Black republicans...who are they really?

[Muhammed]

Democrats like to go easy on violent black offenders. The reason for that is because they want them to go back to the hood and shoot more black people.

 

[sealybobo]

Ol' Blue making senseless noise again...

I think he wants to try an say something....then the democrat whip him back into submission....

It must really suck to live your life voiceless, ignorant, and liberal while looking out through the holes in the plantation fence.....

:0) Who in the fuck would want to be you.

Some fucking clown always talking about a 'plantation' while crying about who black people vote for.

You vote democrat...the plantation is where you live...

What is there really to discuss with us civilized people outside the fence?

There is nothing to discuss you ignorant bitch .. :0) told you that when you first started crying to me.

Well, at least take your dick out of your hand while your standing there....try to look dignified as a piece of property....

Have a democrat plantation wonderful day brother....

You and your family have a wonderful day. Yes, you belong to the GOP and they to you.

 

[Unkotare]

Ol' Blue making senseless noise again...

...who claims I must be white ...

No, you're blue.

 

[Papageorgio]

Black republicans...who are they really?

Answer: They are Props, useless, a joke, and they barely exist.

They don't win elections, they don't count, they don't matter, they influence no one.

Glad we solved that question ... together.

Look someone irrelevant, pretending to be relevant. Lol!

.. you're pretending that I give a fuck about what you think. :0) I don't give a shit about being 'relevant' to morons.

I know you regressives don't care about what others think, you think your narrow minded intolerant opinions are the only ones that count. That is what makes you irrelevant.

:0) You just keep getting dumber. It is the Republican Party and idiots like you who are on the fast track to irrelevancy .. and you know it.

.. and no, HELL NO, I don't give a damn about what idiot racists think. Why the fuck would I?

I don't need your company, your friendship, nor your support.

I like the divide just the way it is .. hope it gets worse. :0)

Regressives keeping with the name calling, that is all they got. Thanks for proving it over and over again.

As far as a divide? I don't think there is much difference between you and the far right nut jobs. Hate is hate.

I also didn't ask for your company, friendship or support. Not sure why you would throw that out there. Interesting though.

 

[owebo]

I think he wants to try an say something....then the democrat whip him back into submission....

It must really suck to live your life voiceless, ignorant, and liberal while looking out through the holes in the plantation fence.....

:0) Who in the fuck would want to be you.

Some fucking clown always talking about a 'plantation' while crying about who black people vote for.

You vote democrat...the plantation is where you live...

What is there really to discuss with us civilized people outside the fence?

There is nothing to discuss you ignorant bitch .. :0) told you that when you first started crying to me.

Well, at least take your dick out of your hand while your standing there....try to look dignified as a piece of property....

Have a democrat plantation wonderful day brother....

You and your family have a wonderful day. Yes, you belong to the GOP and they to you.

Thanks! But I'm not republican....nor am I married...nor do I have any children.....

Other than that, you got everything right, as you liberal tools always do....

 

[Papageorgio]

Trump/hillary can't do it by themselves. Don't vote for a senator or a house member who would let mexican trucker in. Just because trump is into closing our borders doesn't mean Mitch McConnell or John McCain is.

And show up for the midterms. We can't take this country back when only rich people and die hard Republicans show up every 2 and moderates/independents every 4

Ding, winner. This is why we are stuck choosing between Trump and Hillery.

And heads up. The rich have figured out they can do more at a state and local level so whoever is the best funded candidate, do not vote for that person. That small time politician is funded by the kochs and can really impact your life even more so at a local level.

I will get shit for saying this, but this is why Ted Cruz beat David Douchehurst in the run for K. Bailey Hutchesuns senate seat. See, in Texas to get anywhere politically one is supposed to kiss the Bush signet ring and aske the blessing of the yankee transplants elder fucktard. Dick Perry tried to run without doing so and we saw how that went the first time. Cruz told the Bush clan to ram it. Because of that all the media outlets had him losing right up until they had to say he won the seat. Both parties suffer from shit like this. both parties need to be purged of all the money grubbing elites and fixed. They are both crooked as hell. A good start would be for the Clinton and Bush dynasties to fuck off some place and die quietly.

