I cant believe I am actually going to post this but here goes.

[BULLDOG]

I don't care what they like. Giving them massive tax cuts doesn't produce more jobs. It just makes them richer. I would LIKE a pony, but that is not a good reason to give me one.

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Who cares about that?

Evidently not the hypocritical right wing. They went nuts over Michelle Obama exposing her shoulders, but don't care if the new first lady has nude lesbian porn shots all over the internet. Such fine Christians they are.

The only "nuts" I saw over Moochie's shoulders I saw was from the left. I Googled it all the reaction was from the left, primarily the Huffington Post going nuts over the right, yet there were no links to the right going nuts over it anywhere high in the links. You worked yourself into a tizzy.

So name names, who on the right went nuts over it who matters? Where is the hypocrisy of any leaders in the Republican party? I'm slappying your face with my glove and challenging you to back up your shit.

You just seem to be someone who does terrible with the ladies and wants to look down your nose at people who do better than you. Republicans seem a lot more comfortable with their bodies and beautiful women than the left these days

Not playing your game. We both know how hypocritical the right has been on that subject and so many more.

 

[kaz]

I don't care what they like. Giving them massive tax cuts doesn't produce more jobs. It just makes them richer. I would LIKE a pony, but that is not a good reason to give me one.

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Judging her again. Why? What's the point? Just that you're a judgmental ass?

What is anyone supposed to take away from your prudish bigotry? What is your point?

My point is that the right is just a bunch of hypocrites.

And so is the left for claiming to be against labeling people amongst other more serious things.

Great point.

So he's judging while the left says they are against being judged and labeling while the left claim they are against labels ...

.. in order to point out the hypocrisy of "the right" but no one he can name.

Wow, that's a spectacular fail in an attempt to make a point ...



Puppydog, I bow to your remarkable ability to fall flat on your face ...

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't care what they like. Giving them massive tax cuts doesn't produce more jobs. It just makes them richer. I would LIKE a pony, but that is not a good reason to give me one.

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Who cares about that?

I keep asking him that, he has no answer

I don't really see how it's relevant to anything that Melania was a model in the past and posed for some provocative pictures. That has ZERO to do with policy.

It has a lot to do with what you used to call FAMILY VALUES. Remember them?

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't care what they like. Giving them massive tax cuts doesn't produce more jobs. It just makes them richer. I would LIKE a pony, but that is not a good reason to give me one.

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Judging her again. Why? What's the point? Just that you're a judgmental ass?

What is anyone supposed to take away from your prudish bigotry? What is your point?

My point is that the right is just a bunch of hypocrites.

I asked you WHO is being a hypocrite. All you're saying is some conservative on the internet somewhere complained about Moochelle's shoulders. Who that makes the party hypocrites? Did Trump? Did his forming administration? Did congressional leadership?

We both know the answer to all that is no. But here's your chance. prove me wrong.

You're a judgmental bigot and a liar who's making up your shit. Par on your course ...

You asked and I answered the right. I don't expect you to admit it, but we both know it's true.

 

[kaz]

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Who cares about that?

Evidently not the hypocritical right wing. They went nuts over Michelle Obama exposing her shoulders, but don't care if the new first lady has nude lesbian porn shots all over the internet. Such fine Christians they are.

The only "nuts" I saw over Moochie's shoulders I saw was from the left. I Googled it all the reaction was from the left, primarily the Huffington Post going nuts over the right, yet there were no links to the right going nuts over it anywhere high in the links. You worked yourself into a tizzy.

So name names, who on the right went nuts over it who matters? Where is the hypocrisy of any leaders in the Republican party? I'm slappying your face with my glove and challenging you to back up your shit.

You just seem to be someone who does terrible with the ladies and wants to look down your nose at people who do better than you. Republicans seem a lot more comfortable with their bodies and beautiful women than the left these days

Not playing your game. We both know how hypocritical the right has been on that subject and so many more.

