
> 
> Because of people like me, Jroc, who served many years on active duty in the Army, protecting your freedoms, to which you have added pouting, that "You're an embarrassment to this country."





Yeah? We can be who we want the internet,but that fact if true, would be irrelevant to fact that you're an idiot who thinks the meaning of the word conservative is synonymous with the definition of American Constitutional Conservatism. Oh, and there's plenty of idiots in the military. Bowe Bergdahl, Nidal Hasan, Tim McVeigh ..ect


----------



## regent (Feb 26, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > "It's because of people like you so many died in WWII, so many were slaughtered in the Holocaust. People like you who didn't want to bother."
> ...


So, suddenly you turn on the military when you discover Starkey was in the service,


----------



## Jroc (Feb 26, 2015)

regent said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




I already knew fakley said he was in the military...Who gives a shit?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 26, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > "It's because of people like you so many died in WWII, so many were slaughtered in the Holocaust. People like you who didn't want to bother."
> ...


You are howdy trash who is no real conservative, just a fat talking slow walking howdy on the internet with far right reactionary bubba hopes.  Plenty plenty of dopes where you reside politically.  And, oh don't give us your old "you don't know how I have suffered for the country."  You have not other than getting roundly slapped here every time you get stupid on the Board.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 26, 2015)

regent said:


> So, suddenly you turn on the military when you discover Starkey was in the service,


Jroc Howdy Trash is never consistent.  He simply sails blithely along.


----------



## whitehall (Feb 26, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Thanks goes to whitehall for a far right revisionist perversion of American history.  wh's upset with the legal enforcement of separation of far right reactionary church and state.


Am I wrong or are you confused about the argument?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 26, 2015)

whitehall said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks goes to whitehall for a far right revisionist perversion of American history.  wh's upset with the legal enforcement of separation of far right reactionary church and state.
> ...


Any half wit would get it, of course, but you are a quarter wit.  Most far right revisionist's like you have only four bits a dollar.  You historical revisionism does not float.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 26, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


You must have gotten me confused with someone else fake. I've never said such a thing, and fat I'm not. Maybe you're just a senile old man, you get people confused


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 26, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


Yeah, you did say way back when, you must gone on a diet when the welfare money ran out, and you are simply a howdy without much clue or critical thinking ability.


----------



## Faun (Feb 26, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Tom Sweetnam said:
> 
> 
> > No, no, no! You don't understand. All that bad stuff was the old democrat party. That all ended like...well, I dunno, last year or something like that. This is the NEW democrat party, a complete antithesis of the filthy retrograde shitbags they've been for 200 years.
> ...


Yes, the Conservative south was, and still is, very racist.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 26, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Tom Sweetnam said:
> ...


*The Democrat racists of the north like Jessie Jackson and his hymietown crack. Or those Texas democrats and LBJ with his "I will have those N's voting democrat for 100 years".*


----------



## Pogo (Feb 26, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



^^ Bogus quote.  Steve McRacist has been running it for months.  
Jesse Jackson's from South Carolina btw.  Near here.

Anything else?


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 26, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*A well known and documented quote as with Jacksons as well.
How about some Wallace quotes? He was one of yours.
DEMOCRAT!!*


----------



## Pogo (Feb 26, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



Nope, don't think so.  If it were you could link it.
Internet message boards are crawling with bogus quotes for which there's no evidence their purported authors ever said.  I can smell 'em.

And I'm not from Alabama.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 26, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


*LBJ was FAMOUS for his racial slurs. He used them OFTEN.
Here is some background on one of the MOST bigoted men of the 60s.
I will find another link. *


----------



## Pogo (Feb 26, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



First off, you're not allowed to link to other message boards here.  I know it's a silly rule but it's true.
Second, your link proves me right anyway.  You should maybe read it.  As I just said, undocumented.

You're a very silly and bitter old man in desperate need of a life looking for something to demonize.  You should maybe see a shrink.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 26, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Pogo said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


The racist Conservative south seceded from the nation in a failed effort to keep their slaves.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



The racist *DEMOCRATIC* south seceded from the nation in a failed effort to keep their slaves.


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


Yes, the racist Conservative Democrat south.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

The racist conservative dems got their asses kicked back then. They then decided to trick people with low intellect and moved to the republican party and were successful in confusing ignorant inbred whites into believing todays dems are the same as the klowns of k..


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*Well at the very least we got you to ADMIT you are a RACIST CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRAT. There maybe help for you yet.