The establishment of both parties are funded by big business. And the more they are entrenched into Congress, the tougher it will be to root out. America is the land of the rich, for the rich and by the rich. The idea that the Democrats claim to be the party of the poor by touting minimum wage? Pretty silly but effective advertising. The are appeasing the peasants by giving them crumbs and taking away more jobs, more money, more power. Lopsided trade off.

George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting NAFTA, ceremonially signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992. The signed agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" NAFTA ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing of the implementation law to incoming president Bill Clinton.

What dumb fucking Republican thinks Bill Clinton should have veto’ed NAFTA? If you take that position you aren’t being intellectually honest. NAFTA was a done deal. And as it should. Even me, a liberal, doesn’t think we shouldn’t be trading with the rest of the world. Only Republicans who were pro NAFTA yesterday are trying to blame Clinton for signing NAFTA. If he didn’t they would have blamed him for NOT signing it. It would have been their big issue for 1996.

Anyways, back to my point. Prior to sending NAFTA to the Senate, Clinton added two side agreements. The NAALC and the NAAEC to protect workers and the environment. So don’t say “Clinton signed NAFTA” and try and blame him when NAFTA was the GOP’s creation. Now they say they want to put tariffs on imports? Lying mother fuckers.

If Clinton wanted to sign NAFTA, he was all for NAFTA. In his campaign for the Presidency he was for NAFTA.

Here is his speech just before signing NAFTA:

Remarks on the Signing of NAFTA (December 8, 1993)—Miller Center

When I affix my signature to the NAFTA legislation a few moments from now, I do so with this pledge: To the men and women of our country who were afraid of these changes and found in their opposition to NAFTA an expression of that fear—what I thought was a wrong expression and what I know was a wrong expression but nonetheless represented legitimate fears—the gains from this agreement will be your gains, too.
I ask those who opposed NAFTA to work with us to guarantee that the labor and side agreements are enforced, and I call on all of us who believe in NAFTA to join with me to urge the Congress to create the world's best worker training and retraining system. We owe it to the business community as well as to the working men and women of this country. It means greater productivity, lower unemployment, greater worker efficiency, and higher wages and greater security for our people. We have to do that.



Tell me again that Clinton didn't want NAFTA? Sorry but your take is absolutely wrong. Clinton had he opposed NAFTA could have vetoed it, but he was FOR NAFTA.

Ross Perot was the candidate against NAFTA.

 

[Papageorgio]

Do you have a link of the government being racist against black welfare recipients (women) getting less than their white counterparts?

No but I'll try to find the story tomorrow. It was on NPR and they interviewed the 85 year old woman who found out and sued and got the laws changed. When the law changed welfare quadrupled. That means they were denying lots of blacks who qualified.

They also would raid black homes and if a man was found in the home they were cut off. Even if they found a man's razor clothes or shoes.

But this woman found out by comparing her welfare checks with white women with the same number of kids. They were getting more. Whites decided white women needed a little more and blacks could do with a little less. She sued and the supreme Court ruled the welfare discrimination against blacks was unconstitutional.

It's interesting I just heard this for the first time and you can't even believe it. Maybe that should tell you there's a lot you don't realize because you are a white who lacks empathy.

And I don't think this obvious racist history is an excuse for continued black ignorance but I'm not going to pretend the fact that this racism exists

Uh as for men living in homes, we've talked about that for decades, thanks for joining in. Yes the welfare system encourages the break up of families and created dependence, thanks for figuring that out.

and where is the link on the racism in welfare?

But white people weren't subjected to such scrutiny. They went after black women but not white women.

I can't find the NPR story on this. Sorry.

That was 30 years ago. We are talking today.

Ok pal!!! You want more current?