What game? I asked you to say who was going batshit on Moochelle that is a hypocrite. Back up your crap you judgmental, labeling ass hat.

The right overwhelmingly didn't give a shit. I only even heard of it because of you nimrods going ape on this site and googled it. I haven't seen it on Fox or any of my favorite hate radio. I haven't seen a single Republican on this site even mention it. The only one I've ever heard talk about it is you

 

[kaz]

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Judging her again. Why? What's the point? Just that you're a judgmental ass?

What is anyone supposed to take away from your prudish bigotry? What is your point?

My point is that the right is just a bunch of hypocrites.

I asked you WHO is being a hypocrite. All you're saying is some conservative on the internet somewhere complained about Moochelle's shoulders. Who that makes the party hypocrites? Did Trump? Did his forming administration? Did congressional leadership?

We both know the answer to all that is no. But here's your chance. prove me wrong.

You're a judgmental bigot and a liar who's making up your shit. Par on your course ...

You asked and I answered the right. I don't expect you to admit it, but we both know it's true.

I know it's not true. No Republican leaders care and almost no one else does. Maybe a few socons, but I can't stand them any more than I can stand you.

"The right" clearly does not care, you're just a judgmental ass to the right and to Trump's beautiful wife. Come into the third millennium, Archie Bunker.

It's pathetic your inability to name a single name doesn't even make you blink. Totally predictable, but pathetic

 

[ChrisL]

I've never attacked Michelle Obama or the Obama kids. I have nothing personal against the Obamas, I disagree totally with some Obama policies though and I think Obama himself is kind of smarmy and arrogant but just isn't "in your face" about it like Trump. Having said that though, there have been times when Obama has acted like an arrogant jerk.

 

[kaz]

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Who cares about that?

I keep asking him that, he has no answer

I don't really see how it's relevant to anything that Melania was a model in the past and posed for some provocative pictures. That has ZERO to do with policy.

It has a lot to do with what you used to call FAMILY VALUES. Remember them?

Show where anyone supported Trump because of "family values."

You love to judge

You love to label

You love to be offended

This is pay dirt for you, the trifecta ...

 

[kaz]

I've never attacked Michelle Obama or the Obama kids. I have nothing personal against the Obamas, I disagree totally with some Obama policies though and I think Obama himself is kind of smarmy and arrogant but just isn't "in your face" about it like Trump. Having said that though, there have been times when Obama has acted like an arrogant jerk.

His words are clearly as in your face as Trump, but he has a lower key way tone of voice when he says it so it doesn't come off as obvious. Also, the liberal media doesn't react to it so people don't notice it as much.

I agree though, I get tired of the lame partisans like bulldog and the attacks on families. I care what the President and the rest of them are going to do for my liberty. I don't see the point in going after their families, nothing is accomplished by that

 

[ChrisL]

I always like how liberals are so stupid you can't connect your having a job with your boss having the money to pay you.

I also don't get you judging Trump's wife. Why do you give a shit what she did? The woman is fine, Trump's a lucky guy

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Who cares about that?

I keep asking him that, he has no answer

I don't really see how it's relevant to anything that Melania was a model in the past and posed for some provocative pictures. That has ZERO to do with policy.

It has a lot to do with what you used to call FAMILY VALUES. Remember them?

Where did I ever mention family values? Stop making things up.

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

Sure,she's a fine woman. We can tell that by all her nude lesbian pictures on the internet.

Who cares about that?

I keep asking him that, he has no answer

I don't really see how it's relevant to anything that Melania was a model in the past and posed for some provocative pictures. That has ZERO to do with policy.

It has a lot to do with what you used to call FAMILY VALUES. Remember them?

Show where anyone supported Trump because of "family values."

You love to judge

You love to lable

You love to be offended

This is pay dirt for you, the trifecta ...

You left out he loves to lie.

Just sayn...

