Holy crap - this has to stop!

[Pogo]

GOOD NEWS. Scalise has been upgraded to "serious", which means he's no longer in critical condition.

>> (CNN) Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise's condition has been upgraded to "serious" after he underwent surgery Saturday for injuries sustained in a shooting at a Republican congressional baseball practice earlier this week, the hospital treating him said in a release.

Scalise, the third-ranking GOP leader in the House, "continues to show signs of improvement," MedStar Washington Hospital Center said in a statement released on behalf of his family. "He is more responsive, and is speaking with his loved ones. The Scalise family greatly appreciates the outpouring of thoughts and prayers."

Although Scalise was able to talk while lying injured on the ball field, he had gone into shock by the time he was transported by helicopter to the hospital and arrived "in critical condition with an imminent risk of death," Sava said. He added that Scalise would be in the hospital "for some time" and would need "a period of healing and rehabilitation" after being discharged. <<
The other victims hit by gunfire have also improved...

>> Mika also remained hospitalized Saturday after undergoing an additional surgery. His family said in a statement he was showing "positive results" and was expected to make a full recovery.
Griner remained in the hospital in good condition after sustaining a gunshot wound to the ankle, according to a Friday update. Bailey, Barth, and Williams have been treated and released.
<<



In terms of final results it also means the only death resulting from this would-be assassin --- was the would-be assassin himself. Again as noted the night of the game -- "America wins, Violence loses".

With this I'll be reverting back to my old avatar. I like to think it helped.

Y'all can go back to your me-me-me bickering about point scoring now.

 

[Pogo]

To POGO -- Yes "you guys" --- the severed head, the repeated killing of the President in Central Park, the attempted MASS assassination of Congress people (ESPECIALLY THE BOOING AND JEERING OF THE PREZ at the BBall game) --- IS the predictable acceleration of this "street theatre" and farce. And here "you guys" are -- trying to justify all the lying, scheming, hissy fit driven political tantrums that are turning ugly --- with events from 30 years ago and mostly UNORGANIZED and UNSUPPORTABLE acts from history.

You need to see the trajectory and the acceleration and the monumental SIZE of this tantrum to understand the dangers. Especially with the MainStream Press INVENTING and SPINNING the crap that is needed to SUSTAIN the anger and violence and opposition.

NNnnnooo, actually you need to demonstrate where I --- or OldLady, or whichever of us you're talking about --- have anything whatsoever to do with "the severed head, the repeated killing of the President in Central Park, the attempted MASS assassination of Congress people (ESPECIALLY THE BOOING AND JEERING OF THE PREZ at the BBall game)". Speaking for myself I can honestly say (1) I would never have even seen the severed head if not for reading USMB, (2) ditto for whatever this play thing is, I haven't even looked into it, and (3) though I wasn't at the baseball game I was watching it on stream and this is the first I've even heard of it.

You seem to be dropping into the same Borg Fallacy. These events have nothing to do with any "you guys". One was (apparently) a comedian (who I never eve heard of before a month ago), the second was (apparently) a play somebody's putting on, and the third --- That calculates out to a "her", a "troupe" and an unknown event. None of which are part of a "you guys" I have any association with ---- unless you're actually trying to impugn baseball fans, which I find even more bizarro.

Do you actually not understand the difference between various diverse individuals, and a cohesive collective?

And yet youre here multiple hours of every day always dependably defending the Blue Team and taking shots at the Other Ones. Did you REWARD these bad actors with votes? If so -- enjoy your meal. It's about to be served.

SMH --- you're as bad as the Composition Fallacies I've been calling out here for as long as I've existed. I thought you were smarter than this. False accusations now, really??

You'll have to show me some evidence, or take the shame as a liar.

I'm also not aware of any venue where you can "vote" for a comedian or a play or a baseball crowd. This is as blatantly dishonest as the Saul Belinsky bullshit.

What the FUCK kind of level have we descended to when you can just hurl accusations at people of being involved in things they never even FUCKING HEARD OF?

YOU need to look up at the title of this thread and do a soul search pal, because you're on very thin ice here.

When the last time you picked one of your infamous "fight to the death", "I get the last word" grudge matches against anything leftist? That's what you do --- isn't it? Is it NON-partisan? NOPE. It is not...