YOU CAN be CONSERVATIVE and not a democrat.
You CAN be a free minded progressive radical CONSERVATIVE that LOVES your country UNLIKE your leadership who HATES America.

*


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


Who's "we?" And what do you mean, "finally?" When did I ever deny the racist Conservative south, which is now mostly Republican, was Democrat back then?


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*Racist Democratic South, you gave us Cater remember? STILL heavy democratic. Is it not about time you also admitted YOU hate America? 

You are out to destroy it but for who? You will never have ANY power with islam. So why sell your country out like you do?  Oh the Republicans were the "progressives" in the old south because they had this idea about ALL men being equal.

Conservative is a term used for economics NOT party. You may want to invest in a Websters.*


----------



## JQPublic1 (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



Is that the same  racist  *CONSERVATIVE REPUBICAN *south we have today? It still looks the same on a map. Where did all those racist Democrats go? Did they all move North and West ...leaving the South a bastion of GOP ideology ? Help me to understand how the blue  racist south turned in to the red racist south?Can ya do it?


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


No, I don't remember ... what's Cater? And while the south remains very racist, it's now mostly Republican. And I said,  "Conservative," not, "conservative." Pity you don't understand the difference. You must be a Conservative.

*Conservative*

believing in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society : relating to or supporting political conservatism​


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

JQPublic1 said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*The democrat racist south is STILL the democrat racist south in many ways. I just moved from there a decade ago after having to put up with them.

Now the lines are drawn more on economics, so the color of their robes and hoods have changed but NOT what they practice. They use economics to oppress a people instead of fire hoses now.*


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


1, Carter
2, NOT the major cities, those are still strong democrat areas.


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


What about Carter?

And regardless of who lives where, the racist south is still mostly Republican.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*The majority of votes for the racist democrats are in the cities where they hold minority's hostage with EBT and welfare instead of building jobs like Keystone.

As long as they keep the jobs away and use the threat of killing welfare the people are held hostage.*


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


What does that have to do with the fact that the racist Conservative  south is now mostly Republican?


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*The racist controlled cities have more votes per square mile then the republican rural areas. It takes 10 or 12 rural areas to overcome one city. 

*


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


Seems the racist Conservative southern Republicans  have no problems overcoming the Democrats. A Democrat presidential candidate won only once in the racist Conservative southern Bible belt since 1964.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*The cities are still held by racist democrats. To quote a democrat {Tip O'Neil} "ALL politics is local. Given the off year where the cities are fed up with dems and 2016 coming it maybe the first time in a long time ALL the branches are held by a conservative party IF conservatives run a TRUE conservative and not that crap like last time.

Romney is NOT a conservative. McCain is NOT a conservative.*


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


Are you really this dumb, Conservative? Again ..... what difference does it make how many Democrats there are in the big cities? There are still more Republicans overall in the racist Conservative south. The racist Conservative south is still, by far, electing Republicans.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


*What is different is that now minorities are starting to see what racists and back stabbers the democrats are. The minorities after being LIED to for more then FOUR DECADES finally KNOW they have been cheated by democrats.*


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Never said it old man and I've been into bodybuilding since my early 20s  there a recent pic readily available on my profile page, but this is what you do when people expose you as the idiot, antaganizer you really are, deflect


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

Faun said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Another idiot who speaks out of his ass, who doesn't know or care to know what "constitutional conservatism" is. Liberty of the individual get it straight


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 27, 2015)

Jroc whining above when he gets his neo-con ass hammered.

All he needs to do is engage honestly in dialogue.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc whining above when he gets his neo-con ass hammered.
> 
> All he needs to do is engage honestly in dialogue.




When did that happen? Get yourself checked old man, you're delusional, and look up "constitutional conservatism" if you can actually comprehend it


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc whining above when he gets his neo-con ass hammered.
> 
> All he needs to do is engage honestly in dialogue.


Good luck with that. Tell me how it goes.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc whining above when he gets his neo-con ass hammered.
> ...


Constitutional conservatism is a term made up by Conservatives. You cant just make up a word because you dont want to appear racist.  Either way it has nothing to do with the fact that the people that started the Klown Krew Kollaboration were conservatives.  These same people dirty up the Republican party to this day and keep the two party system alive.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




Liberty look it up also look up Progressives and eugenics then get back to me


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

Jroc said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


I dont need to look up any of the terms. They have nothing to do with conservatives starting the KKK.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




"Democratic" anti liberty party is the KKK you must be proud


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 27, 2015)

*Conservatives *started the KKK.  At various times the membership has been Democratic, now it is Republican or independent.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

Jroc said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


That too has nothing to do with conservatives starting the KKK.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Fascist started the KKK look that up too


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

Jroc said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


I agree some were definitely fascists. Glad you finally see the light.

fas·cist
ˈfaSHəst/
_noun_

*1*.
an advocate or follower of fascism.
synonyms: authoritarian, totalitarian, autocrat, *extreme right-winger,* rightist;


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 27, 2015)

And many of our conservative far right neo-cons are of course fascistic.


