Miss. Senator Hyde-Smith Posts Photo Wearing Confederate Hat

[playtime]

Markle :

i know you are one of them thar poorly educated deplorables that trump loves long time, but a 2 second google research could open you up to all kinds of fact learnin'.... i know, i know - you are the lazy sort, so i'll do it for you just this once.

texas revisionist history - Google Search

now, go ahead & place the very much expected 'smile' emoji you will no doubt place as a reply to this post- because well.... it's what you all do when you really have no retort.

I post the laughing emoji because you're just funny. Who are you kidding, you can find anything you like on the internet and, since it's on the internet, it must be true.

democratic revisionist history - Bing

lol.....ummmm.... unlike what you just did - i never post any biased links ever. there were plenty of unbiased credible links to choose from, including a texas newspaper.

nice try, doesn't fly though, jr.

No biased links ever? Says one who posts this picture.

hey - here's a hint, when you are trying to make a point- try making sense first.

& uh - i never post an article from a biased link from anywhere.

no huffpo, no MSNBC, no democratic underground, none. just like i don't accept anything from FOX, gateway pundit, breitbart, american thinker....

comprende?

There is no such thing as "unbiased links."

ya there is. when facts are omitted or skewed to become 'alternative facts' to suit a slanted political view... that is shirley biased.

huffpo will slant the same news story 180 degrees from breitbart.

the best way to get a factual story is to go to the newspapers. there is no difference in factual reporting between the NYT, WaPO, or WSJ. what separates them is the OP/ED page where the first 2 lean left & the WSJ is right leaning... but they report the actual facts equally unbiased.

damn - you really needed that to be explained to you? of course you did, since i have seen you link to breitbart many times & try to pass it off as factually true.

 

[playtime]

Markle :

i know you are one of them thar poorly educated deplorables that trump loves long time, but a 2 second google research could open you up to all kinds of fact learnin'.... i know, i know - you are the lazy sort, so i'll do it for you just this once.

texas revisionist history - Google Search

now, go ahead & place the very much expected 'smile' emoji you will no doubt place as a reply to this post- because well.... it's what you all do when you really have no retort.

I post the laughing emoji because you're just funny. Who are you kidding, you can find anything you like on the internet and, since it's on the internet, it must be true.

democratic revisionist history - Bing

lol.....ummmm.... unlike what you just did - i never post any biased links ever. there were plenty of unbiased credible links to choose from, including a texas newspaper.

nice try, doesn't fly though, jr.

No biased links ever? Says one who posts this picture.

hey - here's a hint, when you are trying to make a point- try making sense first.

& uh - i never post an article from a biased link from anywhere.

no huffpo, no MSNBC, no democratic underground, none. just like i don't accept anything from FOX, gateway pundit, breitbart, american thinker....

comprende?

It makes "sense" that the only reason your girl lost the election, was because of "Russian money"?

hillary is not my girl. she never was. but did i vote for her? yep. & russian cash is only one of the reasons... ask the feds investigating the NRA. why are they suddenly going into the red? that's ironic to say the least. oh ya.... perhaps donny jr. can help enlighten you. & of course there was the heavy influence on the dupes on facebook & gaming sites where they were paid in rubles, & the special ads that ran in swing states & redneck areas like bumfuck, iowa - who think trump was (& still is) a competent 'leader'.... who could shoot someone on 5th ave & not lose their loyalty.... trump loves them long time. lookey! i'm replying to one right now.

 

[bripat9643]

Markle :

i know you are one of them thar poorly educated deplorables that trump loves long time, but a 2 second google research could open you up to all kinds of fact learnin'.... i know, i know - you are the lazy sort, so i'll do it for you just this once.

texas revisionist history - Google Search

now, go ahead & place the very much expected 'smile' emoji you will no doubt place as a reply to this post- because well.... it's what you all do when you really have no retort.

I get about 5 times more of those than I get replies to my post. Apparently all you dumbass snowflakes are terrified to respond to me.

delusional thinking suits you well.

How is that "delusional?" You're the one who just said "it's what you all do when you really have no retort."

i crossed paths with you on this board enough times to know just how delusional you are. cases in point: at least one thread where you basically were saying coal jobs [ that are coming back] will not adversely affect the areas either environmentally nor healthwise.

then of course is that whole 'there's no russian collusion because collusion isn't a legal term' line of crap you've said over & over & over as if repeating it will make it true.

Can you quote me saying that coal mines cause no environmental damage whatsoever?

"Collusion" isn't a crime, dumbass. None of you snowflakes have proved otherwise.

It kills me whenever some leftwing moron accuses me of being "delusional." It's always because I stated indisputable facts.

 

[rightwinger]

So-fucking-what? You liberals keep proving how weak-minded you are by virtue of the fact that you let a Confederate symbol control your emotions to such a degree. My god, you're too arrogant to realize that you've made yourselves into mental slaves over the Confederate flag, representing a country that hasn't existed in 150 years. And you're still pussy-hurt over it.

They are hurt because underneath it all they know the South was right.

Well, I generally look at the Civil War from a pretty neutral, detached perspective (and I'm a distant descendant of the South's Gen. or Col. John Early, according to my parents years of geneological study). I don't believe either side was a an innocent saint and I think both sides had legitimate grievances against the other. I'm just sorry it came to such a bloody war and it couldn't be resolved in a better way. But oh well, what's done is done. It's simply a part of history to me. I just don't see the point in attaching intense personal emotional to things long gone by that are long-settled.

That's why I've always seen the Confederate flag as simply a traditional historical footnote, not some threat of hatred or violence against anyone.