You're in this thread trying to pass off the old South as a some kind of "conservative prototype" because slavery is Conservative. That's a fight I'm willing to pass on. But nonetheless, it's partisan based fantasy...

Oh FUCK YOU and go learn how to read. I CORRECTED a poster who tried to sell the South of 1860 as "Progressivism", which HADN'T EVEN STARTED at that time. Look Hunior, I've known the South intimately since I was seven months old; 'conservative' does indeed describe it. That's not a bad thing in and of itself --- hell I'm sitting in it right now.

I don't tolerate historical revision. Facts matter I'm afraid. Though apparently not to you.

 

[jasonnfree]

We could have a major muslim terrorist attack tomorrow and the demonrats would work harder to bring muslims here because the poor misunderstood muzzies might get the idea that America is not welcoming and gung ho for diversity and all that stuff.

"all that stuff"...more empty rhetoric....

Ok, then why do you want the muzzies here? More diversity? Afraid their feelings will be hurt? We need them to do jobs that Americans won't do?

 

[Divine Wind]

....if it were up to us....But you dupes have to save the greedy idiot rich...

It's exactly that level of arrogance which is why most Americans are against having your party in power. The Republicans are more fucked up than a football bat, but the Democrats are worse.

 

[Markle]

Yes, I agree Trump is a tyrant. And thus why your political system sucks.
If they have abused their power why are the not being punished (it is a rhetorical question - they haven't abused their power. This happens all the time under all presidents).

Of course it is prejudice. He is banning people from particular countries just because they are muslims. No other reason.

BREAKING : The Past SIX Presidents Have “Banned Immigrants”
BREAKING NEWS BY AMY MORENO JANUARY 29, 2017

Obama and his five presidential predecessors all used their executive powers to temporarily ban certain immigrants, including Muslims from entering the United States.

Were liberals outraged and protesting over that?

The protests and outrage we’re witnessing now appears to be more anti-Trump nonsense from the bitter left.

From Washington Examiner
BREAKING : The Past SIX Presidents Have "Banned Immigrants"

 

[Markle]

Nothing wrong with thinking about the security of the country. But that is not the reason he put in the ban. It was kowtowing to his deplorable base. Nothing more. As I stated in another post, if he really was trying to protect the US his starting point for bans would be Saudi Arabia..

IF, as you futilely try to infer that the ban is against Muslims, that, as you know is a lie. Why keep repeating the same lie?

IF the ban was against Muslims, Saudi Arabia and many other nations would be included. The nations named are the same as those named by petulant former President Barack Hussein Obama. They are nations in chaos, nations which have no birth records or anything else about their citizens. The nations in question don't know who are their citizens or anything about them much less anyone else.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's all just escalating. If you watch the UK parliament, they're booing and shouting all the time. The point is -- that moment at the baseball park was NOT the time to do it. And this 2 way finger pointing is what is leading us straight to the bottom of our existence.. We may LOSE the country if it continues. Because if ALL that happens is a power shift the OTHER WAY -- you guys have now set the bar SOO LOW -- the opposition will ALWAYS be just a mindless, useless resistance of fools.

I'm fine with this. Because Dems have spent all their good will and capital doing NOTHING but scheming and attacking.. And both sides are gonna face mighty wrath at the next elections. Don't think we're gonna need term limits as legislation anymore. The "big middle" is now fully nauseated and fucking scared of tanking the whole Republic with the bad and absent leadership on display. I know the LParty is gonna run Indies instead of party candidates in a lot of key races and draft them from superstar achievers and doers with track records of problem solving in govt.

All that has to happen is to MOCK AND RIDICULE this horrendous death match that's gonna drag on for 3 years. Just keep hitting on the NEW LOWS that the 2 brand name parties have brought us to...

Press and polls won't even see it coming. They'll still be in the pig sty trying to kill each other...

Next time, don't let a fat guy strip tease on the convention floor.

Sure.. We can have a 100 Image consultants and focus groups handle that. More balloons, more vetting, more control... Pretty soon, it'll be just as phony as the "niormal" conventions. There was TONS of more debate, more choices, and more solutions offered at THAT convention -- than any other that year.