----------



## Faun (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...





Jroc said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


Which has what to do with the racist Conservative south voting mostly Republican these days?


----------



## JQPublic1 (Feb 27, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...


 Part of your comprehension  problem may stem from looking in dictionaries instead encyclopedias or peer reviewed political writings. I am not sure this conversation if worth having if you don't understand that, besides the fiscal conservatives you described, there are also SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES.
Before the 1960s Southern Democrats were primarily social conservatives mainly  because the majority wanted to preserve the old race codes through segregation.

White Republicans of that era were called "bleeding heart liberals" even though  some aspects of their "liberalism" wasn't much better than that of the social conservatives. The difference was enough, though, to attract  many black voter's  support. Even Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican back then; and, Jesse Jackson was likely a Republican too with King as his mentor.

Today,  southern socialist conservative ideologues are aligned with the GOP. Conversely, conservative and liberal Blacks have abandoned the party of Lincoln in the wake of the Democrat's
positive Civil Right's initiatives. For the same reasons, White conservatives turned red with anger,figuratively and literally, to become Republicans.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Liberty loving conservatives are centrists unlike the far leftist totalitarian communist nutjobs. You know gets me ? Black people dont demand reparations for Blacks from the "Democratic" Party. they are the same party, they never folded and became something else. They should be bankrupted and put out of business for what they did to black people


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 27, 2015)

Jroc is frothing.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

JQPublic1 said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



They were? Classic liberalism is more the conservatism of today. No 'bleeding heart" though that's a modern term. You might want to link to something which backs up your stupidity


----------



## Jroc (Feb 27, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc is frothing.




Thats a natural state for you old men. Drooling and stuff wipe your chin fake


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 27, 2015)

Classic liberalism is nothing like the frothing neo-conservatism of Jroc today.  You are envious of me and people like me, who have en successful in living the American dream, which is certainly natural for a loser like you.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Feb 27, 2015)

Jroc said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...



Most Americans are centrist. Other wise one party would always hold the reins of power.
Since We the People are more likely to vote for the candidate who appeals to us aesthetically as well as morally. Sometimes, the underdog is preferred to "punish" an incumbent  administration that has reneged on campaign promises or did not do what was expected.

 The degree of sophistication shown by American voters doesn't jibe with your  attempt to departmentalize them into either "liberty loving conservaties' or "far leftist totalitarian communist nut jobs." Nay, we are far more intelligent than that and far more diverse in our opinions than you want to believe. However, with only two primary political parties to choose from, Blacks , Asians, Jews and Hispanics have given the bulk of their  national voting support to the restructured, gentler and kinder Democrat Party...along with a significant number of White Women. White males have, for the most part, especially in the last two national elections, voted for the Republican candidate ... no matter how inept and silly that candidate was.

In closing, I am glad you brought up the issue of reparations. I don't think that is something  the general  Black population would ever expect. Black folks certainly would not place the blame for slavery and domestic terrorism at the doorstep pf the Democrat National HQs. Jim Crow and other malignant social manifestations
may have been engineered mostly by old style Democrats but the Northern Republicans were not all so benevolent as we have been led to believe. Besides, the US government sanctioned slavery and  largely ignored the plight of freed slaves years after manumission. It wasn't the Democrat Party that ought to be held accountable...its the entire government apparatus that ought to be held accountable. In light of actions that took place during the Civil Rights Era and with the exodus of many racist factions, the Democrat Party has been forgiven.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 28, 2015)

Jroc said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


Why should they demand reparations from only the Dems? The entire country benefited from slavery dems and repubs alike.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 28, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


*The Republican party was not even formed until about 10 years BEFORE the civil war. You going to punish a party born to fight slavery?*


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 28, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


No one is getting punished. Slavery benefited the US. The US should pay what they owe. Are you being punished when you got to the store to but groceries and you give them money?