 

[rdean]

Hillary Clinton is out, Donald Trump won.
So we know that she is not going to be tried or convicted of anything that would put her in jail, so that speculative conversation is pretty much nothing more than a futile waste of time.he
What we do know is that she is most likely sick, here is my suggestion or request.
What do you say we go ahead and focus on Trump and what he will or will not do vs what he promised during his campaign, lets put the pressure on him to make good on the reasons we voted for him.
As far as hillary goes, she ran a nasty campaign, so did Trump. But now that she is out of the picture, I think it would be the decent thing to let her live out the rest of her life in peace regardless of what we think she did. Lets take the upper hand on this one and let her live the rest of her life with whatever dignity she is able to salvage.
We have more important things to discuss now. As in, just how much of what Donald Trump said was lies. I think we all know that at least some of his promises were empty, but the question is how many of them were.
Of course with me, if he builds a wall, thats all he really needs to do.
but again lets try to leave Hillary to her own now. If she does something new thats different but we have pretty much run her past into the ground.
Like she said during the third debate. They go low, we go high. ( I actually did like that quote from her writers)

Hillary didn't say anything even close to:

Trump said that Mexicans are rapists and dealers and the ones living here are the worst Mexico could send, black communities need "law and order" (wink wink), he grabs p...y whether they want it or not, he would pay legal fees for those who attack other people, our military should commit war crimes like killing members of the families of bombers which suggests babies and children, and torture, protesters should end up in stretchers, a judge with Mexican parents can't be fair, Putin is a great leader, Trump said the first black president was not American for years, 98% of all shootings in New York are blacks and Hispanics, laziness is a trait in blacks, questions whether gays should be "allowed" marriage rights, who wants to target a religion from entering the US, who said blood was coming out of her whatever, it was Trump who said he liked people who weren't captured.

 

[ding]

Slavery, segregation and racism is a Democratic heritage. The more Republican the south became the less racist it became.

^ Dumbest post I've seen today.

The republican south currently celebrates the Confederacy, opposes civil rights, wants to legalize discrimination, and demonizes Abraham Lincoln.

Slavery, segregation and racism is the heritage of social conservatism. The Democrat party has not been the party of social conservatism for 50 years.

I love it when they take the bait...

by the 1820's, most of the Founding Fathers were dead and Thomas Jefferson's party, the Democratic Party, which was founded in 1792, had become the majority party in Congress. With this new party a change in congressional policy on slavery emerged. The 1789 law that prohibited slavery in federal territory was reversed when the Democratic Congress passed the Missouri Compromise in 1820. Several States were subsequently admitted as slave States. Slavery was being officially promoted by congressional policy by a Democratically controlled Congress.

Missouri Compromise - Wikipedia

16th United States Congress - Wikipedia


The Democratic party policy of promoting slavery ignored the principles in the founding document.

"The first step of the slaveholder to justify by argument the peculiar institutions [of slavery] is to deny the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence. He denies that all men are created equal. He denies that they have inalienable rights." President John Quincy Adams, The Hingham Patriot, June 29, 1839

In 1850 the Democrats passed the Fugitive Slave Law. That law required Northerners to return escaped slaves back into slavery or pay huge fines. The Fugitive Slave Law made anti-slavery citizens in the North and their institutions responsible for enforcing slavery. The Fugitive Slave Law was sanctioned kidnapping. The Fugitive Slave Law was disastrous for blacks in the North. The Law allowed Free Blacks to be carried into slavery. 20,000 blacks from the North left the United States and fled to Canada. The Underground Railroad reached its peak of activity as a result of the Fugitive Slave Law.

Fugitive Slave Act - 1850

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Act_of_1850

Fugitive Slave Act

31st United States Congress - Wikipedia In 1854, the Democratically controlled Congress passed another law strengthening slavery, the Kansas-Nebraska act. Even though slavery was expanded into federal territories in 1820 by the Democratically controlled Congress, a ban on slavery was retained in the Kansas Nebraska territory. But through the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Democrats vastly expanded the national area where slavery was permitted as the Kansas and Nebraska territories comprised parts of Colorado, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and Idaho. The Democrats were pushing slavery westward across the nation.