We COULD I suppose go negative on the Brand Name tribes and make BIG HUGE headlines. But we decided (unfortunately) not to DO that. NEXT TIME --- all you're gonna hear from us is about the blood in the streets, the chaos, the phony news, the derilection of DUTY -- that is gonna be the "track record" for BOTH your corrupt and debased dynasty parties that need to die... Won't NEED money or a podium at the debates to make that case...

You guys are making it WAAAAAY too easy...

Thanks to you and TN, I started looking into this Libertarian Party prior to their convention. I looked at articles and write ups on the candidates, and I read your posts and I STILL got more and more confused about what it would look like. Then I watched the televised portion of the convention and it was obvious that the Party has not yet found its professional footing. I've seen town meetings a lot more together than that was. You folks don't have to be slick and shiny and bullshit driven but you do need to have your act together. I'd welcome it; at least knowing what a Libertarian government would look like would be a help. Be ready to answer those questions next time, is my advice. And if an attention whore gets on stage, don't let him strip for five minutes before anyone gets their finger out of their butt and does something about it.

There are a few problems with a third party.

One is that many of us vote to keep the opposing party out less than to get our person in. Trump was not my choice, but it was either vote for him or Hillary may get in. So yes, voting a third party (not that there is one I like) would have helped usher Bill and Hillary back into the White House, and there was just too much at stake given the Supreme Court vacancy.

But even if by some miracle a third party candidate would get in, he or she would not be able to accomplish anything. They would be a political outsider and the other two parties would never let them get their agendas passed. Trump is an outsider, but he at least belongs to the Republican party, and look how hard of a time his own party members are giving him!

Which is what happened with GHW Bush in 1992 and Gore in 2000. After this debacle (for Hillary!) maybe Congress will finally take a serious look at election reform. Specifically to all people to rank their choices versus only picking one and letting winner take all.

Still, I'm tired of voting for the lesser evil and will always vote my conscience from now on.

There is nothing wrong with our election system; been using the same method for a couple hundred years now.

Whenever I hear the word "reform" to me, it means somebody can't win at the same game as the opponent. It's like immigration reform. There is nothing wrong with our immigration system now, it's just that some don't like the outcome of the game.

The reason we don't get better representatives is because of the media. Who wants to put themselves and their family through that? It takes a special kind of person, and that greatly narrows our choices.

 

[Markle]

If Soros turned in Jews in the 30's, who would have believed a small boy?

Children were taught to turn in their parents and neighbors.

 

[francoHFW]

I saw hundreds of conservatives take up arms and aim them at gov't employees when Cliven Bundy refused to comply with grazing regulations for his cattle, and again for his stupid son in Oregon at the Malheur NWR.

Who was shot and killed at the Bundy Ranch or beaten for that matter?

How about the Black Lives Matter demonstrations?

Only on FOX!! Link? No doubt gangsta wannabees/hangers on blown out of proportion...how else to produce so many hater dupes...

 

[Divine Wind]

Next time, don't let a fat guy strip tease on the convention floor.

Sure.. We can have a 100 Image consultants and focus groups handle that. More balloons, more vetting, more control... Pretty soon, it'll be just as phony as the "niormal" conventions. There was TONS of more debate, more choices, and more solutions offered at THAT convention -- than any other that year.

We COULD I suppose go negative on the Brand Name tribes and make BIG HUGE headlines. But we decided (unfortunately) not to DO that. NEXT TIME --- all you're gonna hear from us is about the blood in the streets, the chaos, the phony news, the derilection of DUTY -- that is gonna be the "track record" for BOTH your corrupt and debased dynasty parties that need to die... Won't NEED money or a podium at the debates to make that case...

You guys are making it WAAAAAY too easy...

Thanks to you and TN, I started looking into this Libertarian Party prior to their convention. I looked at articles and write ups on the candidates, and I read your posts and I STILL got more and more confused about what it would look like. Then I watched the televised portion of the convention and it was obvious that the Party has not yet found its professional footing. I've seen town meetings a lot more together than that was. You folks don't have to be slick and shiny and bullshit driven but you do need to have your act together. I'd welcome it; at least knowing what a Libertarian government would look like would be a help. Be ready to answer those questions next time, is my advice. And if an attention whore gets on stage, don't let him strip for five minutes before anyone gets their finger out of their butt and does something about it.