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 28, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


*Given America inherited slavery where is that English money?
Given whites were slaves FIRST where is THEIR money?*


----------



## JQPublic1 (Feb 28, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



Are you saying  indentured servitude is the equivalent of slavery? Under that system people could pay off their debts and  end their "contract" to work off that debt. You are not being clear on the issue of White slavery and how the Brits were responsible for it.  Having funded the colony expeditions and settlements in the New World, It would seem reasonable for the royals to expect a return on that investment. Taxation without Representation was one worthy issue to complain about but it was not tantamount to chattel slavery.

According to Wiki-pedia slavery existed in the colonies from the onset but the article does not elaborate on whether those in bondage were White or Black. The article does suggest that even from the earliest days of colonization slavery was associated with Africans, NOT White people. Also, in the same narrative implies that earlier forms of "slavery" in the colonies was  somehow less  restrictive than Chattel Slavery. During that era Blacks and Whites seemed to intermingle freely both socially as well as sexually.

Interestingly, after the revolutionary war, you would expect the colonists to have a deeper and abiding respect for freedom. That wasn't the case. Instead, especially in the agrarian southern colonies, chattel slavery erupted with all deliberation and haste; it was the African who suffered.


----------



## DarkFury (Feb 28, 2015)

JQPublic1 said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


*The first white slaves to America were brought by the English as they cleaned their ghettos. The first white slaves to the world were captured by Africans and shipped all over.

The African slave trade of whites is even older then this country.
*


----------



## JQPublic1 (Feb 28, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> The first white slaves to America were brought by the English as they cleaned their ghettos. The first white slaves to the world were captured by Africans and shipped all over.
> 
> The African slave trade of whites is even older then this country.



In post #123, I was somewhat skeptical of the use of "slave" when applied to White colonists. Further research on my part indicates there may be more to that whitewashed term "indentured servant" than I thought possible. One very racist site illustrates the plight of White indentured servants in graphic detail comparing it to Black chattel slavery. Looking around for less passion and possibly less embellishment in regards to this topic, I found similar accounts of the "White Slavery phenomenon" here.  I was aware that White Slavery existed before American was discovered and that North Africans ( Arabs) were deeply involved. However, the op is not about slavery at all. It is a discussion about the old Democrats and the KKK. Interesting conversation, though!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Darkfury, the Republicans opposed slavery for white economic opportunity not to free slaves.  Check the party platforms of 1856 and 1860.  In 1856, the issue was to prohibit slavery in the territories. 

Republican Party Platforms Republican Party Platform of 1856
Republican Party Platforms Republican Party Platform of 1860


----------



## JQPublic1 (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The party opposed slavery for white economic opportunity not to free slaves.  Check theprty platforms of 1856 and 1860.  In 1856, the issue was to prohibit slavery in the territories.
> 
> Republican Party Platforms Republican Party Platform of 1856
> Republican Party Platforms Republican Party Platform of 1860



There seems to have been myriad reasons for ending slavery. Those you cited are valid but there are more.
Abolitionists opposed slavery on religious grounds. I am not sure that the Quakers , for instance, were Republicans but  they seem to have had a strong  political influence in emancipating slaves. The line in the sand was drawn literally at the southern border of the Quaker state, Pennsylvania. I am inclined to believe that the custom of Baptizing slaves by the Spanish was also instrumental in stirring Christians to action.



			
				wiki-pedia said:
			
		

> The first 19 or so Africans arrived ashore near the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia, in 1619, brought by Dutch traders who had seized them from a captured Spanish slave ship. *The Spanish usually baptized slaves in Africa before embarking them. As English law considered baptized Christians exempt from slavery, these Africans were treated as indentured servants who joined about 1,000 English indentured servants already in the colony. *They were freed after a prescribed period and given the use of land and supplies by their former masters.





> Though scholars such as Eugene Genovese's argued that slavery was a moribund, inefficient system that was only kept because of cultural reasons, Robert Fogeland Stanley Engerman, in their controversial 1974 book _Time on the Cross,_ argued that the rate of return of slavery at the market price was close to 10 percent, a number close to investment in other assets. Fogel's 1989 work, Without Consent or Contract The Rise and Fall of American Slavery, elaborated on the moral indictment of slavery which ultimately led to its abolition.


According to Wiki-pedia


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Most of the Republicans would rather have the African Americans removed from the country, emancipated or not, so that they were not competitors for free white labor.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Punished? the Democratic party as an entity should have been eradicated long ago.the Democratic gave us Jim Crowe and party prolonged discrimination against black people. Liberty loving constitutionalism and the people who pushes it, is what end slavery .Certainly not leftist who subjugate everyone to government  tyranny


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Most of the Republicans would rather have the African Americans removed from the country, emancipated or not, so that they were not competitors for free white labor.



the Competitors for American jobs are being imported by the leftist scumbags.We want jobs for Americans not foreigners. Funny idiots like "Little Dick Durbin" think legalizing illegals is the same as freeing the Slaves. What a moron, people this stupid should be barred from holding political office


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

You are acting loony again, jroc.