John Kasich: No Food Stamps, Unless You're White

Mother Jones and the Daily KOS? Seriously? Leftwing propaganda sites. How dumb do you think people are to believe that crap?

 

[sealybobo]

Ding, winner. This is why we are stuck choosing between Trump and Hillery.

And heads up. The rich have figured out they can do more at a state and local level so whoever is the best funded candidate, do not vote for that person. That small time politician is funded by the kochs and can really impact your life even more so at a local level.

I will get shit for saying this, but this is why Ted Cruz beat David Douchehurst in the run for K. Bailey Hutchesuns senate seat. See, in Texas to get anywhere politically one is supposed to kiss the Bush signet ring and aske the blessing of the yankee transplants elder fucktard. Dick Perry tried to run without doing so and we saw how that went the first time. Cruz told the Bush clan to ram it. Because of that all the media outlets had him losing right up until they had to say he won the seat. Both parties suffer from shit like this. both parties need to be purged of all the money grubbing elites and fixed. They are both crooked as hell. A good start would be for the Clinton and Bush dynasties to fuck off some place and die quietly.

The establishment of both parties are funded by big business. And the more they are entrenched into Congress, the tougher it will be to root out. America is the land of the rich, for the rich and by the rich. The idea that the Democrats claim to be the party of the poor by touting minimum wage? Pretty silly but effective advertising. The are appeasing the peasants by giving them crumbs and taking away more jobs, more money, more power. Lopsided trade off.

George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting NAFTA, ceremonially signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992. The signed agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" NAFTA ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing of the implementation law to incoming president Bill Clinton.

What dumb fucking Republican thinks Bill Clinton should have veto’ed NAFTA? If you take that position you aren’t being intellectually honest. NAFTA was a done deal. And as it should. Even me, a liberal, doesn’t think we shouldn’t be trading with the rest of the world. Only Republicans who were pro NAFTA yesterday are trying to blame Clinton for signing NAFTA. If he didn’t they would have blamed him for NOT signing it. It would have been their big issue for 1996.

Anyways, back to my point. Prior to sending NAFTA to the Senate, Clinton added two side agreements. The NAALC and the NAAEC to protect workers and the environment. So don’t say “Clinton signed NAFTA” and try and blame him when NAFTA was the GOP’s creation. Now they say they want to put tariffs on imports? Lying mother fuckers.

If Clinton wanted to sign NAFTA, he was all for NAFTA. In his campaign for the Presidency he was for NAFTA.

Here is his speech just before signing NAFTA:

Remarks on the Signing of NAFTA (December 8, 1993)—Miller Center

When I affix my signature to the NAFTA legislation a few moments from now, I do so with this pledge: To the men and women of our country who were afraid of these changes and found in their opposition to NAFTA an expression of that fear—what I thought was a wrong expression and what I know was a wrong expression but nonetheless represented legitimate fears—the gains from this agreement will be your gains, too.
I ask those who opposed NAFTA to work with us to guarantee that the labor and side agreements are enforced, and I call on all of us who believe in NAFTA to join with me to urge the Congress to create the world's best worker training and retraining system. We owe it to the business community as well as to the working men and women of this country. It means greater productivity, lower unemployment, greater worker efficiency, and higher wages and greater security for our people. We have to do that.



Tell me again that Clinton didn't want NAFTA? Sorry but your take is absolutely wrong. Clinton had he opposed NAFTA could have vetoed it, but he was FOR NAFTA.

Ross Perot was the candidate against NAFTA.

Who's against free/fair trade? Are you? I'm not.

Clinton added two side agreements. The NAALC and the NAAEC to protect workers and the environment.

Bush removed those side agreements.

 

[sealybobo]

No but I'll try to find the story tomorrow. It was on NPR and they interviewed the 85 year old woman who found out and sued and got the laws changed. When the law changed welfare quadrupled. That means they were denying lots of blacks who qualified.

They also would raid black homes and if a man was found in the home they were cut off. Even if they found a man's razor clothes or shoes.