There are a few problems with a third party.

One is that many of us vote to keep the opposing party out less than to get our person in. Trump was not my choice, but it was either vote for him or Hillary may get in. So yes, voting a third party (not that there is one I like) would have helped usher Bill and Hillary back into the White House, and there was just too much at stake given the Supreme Court vacancy.

But even if by some miracle a third party candidate would get in, he or she would not be able to accomplish anything. They would be a political outsider and the other two parties would never let them get their agendas passed. Trump is an outsider, but he at least belongs to the Republican party, and look how hard of a time his own party members are giving him!

Which is what happened with GHW Bush in 1992 and Gore in 2000. After this debacle (for Hillary!) maybe Congress will finally take a serious look at election reform. Specifically to all people to rank their choices versus only picking one and letting winner take all.

Still, I'm tired of voting for the lesser evil and will always vote my conscience from now on.

There is nothing wrong with our election system; been using the same method for a couple hundred years now.

Whenever I hear the word "reform" to me, it means somebody can't win at the same game as the opponent. It's like immigration reform. There is nothing wrong with our immigration system now, it's just that some don't like the outcome of the game.

The reason we don't get better representatives is because of the media. Who wants to put themselves and their family through that? It takes a special kind of person, and that greatly narrows our choices.

So you want to "reform" the Constitution and eliminate freedom of the press? Just kidding, but the press/"media" is a two-edged sword that, IMHO, is worth the bullshit.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, that's not what the judiciary is for. When the judiciary stops laws and decides they won't let the executive branch enforce those laws, that's called Judicial Legislation, and our Constitution strictly prohibits that. It's why we have separate branches of government.

Who says they are detrimental to the US? The President does, and that's all that counts. The law states that's all that counts. It's the President of the United States that makes that decision, not some commie anti-American judge sitting on the bench.

A judge is not privy to information the President has. The judge does not sit in on national security meetings, the judge does not discuss possible terrorist plots planned against the US, the judge has no access to classified information. The judge doesn't know anything--the President does, and that's why he gets to make those decisions.

So The Orange Buffoons's EO's haven't been kicked to the curb? And if they have, it is illegal?? Have the judges in question been removed for their impertinence? Didn't think so.

And I don't believe for a NY second that Trump has any information. His EO is based on prejudice, BS and kowtowing to his deplorable base. If he really did give a fuck he'd ban citizens from Saudi Arabia instead of curtsying to their king...The amount of Saudi money backing radical madrasses is appalling...

What we have going on is judicial tyranny, and yes, they should do something about it. To abuse their power by falsely using the Constitution to promote their personal political agenda should have them kicked off of the bench.

You don't know what Trump knows.....I don't know what Trump knows, but the most important thing is judges do not know what Trump knows. That's the problem.

There is not one thing in Trump's executive order that displays prejudice. The lying judges stated it was an act against Muslims, yet could not explain why it is most people from Muslim countries were still allowed to come here. It was a bold faced lie, again....to forward their personal political agenda.

Democrats better pray that no terrorist attack (especially a major one) is executed by a foreigner from one of those countries; people that had the blessing of a liberal judge to come here and commit such an act. Their name would be "mud" for at least a decade or more.

We could have a major muslim terrorist attack tomorrow and the demonrats would work harder to bring muslims here because the poor misunderstood muzzies might get the idea that America is not welcoming and gung ho for diversity and all that stuff.

What the sheep are upset about is Trump going against their leaders wishes.

The Democrats goal is to make whites a minority in our country as soon as possible. Banning people from countries of color is a no-no because it interferers with their long-term goal of making this a one-party country forever.

It doesn't matter how many terrorists attacks we may have, it doesn't matter how many Americans are not working because of immigrants, it doesn't matter the amount of drugs that come into this country that kill tens of thousands of us every year, it doesn't matter that immigrants are lowering the pay scale for all Americans. What matters is making whites a minority.

Liberals will never admit this because they lie so much, they even lie to themselves. But if we had a problem with people coming here from countries that vote Republican as a majority, you would see how fast those Democrats would support closing the border.