We are talking about the GOP of the 1850s to 1860.

Stay on track, please.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> You are acting loony again, jroc.
> 
> We are talking about the GOP of the 1850s to 1860.
> 
> Stay on track, please.




The tyranny of the leftist in federal government is ongoing and increasing thanks in part to idiots like yourself. As i said black unemployment is high. Black teenage unemployment is very high, but you leftist think it a great idea to import more workers displacing Americans


----------



## JQPublic1 (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Most of the Republicans would rather have the African Americans removed from the country, emancipated or not, so that they were not competitors for free white labor.


Well, I don't know about that! In the early 1820s and 1830s the ACS ( American Colonization Society) was formed expressly for "repatriating" Blacks to Africa. The ACS was a coalition of slave holders, Quakers and others who preferred repatriation to Africa rather emancipation. Slaveholders were probably more likey to be Democrats back then.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > You are acting loony again, jroc.
> ...


You are trolling the thread.  Reported.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Focus on the bolded part.

Most of the Republicans would rather have the African Americans removed from the country, *emancipated or not,* so that they were not competitors for free white labor.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Focus on the bolded part.
> 
> Most of the Republicans would rather have the African Americans removed from the country, *emancipated or not,* so that they were not competitors for free white labor.




I'm focused on the current reality. What are you focused on? Did you take your medication today?


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




*"Which Party Put The First KKK Member On The Supreme Court?"*

**


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

The OP has been addressed, thoroughly.

Jroc, if you wish to post a thread about illegal immigration and our economy, go ahead.

Or continued to be reported for trolling.

JQ, white indentured servitude was awful. Aproximately 70,000 of 110,000 died before their contracts were up.

However, those who survived their contracts were given their 'dues' and mostly moved into the back country.

The 250,000 blacks who were brought to the North American colonies could only be freed by their masters, and thus the color 'black' became associated with racial slavery.

A few blacks were slave masters, and Darkfury cannot show that they were even 1 of every 5000.

Utah had slavery in the territorial constitution for white and blacks until the 13th Amendment ended all slavery.

To equate general slavery with Negro chattel slavery  in America is ludicrous.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The OP has been addressed, thoroughly.
> 
> Jroc, if you wish to post a thread about illegal immigration and our economy, go ahead.
> 
> ...


In addition I may add that the vast majority of that small amount of Black slave owners actually owned their family members.


----------



## Faun (Feb 28, 2015)

About the only thing the KKK from then has in common with the KKK of today is that they're primarily Christian Conservatives.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

The KKK then and now are *conservative *racialists.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The KKK then and now is that they are *conservatives *racialists.





> President Wilson is mostly remembered today as the first modern liberal president, the first (and only) POTUS with a PhD, and the only political scientist to occupy the Oval Office. He was the champion of "self determination" and the author of the idealistic but doomed "Fourteen Points" – his vision of peace for Europe and his hope for a League of Nations. But the nature of his presidency has largely been forgotten.





> That's a shame, because Wilson's two terms in office provide the clearest historical window into the soul of progressivism. Wilson's racism, his ideological rigidity, and his antipathy toward the Constitution were all products of the progressive worldview. And since "progressivism" is suddenly in vogue – today's leading Democrats proudly wear the label – it's worth actually reviewing what progressivism was and what actually happened under the last full-throated progressive president


.

You want a more progressive America Careful what you wish for. - CSMonitor.com


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

> In an astonishing admission, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
> says she was under the impression that legalizing abortion with the 1973 Roe. v. Wade case would eliminate undesirable members of the populace, or as she put it “populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”




Read more at Ginsburg I thought Roe was to rid undesirables




> Looks like Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg isn’t the only one who’s been channeling eugenicist Margaret Sanger.
> 
> Internet sleuth Zombie has a new report on John Holdren, President Obama’s science czar:
> 
> ...





> • The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food;
> 
> • Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;



Michelle Malkin The ghoulish spirit of Margaret Sanger lives


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

Leftists and Planned parenthood....