But this woman found out by comparing her welfare checks with white women with the same number of kids. They were getting more. Whites decided white women needed a little more and blacks could do with a little less. She sued and the supreme Court ruled the welfare discrimination against blacks was unconstitutional.

It's interesting I just heard this for the first time and you can't even believe it. Maybe that should tell you there's a lot you don't realize because you are a white who lacks empathy.

And I don't think this obvious racist history is an excuse for continued black ignorance but I'm not going to pretend the fact that this racism exists

Uh as for men living in homes, we've talked about that for decades, thanks for joining in. Yes the welfare system encourages the break up of families and created dependence, thanks for figuring that out.

and where is the link on the racism in welfare?

But white people weren't subjected to such scrutiny. They went after black women but not white women.

I can't find the NPR story on this. Sorry.

That was 30 years ago. We are talking today.

Ok pal!!! You want more current?

John Kasich: No Food Stamps, Unless You're White

Mother Jones and the Daily KOS? Seriously? Leftwing propaganda sites. How dumb do you think people are to believe that crap?

I'm sorry but you're going to have to provide a link that proves Kasich isn't a racist scumbag. As far as we know:

While in Congress in 1996, "moderate" "blue-collar" "Christian" Kasich was the architect of welfare reform legislation that, in his preferred language, eliminated food aid for a million people per month. Even that was too extreme for the Republican-led 104th US Congress, and Kasich greased the wheels for passage by inserting a provision that would create time-limited exemptions for regions under particular duress. State governors are afforded discretion in the implementation of those exemptions, and Kasich has been particularly clever in depriving communities of color of these exemptions while directing them toward white majority constituencies more likely to vote for Republican candidates.

I told you today the GOP is more covert about their racism

In 1996, then-Congressman John Kasich cosponsored a welfare reform bill that, for the first time ever, put a time limit on recipients' access to food stamps. Healthy, childless adults would be able to receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for no more than three months in any three-year period, unless they were employed or in a training program for at least 20 hours a week. When Congress balked at a rule that would cause an estimated 1 million people to lose food aid each month, Kasich added an exception that would allow states to seek time-limit waivers for areas with especially high unemployment.

Twenty years later, in his second term as Ohio's governor, the GOP presidential hopeful is taking advantage of these waivers, as most governors have done. But Ohio civil rights groups and economic analysts say Kasich's administration is using the waivers unequally: It applies for waivers in some regions of the state but refuses them in others, in a pattern that has disproportionately protected white communities and hurt minority populations.

 

[sealybobo]

Ohio was hit particularly hard by the recession, with unemployment peaking at 11% in 2009

What??? I thought only liberal Michigan/Detroit was hit hard by the recession.

 

[sealybobo]

Due to a struggling economy and high unemployment, Ohio had qualified for and accepted this statewide waiver from the US Department of Agriculture every year since 2007, including during most of Kasich's first term as governor. But this time, Kasich rejected the waiver for the next two years in most of the state's 88 counties. His administration did accept them for 16 counties in 2014 and for 17 counties in 2015. Most of these were rural counties with small and predominantly white populations. Urban counties and cities, most of which had high minority populations, did not get waivers.

 

[sealybobo]

Very similar to how in the past black women were denied welfare or given less money than white women. And you white racist monkey Republicans want to deny it still happens? Or just blow off the source of my information? Sorry Papa, you aint gonna hear these things in the MSM. It's corporate owned and controlled you know.

 

[sealybobo]

The racial disparity in food stamp distribution is now so extreme that it strains credibility to put it down to anything but political retribution against non-white communities who have no supported the GOP in recent elections. If you can't beat, starve 'em!

 

[sealybobo]

Across the 16 counties the state had selected for waivers, about 94 percent of food stamp recipients were white. Overall in Ohio in December 2013—immediately before the new policy's effects began to surface—food stamp recipients were 65 percent white.