 

[Markle]

I'm the one who posted that the Klan wasn't founded by Democrats, or rather refuted Buttsoiler's (and somebody else's --- Markle?) claim that it was, and I proved it. I've been doing it here for literally years, which says much about the level of self-delusion around here.

The Ku Klux Klan Founded

The white supremacist group was founded on December 24th, 1865.

In the hood: two members of the Ku Klux Klan, c.1870
The war between the States ended in 1865 with the North victorious and the Confederate South defeated. Slavery in the South was now illegal, the former slaves had the vote and groups of white Republicans started collecting batches of them and escorting them to the polls. The situation was resented and small white terrorist groups formed at various places to keep the blacks down and white supremacy intact. Far the best known would be the Ku Klux Klan.

The Klan began in Tennessee, in the small town of Pulaski, near Memphis. It was founded by Confederate army veterans at a drinking club there and the strange but memorable name was a combination of ‘clan’ and the Greek word kuklos, meaning ‘circle’ or, in this case, social club. Dressed up in scary costumes with hoods and masks, members rode about at night threatening and frightening blacks. They demanded that blacks either vote Democrat or not vote at all. They met defiance with beatings, whippings and sometimes murder. They burned blacks’ houses down and drove black farmers off their land and they extended their hostilities to southern whites who opposed them and the so-called ‘carpetbaggers’, white infiltrators from the North.

The Ku Klux Klan founded | History Today

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What we have going on is judicial tyranny, and yes, they should do something about it. To abuse their power by falsely using the Constitution to promote their personal political agenda should have them kicked off of the bench.

You don't know what Trump knows.....I don't know what Trump knows, but the most important thing is judges do not know what Trump knows. That's the problem.

There is not one thing in Trump's executive order that displays prejudice. The lying judges stated it was an act against Muslims, yet could not explain why it is most people from Muslim countries were still allowed to come here. It was a bold faced lie, again....to forward their personal political agenda.

Democrats better pray that no terrorist attack (especially a major one) is executed by a foreigner from one of those countries; people that had the blessing of a liberal judge to come here and commit such an act. Their name would be "mud" for at least a decade or more.

Yes, I agree Trump is a tyrant. And thus why your political system sucks.
If they have abused their power why are the not being punished (it is a rhetorical question - they haven't abused their power. This happens all the time under all presidents).

Of course it is prejudice. He is banning people from particular countries just because they are muslims. No other reason.

You really suffer comprehension problems, don't cha? So let's try this again:

Most Muslims from Muslim countries would still be allowed to enter the USA under Trump's executive order. HTF can you say it's a ban on Muslims if most are still allowed to come here? You can't because it's a PROVEN lie. It's proven in the order and it's been proven to the radical judges. There is nothing in the EO that even mentions Muslims.

Obama mocks Trump, but has barred immigrants, many Muslim, 6 times

 

[francoHFW]

"It" won't stop. Pelosi did not last 24 hours. The radical anti-American board marxist are already leaking back to normal, despite pleading "this has to stop". They want violence in the streets. They will not stop until they get it. They will have to be obliged.

Who here wants violence?

Last civil war took 600,000 lives. It's unconscionable that we could go that route again. Besides, there's no Mason-Dixon line in the sand. What would happen? Instead of Sherman burning Atlanta we would have rednecks burning L.A.?

We won't have a civil war for one major reason: too many Americans are spineless shits more concerned about their iPhones and Beemers to pick up a weapon.

A few riots and a few mass shootings do not a Civil War make.

Well for starters, speech and expression are gonna get shut down. Town Halls??? Impossible.. Political figures giving graduation speeches? Not gonna happen. Folks are gonna turn off the annoying noise and make their own.

The NEW Social Media is gonna be "filtered" for news and hate speech. Creating further polarization and isolation. And with no 3rd estate having any credibility left --- the polarization is just gonna broach violence. There's nothing to moderate the anger and frustration over political POWER.

This ain't about policy. It ain't about solving problems. It's ALL about struggle to CONTROL the power that the Feds TAKEN from the Constitution to micromanage EVERY ASPECT of people's lives. Nothing to do with money. Because 1/2 the lobbyists in D.C. would pack up and leave tomorrow if every congress critter didn't TAKE the power to make SOME companies win and others lose. Lobbying is a defensive art. Not an offensive art. You take away the ability to favor ONE company over ANOTHER and the money and the power and the LOBBYISTS -- simply disappear.... Neither party Dem or Rep will do that. Because that's the PRIZE for "WINNING"...