> They were stolen from their homes, locked in chains and taken across an ocean. And for more than 200 years, their blood and sweat would help to build the richest and most powerful nation the world has ever known.
> 
> But when slavery ended, their welcome was over. America's wealthy elite had decided it was time for them to disappear and they were not particular about how it might be done.
> 
> What you are about to see is that the plan these people set in motion 150 years ago is still being carried out today. So don't think that this is history. It is not. It is happening right here, and it's happening right now


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Jroc confuses southen *conservatives *in the Klan with northern liberals?  Wilson is the example that proves the rule that Jroc is wrong about southern *conservatives*.

Ginsberg had no such hope as did you about Roe.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Propaganda videos are propaganda videos, not examples of critical thinking.  Your thinking is what the mainstream GOP is trying to eliminate from the party.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc confuses southen *conservatives *in the Klan with northern liberals?  Wilson is the example that proves the rule that Jroc is wrong about southern *conservatives*.
> 
> Ginsberg had no such hope as did you about Roe.




I'm sure fake Wilson the progressive one of your kind. Now take your meds you're delusional. Dementia?


----------



## MaryL (Feb 28, 2015)

I resisted posting here. Democrats are such idiots. And you know, Lincoln was a republican and started a war? SHOCKING? And that lead to a future and a populace that can't get past slavery and racism? And those same people  keep blaming their failures  on that same past? So what are we gonna do about it?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Jroc said:


> I'm sure fake Wilson the progressive _*needs a transitive verb*_ one of your kind. Now take your meds *needs punctuation* you're *d*elusional. Dementia?


You are a neo-con; by definition, you are a big government right wing progressive.

Try Welcome to the Purdue University Online Writing Lab OWL


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure fake Wilson the progressive one of your kind. Now take your meds you're elusional. Dementia?
> ...



You're a progressive nutjob who is partly responsible for the destruction of our constitutional system by the totalitarian leftist ,but you're old and will die off before the full effects of those leftist will be felt. so what to do care really


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

"You're a progressive nutjob who is partly responsible for the destruction of our constitutional system by the totalitarian leftist"

You know nothing of the kind, when in fact, I served militarily and you did not, I suffered for my country and you did not, and you neo-cons are big government right wing fools.  The millennials, who have been well taught by my generation,  despise you neo-cons.


----------



## Pogo (Feb 28, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



When was Carter a racist?



>> Carter was sworn in as the 76th Governor of Georgia on January 12, 1971. He declared in his inaugural speech that "the time of racial segregation was over. No poor, rural, weak, or black person should ever again have to bear the additional burden of being deprived of the opportunity for an education, a job, or simple justice." The crowd was reportedly shocked by this message, contrasting starkly with Georgia's political culture and particularly Carter's campaign. The many segregationists who had supported Carter during the race felt betrayed. _Time_ magazine ran a story on the progressive "New South" governors elected that year in a May 1971 issue, featuring a cover illustration of Carter.[25][26][27] << (Wiki)​


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Darkfury is a concrete learner.

It is what it is, so he is being used by others.


----------



## Pogo (Feb 28, 2015)

DarkFury said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > DarkFury said:
> ...



"Democratic" was effectively all there was at the time; the Whig Party was dead and the Republican Party was six years old when the 1860 election came up.

How many states did Lincoln win in the South in 1860?  *Zero.*
How many states did the Democrat Steven Douglas win in the South?  *Also zero.*

The South ran their own candidates.  Two of them.  The identity crisis between Democrats and Southerners was already estblished even then.  The schism would bubble up again in future election years -- 1924... 1948... 1964 and again four years later.  It was a recurring square peg in a round hole.  Finally the migration to the RP began with Thurmond, exactly 99 years after the Civil War, to the party of the despised President who had defeated them -- a move which for 99 years was unthinkable in the South.  But like us in the present, they had no other choice --- in a nation where a single two-headed party dominates everything, you're either a Democrat, a Republican, or an also-ran.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> "You're a progressive nutjob who is partly responsible for the destruction of our constitutional system by the totalitarian leftist"
> 
> You know nothing of the kind, when in fact, I served militarily and you did not, I suffered for my country and you did not, and you neo-cons are big government right wing fools.  The millennials, who have been well taught by my generation,  despise you neo-cons.



You're still suffering from delusions. Your generation spat on our military. and you would like us to stand by and watch another genocide of Christians in the middle east. You're a no principled, America hating, leftist, nutjob and a fraud get lost.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > "You're a progressive nutjob who is partly responsible for the destruction of our constitutional system by the totalitarian leftist"
> ...


Where do you come up with your crap, Jroc?  I served in the military as did millions of my generation from the Vietnam War into the nineties, you military dodging freak.  Where were you?