The History Place - Abraham Lincoln: Kansas-Nebraska Act

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas–Nebraska_Act

Frederick Douglas believed that the 3/5th clause is an anti-slavery clause. Not a pro-slavery clause. Frederick Douglas believed that the Constitution was an anti-slavery document.

(1860) Frederick Douglass, “the Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-slavery?” | The Black Past: Remembered and Reclaimed

What Did Frederick Douglass Believe About the U.S. Constitution? | The Classroom | Synonym

http://townhall.com/columnists/kenb...onstitution_did_not_condone_slavery/page/full

And so did others.

In May of 1854, following the passage of these pro-slavery laws in Congress, a number of anti-slavery Democrats along with some anti-slavery members from other parties, including the Whigs, Free-Soilers, and Emancipationists formed a new party to fight slavery and secure equal civil rights. The name of the new party? The Republican Party. It was named the Republican Party because they wanted to return to the principles of freedom set forth in the governing documents of the Republic before pro-slavery members of Congress had perverted those original principles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Republican_Party

Republican Party founded - Mar 20, 1854 - HISTORY.com

Republican Party - The Republican Party In The New Millennium

The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. Jim Crow Stories . Republican Party | PBS

"The Democratic Party had become the dominant political party in America in the 1820s, [30] and in May 1854, in response to the strong pro-slavery positions of the Democrats, several anti-slavery Members of Congress formed an anti-slavery party – the Republican Party. [31] It was founded upon the principles of equality originally set forth in the governing documents of the Republic. In an 1865 publication documenting the history of black voting rights, Philadelphia attorney John Hancock confirmed that the Declaration of Independence set forth “equal rights to all. It contains not a word nor a clause regarding color. Nor is there any provision of the kind to be found in the Constitution of the United States.”

The History of Black Voting Rights [Great read!]

In 1856, the Democratic platform strongly defended slavery. According to the Democrats of 1856, ending slavery would be dangerous and would ruin the happiness of the people.

“All efforts of the abolitionists... are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences and all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people.” McKee, The National...Platforms, Democratic Platform of 1856, p.91

In 1857, a Democratically controlled Supreme Court delivered the Dred Scott decision, declaring that blacks were not persons or citizens but instead were property and therefore had no rights. In effect, Democrats believed slaves were property that could be disposed of at the will of its owner.

Democrats on the Court announced that "blacks had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the Negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever a profit could be made by it." Dred Scott at 407 (1856)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford

The History Place - Abraham Lincoln: Dred Scott Decision

Dred Scott

Dred Scott: Democratic Reaction

The Democratic Platform for 1860 supported both the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the Dred Scott decision of 1857. The Democrats even handed out copies of the Dred Scott decision with their platform to affirm that it was proper to hold African Americans in bondage.

2. Inasmuch as difference of opinion exists in the Democratic party as to the nature and extent of the powers of a Territorial Legislature, and as to the powers and duties of Congress, under the Constitution of the United States, over the institution of slavery within the Territories, Resolved, That the Democratic party will abide by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States upon these questions of Constitutional Law.

6. Resolved, That the enactments of the State Legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect.

Avalon Project - Democratic Party Platform; June 18, 1860

The Republican platform of 1860, on the other hand, blasted both the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the Dred Scott decision of 1857 and announced its continued intent to end slavery and secure equal civil rights for black Americans.

2. That the maintenance of the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence and embodied in the Federal Constitution, "That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," is essential to the preservation of our Republican institutions; and that the Federal Constitution, the rights of the states, and the Union of the states, must and shall be preserved.

5. That the present Democratic Administration has far exceeded our worst apprehension in its measureless subserviency to the exactions of a sectional interest, as is especially evident in its desperate exertions to force the infamous Lecompton constitution upon the protesting people of Kansas - in construing the personal relation between master and servant to involve an unqualified property in persons - in its attempted enforcement everywhere, on land and sea, through the intervention of congress and of the federal courts, of the extreme pretensions of a purely local interest, and in its general and unvarying abuse of the power entrusted to it by a confiding people.