This is a very interesting article John Kasich: No Food Stamps, Unless You're White

 

[sealybobo]

No but I'll try to find the story tomorrow. It was on NPR and they interviewed the 85 year old woman who found out and sued and got the laws changed. When the law changed welfare quadrupled. That means they were denying lots of blacks who qualified.

They also would raid black homes and if a man was found in the home they were cut off. Even if they found a man's razor clothes or shoes.

But this woman found out by comparing her welfare checks with white women with the same number of kids. They were getting more. Whites decided white women needed a little more and blacks could do with a little less. She sued and the supreme Court ruled the welfare discrimination against blacks was unconstitutional.

It's interesting I just heard this for the first time and you can't even believe it. Maybe that should tell you there's a lot you don't realize because you are a white who lacks empathy.

And I don't think this obvious racist history is an excuse for continued black ignorance but I'm not going to pretend the fact that this racism exists

Uh as for men living in homes, we've talked about that for decades, thanks for joining in. Yes the welfare system encourages the break up of families and created dependence, thanks for figuring that out.

and where is the link on the racism in welfare?

But white people weren't subjected to such scrutiny. They went after black women but not white women.

I can't find the NPR story on this. Sorry.

That was 30 years ago. We are talking today.

Ok pal!!! You want more current?

John Kasich: No Food Stamps, Unless You're White

Mother Jones and the Daily KOS? Seriously? Leftwing propaganda sites. How dumb do you think people are to believe that crap?

All I know is first you wanted a link to the article showing you that in the past they gave black women less than white women. Then you laughed because it was in the past, not today. And NOW I have shown you that the GOP are pulling that same old racist shit today. Kasich in Ohio most recently.

I don't care what scum Democrats are. I show up to vote against the GOP who I KNOW are the greater of two evils.

When your party can get 30% of the vote come talk to me. And when your party shows up to midterms instead of every 4 years, let me know. Otherwise, you libertarian/tea baggers are just fos.

 

[sealybobo]

Across the 16 counties the state had selected for waivers, about 94 percent of food stamp recipients were white. Overall in Ohio in December 2013—immediately before the new policy's effects began to surface—food stamp recipients were 65 percent white.

This is a very interesting article John Kasich: No Food Stamps, Unless You're White

Remember you guys tell these crackers that whites murder more than blacks and whites take more welfare than blacks? Well now we see evidence that whites are the majority of slackers who are sucking on the government tit. And whites don't want blacks taking food stamps. Apparently whites deserve and need it and blacks are just looking for a handout. How fucking obviously racist can they be?

 

[Correll]

I've talked with plenty of pro-life blacks about this, in the past.

IN that they were pro-life but voted for pro-choice dems, yes they could be called hypocrites.

But the fact remains, something convinced them that supporting dems was more important that the lives of tens of millions of black babies.


That is absolutely incredible if you think about it.


ps And no, they were not the more successful, middle class blacks growing up in the burbs.


And that bit were you stated that it is the "women's right to choose"?

That is reasoning based on YOUR pro-choices assumptions.


The assumptions of PRO-LIFE BLACKS is, off course, the exact opposite.

They recognize the fallacy of being only pro-UNBORN-life .. even if you don't.

Pro-UNBORN-life is all republicans are .. which is why they keep losing the abortion war.

In fact, republicans have lost on virtually every social issue they care about .. and yes, guns are next.

They know that .. even if you don't.

YOu keep insisting on judging pro-life blacks as though they share your pro-choice assumptions.


Which, of course leads you to miss the huge and unexplained conflict between their beliefs and their actions.


the fact remains, something convinced them that supporting dems was more important that the lives of tens of millions of black babies.


That is absolutely incredible if you think about it.

You're pretending to know black people better than I do. I'm well aware of their conflict on abortion .. and better aware than you seem to be on how they deal with it. Also aware that 'successful' blacks have the same conflicts and use the same reasoning.

Also more aware than you that we do not see the conflict as "tens of millions of black babies" as you do.