If you don't know the GOP is much worse on lobbyists, you just might be a dupe...

 

[francoHFW]

What we have going on is judicial tyranny, and yes, they should do something about it. To abuse their power by falsely using the Constitution to promote their personal political agenda should have them kicked off of the bench.

You don't know what Trump knows.....I don't know what Trump knows, but the most important thing is judges do not know what Trump knows. That's the problem.

There is not one thing in Trump's executive order that displays prejudice. The lying judges stated it was an act against Muslims, yet could not explain why it is most people from Muslim countries were still allowed to come here. It was a bold faced lie, again....to forward their personal political agenda.

Democrats better pray that no terrorist attack (especially a major one) is executed by a foreigner from one of those countries; people that had the blessing of a liberal judge to come here and commit such an act. Their name would be "mud" for at least a decade or more.

Yes, I agree Trump is a tyrant. And thus why your political system sucks.
If they have abused their power why are the not being punished (it is a rhetorical question - they haven't abused their power. This happens all the time under all presidents).

Of course it is prejudice. He is banning people from particular countries just because they are muslims. No other reason.

You really suffer comprehension problems, don't cha? So let's try this again:

Most Muslims from Muslim countries would still be allowed to enter the USA under Trump's executive order. HTF can you say it's a ban on Muslims if most are still allowed to come here? You can't because it's a PROVEN lie. It's proven in the order and it's been proven to the radical judges. There is nothing in the EO that even mentions Muslims.

Vetting is already WAYYYY extreme. This Trump ban is GOP campaign bs based on GOP bs, dupe.

 

[francoHFW]

I'm the one who posted that the Klan wasn't founded by Democrats, or rather refuted Buttsoiler's (and somebody else's --- Markle?) claim that it was, and I proved it. I've been doing it here for literally years, which says much about the level of self-delusion around here.

The Ku Klux Klan Founded

The white supremacist group was founded on December 24th, 1865.

In the hood: two members of the Ku Klux Klan, c.1870
The war between the States ended in 1865 with the North victorious and the Confederate South defeated. Slavery in the South was now illegal, the former slaves had the vote and groups of white Republicans started collecting batches of them and escorting them to the polls. The situation was resented and small white terrorist groups formed at various places to keep the blacks down and white supremacy intact. Far the best known would be the Ku Klux Klan.

The Klan began in Tennessee, in the small town of Pulaski, near Memphis. It was founded by Confederate army veterans at a drinking club there and the strange but memorable name was a combination of ‘clan’ and the Greek word kuklos, meaning ‘circle’ or, in this case, social club. Dressed up in scary costumes with hoods and masks, members rode about at night threatening and frightening blacks. They demanded that blacks either vote Democrat or not vote at all. They met defiance with beatings, whippings and sometimes murder. They burned blacks’ houses down and drove black farmers off their land and they extended their hostilities to southern whites who opposed them and the so-called ‘carpetbaggers’, white infiltrators from the North.

The Ku Klux Klan founded | History Today

And that's why southern conservatives HATED the GOP until 1964-80, and are now pure GOP duhh...

 

[francoHFW]

We could have a major muslim terrorist attack tomorrow and the demonrats would work harder to bring muslims here because the poor misunderstood muzzies might get the idea that America is not welcoming and gung ho for diversity and all that stuff.

"all that stuff"...more empty rhetoric....

Ok, then why do you want the muzzies here? More diversity? Afraid their feelings will be hurt? We need them to do jobs that Americans won't do?

Start ANOTHER crusade against 1.6 billion people, racist dingbat dupe...vetting is already ridiculously extreme- by Obama. You are totally misinformed.

 

[flacaltenn]

That's not tyranny. That's thinking of the security of our country, which is one of the major responsibilities of the president. One of the major reasons I told hillary to take a hike and voted for Trump.

Nothing wrong with thinking about the security of the country. But that is not the reason he put in the ban. It was kowtowing to his deplorable base. Nothing more. As I stated in another post, if he really was trying to protect the US his starting point for bans would be Saudi Arabia...