7. That the new dogma that the Constitution of its own force carries slavery into any or all of the territories of the United States, is a dangerous political heresy, at variance with the explicit provisions of that instrument itself, with cotemporaneous exposition, and with legislative and judicial precedent, is revolutionary in its tendency and subversive of the peace and harmony of the country.

8. That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom; that as our republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that no "person should be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law," it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the constitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States.

9. That we brand the recent re-opening of the African Slave Trade, under the cover of our national flag, aided by perversions of judicial power, as a crime against humanity, and a burning shame to our country and age, and we call upon congress to take prompt and efficient measures for the total and final suppression of that execrable traffic.

10. That in the recent vetoes by the federal governors of the acts of the Legislatures of Kansas and Nebraska, prohibiting slavery in those territories, we find a practical illustration of the boasted democratic principle of non- intervention and popular sovereignty, embodied in the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and a demonstration of the deception and fraud involved therein.
Republican Party National Platform, 1860


Republicans freed the slaves, Democrats in the North and the South fought against it.

January 31, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery was passed by U.S. House of Representatives with unanimous Republican support and intense Democrat opposition.

April 8, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support and 63% Democrat opposition.

November 22, 1865
Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “Black Codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination.

February 5, 1866
U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves.

April 9, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto, and the Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law.

May 10, 1866
U.S. House passes the Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens, with 100% of Democrats voting no.

June 8, 1866
U.S. Senate passes the Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens, where 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no.

January 8, 1867
Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.

July 19, 1867
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans.

March 30, 1868
Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”.

That's all interesting, but you got anything later than the mid 1800s that was more that 150 years ago.

December 31, 1898 Republican Theodore Roosevelt becomes Governor of New York; in 1900, he outlawed racial segregation in New York public schools

May 24, 1900 Republicans vote no in referendum for constitutional convention in Virginia, designed to create a new state constitution disenfranchising African-Americans

January 15, 1901 Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans

October 16, 1901 President Theodore Roosevelt invites Booker T. Washington to dine at White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

May 29, 1902 Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%

February 12, 1909 On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP

June 18, 1912 African-American Robert Church, founder of Lincoln Leagues to register black voters in Tennessee, attends 1912 Republican National Convention as delegate; eventually serves as delegate at 8 conventions

August 1, 1916 Republican presidential candidate Charles Evans Hughes, former New York Governor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice, endorses women’s suffrage constitutional amendment; he would become Secretary of State and Chief Justice

May 21, 1919 Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no

April 18, 1920 Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus

August 18, 1920 Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures

January 26, 1922 House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster

June 2, 1924 Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans

October 3, 1924 Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention

December 8, 1924 Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis argues in favor of “separate but equal”

June 12, 1929 First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

August 17, 1937 Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation

June 24, 1940 Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it

October 20, 1942 60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries

April 3, 1944 U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system

August 8, 1945 Republicans condemn Harry Truman’s surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that “[t]he use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul.”

February 18, 1946 Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools

July 11, 1952 Republican Party platform condemns ?duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters

September 30, 1953 Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education

December 8, 1953 Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education

May 17, 1954 Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education

November 25, 1955 Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel

March 12, 1956 Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation

June 5, 1956 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law

October 19, 1956 On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America”

November 6, 1956 African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President

September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

June 23, 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights

February 4, 1959 President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats

May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats

July 27, 1960 At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform

May 2, 1963 Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights

June 1, 1963 Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama

September 29, 1963 Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School

June 9, 1964 Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate

June 10, 1964 Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirkson, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.