You are morally insane to believe you have any right to post on these matters.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




Right? Please, You think i must agree with you because you may have served in the military? John McCain suffered greatly as a prisoner of war. Do you agree with the man? of course not, so spare me fake. Now stay on topic


----------



## JakeStarkey (Feb 28, 2015)

I am not a neo-con.  No sane person is.  I admire John McCain greatly but I believe his torture affected his mind on this issue.

We are NOT the policeman of the war.  We have not the resources, the personnel, or the will to be at continual war from now on.

Your brand of American imperialism, your attitude as a military service dodging individual, will lead to 3rd world status for America.

I will correct all who are wrong, such as you who makes being wrong a professional habit, anytime they go off OP like you.


----------



## regent (Feb 28, 2015)

So which party put the first black justice on the Supreme Court?


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> I am not a neo-con.  No sane person is.  I admire John McCain greatly but I believe his torture affected his mind on this issue.
> 
> We are NOT the policeman of the war.  We have not the resources, the personnel, or the will to be at continual war from now on.
> 
> ...




"Evil prevails when good men do nothing" Are you a good man? and the proper term would be "American exceptionalism".. Get it straight.


----------



## Jroc (Feb 28, 2015)

regent said:


> So which party put the first black justice on the Supreme Court?


 and which party slandered a good man...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 1, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > I am not a neo-con.  No sane person is.  I admire John McCain greatly but I believe his torture affected his mind on this issue.
> ...


Evil prevails when bad men do everything they can do destroy a country.  That describes you.  American exceptionalism is not your American imperialism.  American neo-conservatism is not American exceptionalism, you service dodging ingrate.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 1, 2015)

"which party slandered a good man..."

The GOP and the Dems do that all the time.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Mar 1, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The OP has been addressed, thoroughly.
> 
> Jroc, if you wish to post a thread about illegal immigration and our economy, go ahead.
> 
> ...


Which of my posts are you addressing?


----------



## JQPublic1 (Mar 1, 2015)

Faun said:


> About the only thing the KKK from then has in common with the KKK of today is that they're primarily Christian Conservatives.


Oh, I think the hate continues to bond their present and past. The major reason the terrorism has subsided  is due to fear of lawsuits and prison. Something their predecessors had no fear of!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 1, 2015)

The ultimate metaphorical fate of neo-conservatism.  History will chase them down.


----------



## Jroc (Mar 1, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> The ultimate metaphorical fate of neo-conservatism.  History will chase them down.




Funny I came up poor, from inner city Detroit and have never been a leftist because I've seen what liberals policies have done to people. So "Neocon" Nope that's a leftist term. You are way too full of yourself fake. Maybe because you're old, i don't know, but you're leftist, isolationism is what leads to us to eventually have to go in later.and take care of much bigger problems.



The Rabbi says it well...



> As gruesome burnings now join the ranks of horrific beheadings and other beastly attacks on innocent men, women and children, all in the name of religion, we humans -- the human race -- ought, nay, must, look at ourselves and ask: how have we come to this? And what can we do to change the state of affairs?
> 
> As decent people we are obligated to get to the bottom of this cancer, and do whatever it takes to eradicate it. *Our generation will be judged by what we did or did not do at this critical juncture in history.*


 *Rabbi Simon Jacobson*


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 1, 2015)

I am the American Dream.  I am older, served 12 years on active duty, got two graduate degrees, served my community in many capacities (twice as a school board president), my brothers and sisters and I established a very successful business, and I have retired to a great life in Salt Lake City.

I grew up in a single parent family, very poor, most of my child hood and youth.  So stop your fucking whining about your background.  I have succeeded, and you have not.  Ask yourself why.

Jroc, you are nothing special, just a failed neo-conservative who tries to revise history and gets his ass kicked when he does, and then cries.


----------



## Jroc (Mar 1, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> I am the American Dream.  I am older, served 12 years on active duty, got two graduate degrees, served my community in many capacities (twice as a school board president), my brothers and sisters and I established a very successful business, and I have retired to a great life in Salt Lake City.
> 
> I grew up in a single parent family, very poor, most of my child hood and youth.  So stop your fucking whining about your background.  I have succeeded, and you have not.  Ask yourself why.
> 
> Jroc, you are nothing special, just a failed neo-conservative who tries to revise history and gets his ass kicked when he does, and then cries.