Well then you should KNOW that Saudi Arabia has the EXACT SAME defacto "muslim ban" as Trump has proposed. Several other Arab states have posted "their muslim bans" publicly. The latest being Kuwait who lists the same group of states included the Trump travel ban. They must be Islamophobes --- huh???

 

[Pogo]

I'm the one who posted that the Klan wasn't founded by Democrats, or rather refuted Buttsoiler's (and somebody else's --- Markle?) claim that it was, and I proved it. I've been doing it here for literally years, which says much about the level of self-delusion around here.

The Ku Klux Klan Founded

The white supremacist group was founded on December 24th, 1865.

In the hood: two members of the Ku Klux Klan, c.1870
The war between the States ended in 1865 with the North victorious and the Confederate South defeated. Slavery in the South was now illegal, the former slaves had the vote and groups of white Republicans started collecting batches of them and escorting them to the polls. The situation was resented and small white terrorist groups formed at various places to keep the blacks down and white supremacy intact. Far the best known would be the Ku Klux Klan.

The Klan began in Tennessee, in the small town of Pulaski, near Memphis. It was founded by Confederate army veterans at a drinking club there and the strange but memorable name was a combination of ‘clan’ and the Greek word kuklos, meaning ‘circle’ or, in this case, social club. Dressed up in scary costumes with hoods and masks, members rode about at night threatening and frightening blacks. They demanded that blacks either vote Democrat or not vote at all. They met defiance with beatings, whippings and sometimes murder. They burned blacks’ houses down and drove black farmers off their land and they extended their hostilities to southern whites who opposed them and the so-called ‘carpetbaggers’, white infiltrators from the North.

The Ku Klux Klan founded | History Today

I already posted that history. I've got plenty more too.

You should read you own link. Here, lemme read it back to you:

It was founded by Confederate army veterans at a drinking club there and the strange but memorable name was a combination of ‘clan’ and the Greek word kuklos, meaning ‘circle’ or, in this case, social club.​

This is exactly what I described, with the exception that I didn't mention "drinking" (and I don't know that to be true, don't remember it coming up in my sources) and that I gave all six names of the founders, plus the address of the building.

Buttsoiler's assertion however was that it was "created by Democrats", an assertion for which there is zero evidence. I couldn't remember who else made the same claim but there is no evidence that McCord, Jones, Kennedy, Lester, Crowe or Reed had any political affiliation. At least some of them may not have even been old enough to vote.

Your link above moves quickly in two sentences into the Reconstruction resistance without noting that the social club founded by McCord, Jones, Kennedy, Lester, Crowe and Reed was, as I also noted, taken over by pre-existing elements called "night rides" or "slave patrols" that had existed since at least the eighteenth century, plus the added elements described below...

That means that McCord, Jones, Kennedy, Lester, Crowe and Reed were no longer involved in it. It was completely out of their hands by 1866. Some histories erroneously date the creation of the KKK to 1866, using a public parade of that summer as a starting point. But by then the original six were gone and there is no record of them being further involved. They simply disappear.

In short it was not founded AS a white supremacist group. That element commandeered it after it was founded.

I also noted the Klan was one of dozens of such vigilante groups erupting all over the defeated Confederacy at that time. These included:

• Caucasian Club(s) (Louisiana 1869)
• Constitutional Union Guard (North Carolina 1868-70)
• Heggie's Scouts (Mississippi)
• Heroes of America (South Carolina)
• Knights of the Black Cross (Mississippi)
• Knights of the Rising Sun (Texas 1868)
• Knights of the White Camellia (Louisiana 1867-69)
• Knights of the White Carnation (Alabama)
• Men of Justice
• Native Sons of the South (Mississippi)
• Order of Pale Faces (Tennessee 1869 or 1867)
• Order of the White Rose
• Red Caps (Tennessee)
• Red Jackets (Tennessee)
• Red Strings (South Carolina)
• Robertson Family (Mississippi)
• Society of the White Rose (Mississippi)
• Seymour Knights (Louisiana)
• White League (Louisiana 1874)
• White Brotherhood (North Carolina 1868-70)
• Yellow Jackets (Tennessee)

This is all going on at the same time --- the White South resisting the result of the War. What we call today "insurgents'.