June 20, 1964 The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act

March 7, 1965 Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL

March 21, 1965 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace

August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose

August 6, 1965 Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

July 8, 1970 In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits

September 17, 1971 Former Ku Klux Klan member and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D-AL) retires from U.S. Supreme Court; appointed by FDR in 1937, he had defended Klansmen for racial murders

February 19, 1976 President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

September 15, 1981 President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs

June 29, 1982 President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act

August 10, 1988 President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR

November 21, 1991 President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation

August 20, 1996 Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law

April 26, 1999 Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President

January 25, 2001 U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee declares school choice to be “Educational Emancipation”

March 19, 2003 Republican U.S. Representatives of Hispanic and Portuguese descent form Congressional Hispanic Conference

May 23, 2003 U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture

You are trying really hard, but you haven't proven your point.

You mean pointing out the ridiculousness of your logic that racists left the party of slavery, racism and segregation for the party that ended slavery, racism and segregation wasn't enough?

Or pointing out the fact that as the south became more republican the less racists it became, that wasn't enough either?

Or pointing out the absurdity that party affiliation magically alters one's racist tendencies, that wasn't enough for you?

Ok, then I guess I'll be a Democrat, am I racist now?

 

[ChrisL]

Because Melania posed for some pictures in her 20s means she is anti-family values though? Good grief. Don't be dumb.

 

[kaz]

Hillary Clinton is out, Donald Trump won.
So we know that she is not going to be tried or convicted of anything that would put her in jail, so that speculative conversation is pretty much nothing more than a futile waste of time.he
What we do know is that she is most likely sick, here is my suggestion or request.
What do you say we go ahead and focus on Trump and what he will or will not do vs what he promised during his campaign, lets put the pressure on him to make good on the reasons we voted for him.
As far as hillary goes, she ran a nasty campaign, so did Trump. But now that she is out of the picture, I think it would be the decent thing to let her live out the rest of her life in peace regardless of what we think she did. Lets take the upper hand on this one and let her live the rest of her life with whatever dignity she is able to salvage.
We have more important things to discuss now. As in, just how much of what Donald Trump said was lies. I think we all know that at least some of his promises were empty, but the question is how many of them were.
Of course with me, if he builds a wall, thats all he really needs to do.
but again lets try to leave Hillary to her own now. If she does something new thats different but we have pretty much run her past into the ground.
Like she said during the third debate. They go low, we go high. ( I actually did like that quote from her writers)

Hillary didn't say anything even close to:

Trump said that Mexicans are rapists and dealers and the ones living here are the worst Mexico could send, black communities need "law and order" (wink wink), he grabs p...y whether they want it or not, he would pay legal fees for those who attack other people, our military should commit war crimes like killing members of the families of bombers which suggests babies and children, and torture, protesters should end up in stretchers, a judge with Mexican parents can't be fair, Putin is a great leader, Trump said the first black president was not American for years, 98% of all shootings in New York are blacks and Hispanics, laziness is a trait in blacks, questions whether gays should be "allowed" marriage rights, who wants to target a religion from entering the US, who said blood was coming out of her whatever, it was Trump who said he liked people who weren't captured.

Liar, Trump said that rapists and murderers come from Mexico which is clearly true. He did not say Mexicans are rapists and murderers.

You're a ridiculous little liar and repeating your lies doesn't make it truth

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

Hillary Clinton is out, Donald Trump won.
So we know that she is not going to be tried or convicted of anything that would put her in jail, so that speculative conversation is pretty much nothing more than a futile waste of time.he
What we do know is that she is most likely sick, here is my suggestion or request.
What do you say we go ahead and focus on Trump and what he will or will not do vs what he promised during his campaign, lets put the pressure on him to make good on the reasons we voted for him.
As far as hillary goes, she ran a nasty campaign, so did Trump. But now that she is out of the picture, I think it would be the decent thing to let her live out the rest of her life in peace regardless of what we think she did. Lets take the upper hand on this one and let her live the rest of her life with whatever dignity she is able to salvage.
We have more important things to discuss now. As in, just how much of what Donald Trump said was lies. I think we all know that at least some of his promises were empty, but the question is how many of them were.
Of course with me, if he builds a wall, thats all he really needs to do.
but again lets try to leave Hillary to her own now. If she does something new thats different but we have pretty much run her past into the ground.
Like she said during the third debate. They go low, we go high. ( I actually did like that quote from her writers)