I'm also aware that as conservative as we may be, voting for republicans would make us REAL hypocrites. :0) .. and incredibly stupid.

Vote for an all-white political party that doesn't give a rats ass about your BORN children. :0) get real dude.

What is hypocritical is for blacks to vote for the pro-slavery party.

However I do understand why Republicans started losing the black vote. It was Hoover. He was seen as a hero after the great flood but after he became president he couldn't make good on his promises. Although he did get massive relief camps built, being in the south, of course the camps were run by southern Democrats who treated blacks much worse than slaves. The blacks erroneously blamed Hoover and Republicans in general for their plight.

After the diaspora blacks started voting against Republicans. The Republicans have been losing black voters ever since.

:0) "pro-slavery party" .. fast forward several hundred years and .. the Southern Strategy. Today, the Republican Party would re-institute slavery if it could.

That's why blacks hate the Republican Party.

You skipped right past the truth.

The southern strategy is a lie, supported by nothing but bullshit.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

They recognize the fallacy of being only pro-UNBORN-life .. even if you don't.

Pro-UNBORN-life is all republicans are .. which is why they keep losing the abortion war.

In fact, republicans have lost on virtually every social issue they care about .. and yes, guns are next.

They know that .. even if you don't.

YOu keep insisting on judging pro-life blacks as though they share your pro-choice assumptions.


Which, of course leads you to miss the huge and unexplained conflict between their beliefs and their actions.


the fact remains, something convinced them that supporting dems was more important that the lives of tens of millions of black babies.


That is absolutely incredible if you think about it.

You're pretending to know black people better than I do. I'm well aware of their conflict on abortion .. and better aware than you seem to be on how they deal with it. Also aware that 'successful' blacks have the same conflicts and use the same reasoning.

Also more aware than you that we do not see the conflict as "tens of millions of black babies" as you do.

I'm also aware that as conservative as we may be, voting for republicans would make us REAL hypocrites. :0) .. and incredibly stupid.

Vote for an all-white political party that doesn't give a rats ass about your BORN children. :0) get real dude.

What is hypocritical is for blacks to vote for the pro-slavery party.

However I do understand why Republicans started losing the black vote. It was Hoover. He was seen as a hero after the great flood but after he became president he couldn't make good on his promises. Although he did get massive relief camps built, being in the south, of course the camps were run by southern Democrats who treated blacks much worse than slaves. The blacks erroneously blamed Hoover and Republicans in general for their plight.

After the diaspora blacks started voting against Republicans. The Republicans have been losing black voters ever since.

:0) "pro-slavery party" .. fast forward several hundred years and .. the Southern Strategy. Today, the Republican Party would re-institute slavery if it could.

That's why blacks hate the Republican Party.

You skipped right past the truth.

The southern strategy is a lie, supported by nothing but bullshit.

That's stupid .. and I've already posted the truth of just how stupid that is.

Your party is virtually all-white .. and ONLY white men support the racist party in the majority.

You make not like history, but you can't change it.

 

[Correll]

Trump/hillary can't do it by themselves. Don't vote for a senator or a house member who would let mexican trucker in. Just because trump is into closing our borders doesn't mean Mitch McConnell or John McCain is.

And show up for the midterms. We can't take this country back when only rich people and die hard Republicans show up every 2 and moderates/independents every 4

Ding, winner. This is why we are stuck choosing between Trump and Hillery.

And heads up. The rich have figured out they can do more at a state and local level so whoever is the best funded candidate, do not vote for that person. That small time politician is funded by the kochs and can really impact your life even more so at a local level.

I will get shit for saying this, but this is why Ted Cruz beat David Douchehurst in the run for K. Bailey Hutchesuns senate seat. See, in Texas to get anywhere politically one is supposed to kiss the Bush signet ring and aske the blessing of the yankee transplants elder fucktard. Dick Perry tried to run without doing so and we saw how that went the first time. Cruz told the Bush clan to ram it. Because of that all the media outlets had him losing right up until they had to say he won the seat. Both parties suffer from shit like this. both parties need to be purged of all the money grubbing elites and fixed. They are both crooked as hell. A good start would be for the Clinton and Bush dynasties to fuck off some place and die quietly.