You're a wrinkled up old man who is full of yourself fake. Which is why most people don't like you here. Funny you know what I've done and you don't even know me. You are the "American dream"?  You have no concept of the Constitution and you slander the founders. it must have been your leftist indoctrination in school?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 1, 2015)

Jroc, you have accused me of this that and the other, without knowing me, yet you balk at getting the same treatment.  You will be corrected every time you misuse terms and definitions and miscast the actual history narrative of America.

The millennials overwhelmingly do not agree with your neo-con political beliefs, and they are the largest voting generation next year.  You are going to live with it.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Mar 1, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The KKK then and now is that they are *conservatives *racialists.
> ...


I think Teddy Roosevelt might take umbrage at the notion of you declaring that Wilson was the first progressive president.

After all, it was he who created the Progressive Party . Here is a permalink to an exchange where a right wing nut job was trying to equate Progressivism with Communism.  He was thoroughly schooled and finally learned what Progressivism is.. Do you dare to come face to face with YOUR ignrorance as well? Here is the gateway:

Stalin was a Progressive Page 3 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## Jroc (Mar 1, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc, you have accused me of this that and the other, without knowing me, yet you balk at getting the same treatment.  You will be corrected every time you misuse terms and definitions and miscast the actual history narrative of America.
> 
> The millennials overwhelmingly do not agree with your neo-con political beliefs, and they are the largest voting generation next year.  You are going to live with it.
> 
> View attachment 37330


You're So full yourself fake. That's another reason a lot of people don't like you here , You make declarations, then you expect people to take them as facts, simply because you said it. We should be advancing the interest of the U.S. around the world like most countries do


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 1, 2015)

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc, you have accused me of this that and the other, without knowing me, yet you balk at getting the same treatment.  You will be corrected every time you misuse terms and definitions and miscast the actual history narrative of America.
> ...


I take immense pride that you freaks on the far right don't like me.  Makes my day.  I take your "facts" and unravel them, apply them to you, and you fucking whine because you can't meet the standard.

Our national duty is not to spread Americanism across the word, the old navy following the flag of commerce theory.

We are perfectly capable of being the greatest power in the world without being neo-conservative.


----------



## Jroc (Mar 1, 2015)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


We advance the interests of this country Just like China does ,Russia ect. "Americanism"?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 1, 2015)

And we can do that without your hippy neo-con horseshit.


----------



## regent (Mar 7, 2015)

When FDR lost the Court-packing battle he began a program to realign the parties. It was sort of a low keyed realignment but it had started. Eleanor, always on the side of the down trodden, helped but with a different motive. It was Truman, however, that started the big exodus of Southern Democrats from the party.


----------



## Pogo (Mar 7, 2015)

regent said:


> When FDR lost the Court-packing battle he began a program to realign the parties. It was sort of a low keyed realignment but it had started. Eleanor, always on the side of the down trodden, helped but with a different motive. It was Truman, however, that started the big exodus of Southern Democrats from the party.



Only temporarily, really.  That would be the "Dixiecrat" faction that split off at the convention and ran Strom Thurmond (the event Trent Lott was referring to in the infamous 100th birthday remark) which split the Southern vote in half.  But they had done that before, as long ago as 1860 when they ran two candidates (Breckenridge and Bell) against the DP, who won no Southern states at all.  They also disrupted the 1924 convention when a Catholic stood to get the nomination, a time when the KKK and racism in general was resurgent.  Then there was George Wallace later on.  But after 1948 the Dixiecrats, like the other splitters, dissolved and went back to the DP, the idea of associating with the party of the POTUS who vanqushed the South being still unthinkable, until Thurmond broke the ice in 1964 after the CRA had passed.

The bipolar alliance between Southern conservatives and Northern liberals having the same political party alliance had a long and fundamentally dysfunctional history.  It's kind of amazing it went on as long as it did.

Part of why it's demagoguic tomfoolery to suggest a political party always stands in the same place over time, or that it's even intended to represent some permanently fixed ideology.  In truth political parties are wind-powered; if the wind shifts, so does the party.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 7, 2015)

The beginning of the end for southern *conservatives *in the Democratic Party was certainly jetted forward by Truman and Humphrey and Wallace and others.

Excellent comment: "The bipolar alliance between *Southern conservatives* and *Northern liberals* having the same political party alliance had a long and fundamentally dysfunctional history. It's kind of amazing it went on as long as it did."


----------



## rdean (Mar 7, 2015)

white wing so funi

think kkk were liberals


----------



## JakeStarkey (Mar 7, 2015)

Yeah, as if *social conservatives* are going to welcome civil rights.


----------