Hillary didn't say anything even close to:

Trump said that Mexicans are rapists and dealers and the ones living here are the worst Mexico could send, black communities need "law and order" (wink wink), he grabs p...y whether they want it or not, he would pay legal fees for those who attack other people, our military should commit war crimes like killing members of the families of bombers which suggests babies and children, and torture, protesters should end up in stretchers, a judge with Mexican parents can't be fair, Putin is a great leader, Trump said the first black president was not American for years, 98% of all shootings in New York are blacks and Hispanics, laziness is a trait in blacks, questions whether gays should be "allowed" marriage rights, who wants to target a religion from entering the US, who said blood was coming out of her whatever, it was Trump who said he liked people who weren't captured.

America has already told you that WE don't care what Hellary said. Not on 11/8 or now. Now go sit in a safe corner and say President Trump 100 times.

Bwahahahaha

 

[leftwinger]

Along with the ammunition bills he signed, Brown endorsed legislation that will prohibit long guns with “bullet buttons” that make it easier for shooters to reload,
Right there in the articleAnd I heard you were supposed to bring them down and turn them in If you have the quick reload model You didn't read the article did you you could probably find another article that would explain it better My work is done here Brought to you by Google Talking typing

Yeah right. CA has gone after bullets and magazines. The liberal dream state. I think if you have a certain gun you are supposed to turn it in. So far ZERO compliance.

What gun is supposed to be turned in?

A "long-gun" with quick reload. Background check to buy bullets.......few other items I heard.

California gun laws: Brown signs new restrictions on firearms, rejects others – The Mercury News

After being convicted of serious crimes people will be required to surrender their guns, but there was no specific type gun required to be surrender. Are you just making stuff up to make things sound worse than they are again?

I have no doubt you heard a lot of lies, but your link doesn't show it. You got any reason to believe it's true? You know, like a credible link?

Along with the ammunition bills he signed, Brown endorsed legislation that will prohibit long guns with “bullet buttons” that make it easier for shooters to reload,

that is from the link. Many links are available. If you have one of those guns you are supposed to surrender "it". No one has. If they find you using it, you are in violation. Not clear what happens if they find the gun in your house on a domestic call? The bill was signed to PROHIBIT certain guns. The camels' nose is under tent. /out...

 

[leftwinger]

Liar, Trump said that rapists and murderers come from Mexico which is clearly true. He did not say Mexicans are rapists and murderers.

You're a ridiculous little liar and repeating your lies doesn't make it truth

AND I think what he meant to say was those Mules were raping the poor illegals on the way over. But it came out different. And it is known, Mexico has been sending their Human Garbage that they don't want to deal with up here. Ever seen the old westerns' "you better get outa Dodge ombre".........that has been going on forever. We get the rapists, murderers that they don't want to lock up and put through court. Or we get the ones who pay the corrupt "system" to get free and then they run here.

 

[leftwinger]

Because Melania posed for some pictures in her 20s means she is anti-family values though? Good grief. Don't be dumb.

Don't worry BullDog.....She won't do it again.

 

[kaz]

Liar, Trump said that rapists and murderers come from Mexico which is clearly true. He did not say Mexicans are rapists and murderers.

You're a ridiculous little liar and repeating your lies doesn't make it truth

AND I think what he meant to say was those Mules were raping the poor illegals on the way over. But it came out different. And it is known, Mexico has been sending their Human Garbage that they don't want to deal with up here. Ever seen the old westerns' "you better get outa Dodge ombre".........that has been going on forever. We get the rapists, murderers that they don't want to lock up and put through court. Or we get the ones who pay the corrupt "system" to get free and then they run here.

Yes, it's well known the Mexican government tries to ship their criminals here