The establishment of both parties are funded by big business. And the more they are entrenched into Congress, the tougher it will be to root out. America is the land of the rich, for the rich and by the rich. The idea that the Democrats claim to be the party of the poor by touting minimum wage? Pretty silly but effective advertising. The are appeasing the peasants by giving them crumbs and taking away more jobs, more money, more power. Lopsided trade off.

George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting NAFTA, ceremonially signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992. The signed agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" NAFTA ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing of the implementation law to incoming president Bill Clinton.

What dumb fucking Republican thinks Bill Clinton should have veto’ed NAFTA? If you take that position you aren’t being intellectually honest. NAFTA was a done deal. And as it should. Even me, a liberal, doesn’t think we shouldn’t be trading with the rest of the world. Only Republicans who were pro NAFTA yesterday are trying to blame Clinton for signing NAFTA. If he didn’t they would have blamed him for NOT signing it. It would have been their big issue for 1996.

Anyways, back to my point. Prior to sending NAFTA to the Senate, Clinton added two side agreements. The NAALC and the NAAEC to protect workers and the environment. So don’t say “Clinton signed NAFTA” and try and blame him when NAFTA was the GOP’s creation. Now they say they want to put tariffs on imports? Lying mother fuckers.

The Free Traders are a ideological camp inside the GOP.

They are primarily for the adoption of the Free Trade policy we have today.

HOWEVER, the dems have joined in alone the way, and now are part of that consensus.


The GOP congress did write Nafta and send it to BIll Clinton.

Bill Clinton COULD have vetoed it, but choose to sign it.

One can discuss his reasons.

Today, an ANTI-Free Trader has won the GOP nomination.

A Free Trader has won the dem nomination.


If you think Free Trade and/or Nafta is a bad idea....


Holding Trump responsible for what the GOP congress did in the 90s, makes no sense.

 

[Correll]

YOu keep insisting on judging pro-life blacks as though they share your pro-choice assumptions.


Which, of course leads you to miss the huge and unexplained conflict between their beliefs and their actions.


the fact remains, something convinced them that supporting dems was more important that the lives of tens of millions of black babies.


That is absolutely incredible if you think about it.

You're pretending to know black people better than I do. I'm well aware of their conflict on abortion .. and better aware than you seem to be on how they deal with it. Also aware that 'successful' blacks have the same conflicts and use the same reasoning.

Also more aware than you that we do not see the conflict as "tens of millions of black babies" as you do.

I'm also aware that as conservative as we may be, voting for republicans would make us REAL hypocrites. :0) .. and incredibly stupid.

Vote for an all-white political party that doesn't give a rats ass about your BORN children. :0) get real dude.

What is hypocritical is for blacks to vote for the pro-slavery party.

However I do understand why Republicans started losing the black vote. It was Hoover. He was seen as a hero after the great flood but after he became president he couldn't make good on his promises. Although he did get massive relief camps built, being in the south, of course the camps were run by southern Democrats who treated blacks much worse than slaves. The blacks erroneously blamed Hoover and Republicans in general for their plight.

After the diaspora blacks started voting against Republicans. The Republicans have been losing black voters ever since.

:0) "pro-slavery party" .. fast forward several hundred years and .. the Southern Strategy. Today, the Republican Party would re-institute slavery if it could.

That's why blacks hate the Republican Party.

You skipped right past the truth.

The southern strategy is a lie, supported by nothing but bullshit.

That's stupid .. and I've already posted the truth of just how stupid that is.

Your party is virtually all-white .. and ONLY white men support the racist party in the majority.

You make not like history, but you can't change it.

Stating your opinion is not the same as supporting your opinion.

The southern strategy is a lie.

Nixon desegregated more southern schools than anyone else. That was no way to pander to southern racists.