Notice the recurring theme of "Knights" especially, along with the occasional "Brotherhood", "Heroes" etc.
That's how they supposedly saw themselves, or at least how they presented themselves --- as chivalrous knights holding up tradition (i.e. resisting change), "protecting white womanhood" and the Old Days. That's why they're a social force (as well as part of what made them überconservative). In fact when Simmons restarted his new version of the Klan in 1915 he officially called it the "Knights of the Ku Klu Klan" and took with him several members of an impromptu lynch mob called the "Knights of Mary Phagan", which had lynched a Jewish factory manager (Leo Frank) on an unproven accusation that he had brutally murdered one of his workers, a young girl by that name. The idea of "knights" was supposed to represent a vigilante-justice posse protecting white Protestant Christian women through their "chivalry".

Back in the immediate postwar, the Reconstructionists and Carpetbaggers arriving in the devastated South were seen as an occupying army, which is this part:

They demanded that blacks either vote Democrat or not vote at all. They met defiance with beatings, whippings and sometimes murder. They burned blacks’ houses down and drove black farmers off their land and they extended their hostilities to southern whites who opposed them and the so-called ‘carpetbaggers’, white infiltrators from the North. ​

This is part of the same insurgent resistance. Republicans had never even been IN the South before (Lincoln's name never appeared on a ballot there), and these groups were resisting the newcomers' arrival --- but in 1866 "Republican" to the conservative white South didn't mean a political party -- it was synonymous with "invader" and "occupier" and "carpetbagger" --- those elements arriving from outside to (as they saw it) take over and "destroy" their previous lifestyle.

And here's the part y'all keep missing --- they resisted them not because they were a political party but because they were "invaders", "occupiers" and '"revenooers" (i.e. government agents) ALL of whom were seen as "taking our land, our resources, our food" etc etc, and with it the old lifestyle. (This also explains why the concept of "Republican" -- synonymous with Lincoln, the man who had defeated, humiliated and, as they saw it, raped their land, became unthinkable for the next ninety-nine years. An emotional connection rather than an analytical one, which is why it hung on so long in a divided party).

This is also what Eric Foner means in his often misquoted description of the Klan:

"In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired the restoration of white supremacy. It aimed to destroy the Republican party’s infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life.​

Usually on this board the crucial phase "in effect" is omitted, as is "the planter class and all those who desired the restoration of white supremacy". That's usually edited out so that it looks like Foner is limiting his statement to "the Democratic party", rather than describing them as one of the entities that stood to benefit as a result. But actively, it was about insurgent resistance to occupation.

The racial part is a different dynamic from the "occupying army" resistance. After the Civil War with the land and economy devastated plus a new black population competing for livelihoods, newly-freed blacks were, out of resentment, harassed, beaten, whipped, hung, even in at least one case skinned --- SKINNED, with the carcass hung on display --- for simply "walking into town" or "expecting to be paid fair wages". That undercurrent was already there, and the Klan and its co-contemporary groups were out to "protect" white women (white racists both in the South and elsewhere seem to have had a masculinity thing, a theme that would emerge as a pretext over and over in rampant lynchings that went on largely unabated until WW2). And those actions were taking place by individuals, by gangs, by ad hoc posses or by organized groups like the Klan.

So on one hand these insurgents were resisting outside forces (military occupation and opportunists) and on the other hand resisting internal forces (the freed slaves). All to preserve the Old Ways of the Old South. Or to put all this another way, in many respects it could be said that the War simply did not end at Appomattox in 1865.

 

[Markle]

The Klan began in Tennessee, in the small town of Pulaski, near Memphis. It was founded by Confederate army veterans at a drinking club there and the strange but memorable name was a combination of ‘clan’ and the Greek word kuklos, meaning ‘circle’ or, in this case, social club. Dressed up in scary costumes with hoods and masks, members rode about at night threatening and frightening blacks. They demanded that blacks either vote Democrat or not vote at all. They met defiance with beatings, whippings and sometimes murder. They burned blacks’ houses down and drove black farmers off their land and they extended their hostilities to southern whites who opposed them and the so-called ‘carpetbaggers’, white infiltrators from the North.

The Ku Klux Klan founded | History Today