We needed to kill 600,000 to end slavery

 

[bripat9643]

I post the laughing emoji because you're just funny. Who are you kidding, you can find anything you like on the internet and, since it's on the internet, it must be true.

democratic revisionist history - Bing

lol.....ummmm.... unlike what you just did - i never post any biased links ever. there were plenty of unbiased credible links to choose from, including a texas newspaper.

nice try, doesn't fly though, jr.

No biased links ever? Says one who posts this picture.

hey - here's a hint, when you are trying to make a point- try making sense first.

& uh - i never post an article from a biased link from anywhere.

no huffpo, no MSNBC, no democratic underground, none. just like i don't accept anything from FOX, gateway pundit, breitbart, american thinker....

comprende?

There is no such thing as "unbiased links."

ya there is. when facts are omitted or skewed to become 'alternative facts' to suit a slanted political view... that is shirley biased.

huffpo will slant the same news story 180 degrees from breitbart.

I know there are biased websites. They're all biased, moron. I disputed your believe that you post links to "unbiased" websites. That takes a special kind of stupid.

the best way to get a factual story is to go to the newspapers. there is no difference in factual reporting between the NYT, WaPO, or WSJ. what separates them is the OP/ED page where the first 2 lean left & the WSJ is right leaning... but they report the actual facts equally unbiased.

damn - you really needed that to be explained to you? of course you did, since i have seen you link to breitbart many times & try to pass it off as factually true.

BWAHAHAHAHA!

The snowflake believes the reporting in the NYT isn't biased!

The news section of the WSJ is almost as leftwing as the NYT. Only the opinion section is conservative.

Do you actually believe it wasn't biased when the NYT had a front page story on Abu Ghraib every day for 6 months?

 

[bripat9643]

So-fucking-what? You liberals keep proving how weak-minded you are by virtue of the fact that you let a Confederate symbol control your emotions to such a degree. My god, you're too arrogant to realize that you've made yourselves into mental slaves over the Confederate flag, representing a country that hasn't existed in 150 years. And you're still pussy-hurt over it.

They are hurt because underneath it all they know the South was right.

Well, I generally look at the Civil War from a pretty neutral, detached perspective (and I'm a distant descendant of the South's Gen. or Col. John Early, according to my parents years of geneological study). I don't believe either side was a an innocent saint and I think both sides had legitimate grievances against the other. I'm just sorry it came to such a bloody war and it couldn't be resolved in a better way. But oh well, what's done is done. It's simply a part of history to me. I just don't see the point in attaching intense personal emotional to things long gone by that are long-settled.

That's why I've always seen the Confederate flag as simply a traditional historical footnote, not some threat of hatred or violence against anyone.

We needed to kill 600,000 to end slavery

No we didn't. That's the most tragic aspect of the whole thing. Every other country in the world managed to end slavery without going to war or killing anyone.

 

[bripat9643]

Tell us more
Eight blacks in the last hundred years

Does that mean Republicans could find no qualified blacks and the only ones qualified were white, male Christians?

It means that very few blacks run as republicans.


ONly a real piece of shit, could spend a lifetime race baiting minorities about how evul and racist the GOP is,


and then point to the lack of minorities in the GOP as something the GOP did wrong.

You are a fucking asshole.

The GOP made a conscious decision to break the solid south by appealing to white southern democrats which was not hard. Democratic leadership in the Whitehouse got the civil rights and the voting act passed which would destroy segregation and promised to put blacks in control in many areas. To southern democrats it was the civil war all over again with the North tramping all over states rights and their way life.

Picking up the banner of states rights was easy for the GOP which was becoming increasing conservative. In less than 20 years, the solid blue south had become the solid red south as year by year more democrats deserted the party, first in national elections and then in local elections.

Today the South is red and southern democrats are most black, a far cry from the party of early 20th century.

You imply that the GOP appealed to the White Southern Democrats with racist policies, and became racist as it won the South.



Support that by explaining what racist policies.

I wouldn't put it in those words. Republicans just emphasized their support for States Rights which was the white southern democrats defense against forced integration. They criticized the forced busing, called out black demonstrators as communist agitators, supported the White Citizens Council, and condemned the use of federal troops and marshals to force integration in schools. When federal welfare dollars started pouring into the pockets of blacks in the South, Republicans joined white southern democrats in condemning federal aid programs.

No, the GOP didn't carry burning crosses in streets. They just promoted policies that attracted white southern democrats and repelled southern blacks. Today, the democratic party party in the South is primarily black and the republican party is overwhelmingly white. Of course there's no racism involved.

President Nixon who, according to the left, is the one the invented the "Southern Strategy" was the President that desegregated most of the Southern Schools and enforced busing.

The closest he came to "promoting a policy" to attract southern democrats, was to implement the polices as fast as possible, so that it would be moot by the time of the mid terms.


Racist, or at least people who voted based on their racist agenda, were marginalized, and rendered irrelevant.


Politics in the SOuth, at least with White Southerns, realigned based on other factors, as the racist political alliance of the dems feel apart.


And yes, there was no racism involved in that. The old school racists stayed with the dems until they died off.


Your view on what happened clashes with the historical record.

Democrats believe it's racist to enforce the law.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

So-fucking-what? You liberals keep proving how weak-minded you are by virtue of the fact that you let a Confederate symbol control your emotions to such a degree. My god, you're too arrogant to realize that you've made yourselves into mental slaves over the Confederate flag, representing a country that hasn't existed in 150 years. And you're still pussy-hurt over it.

They are hurt because underneath it all they know the South was right.

Well, I generally look at the Civil War from a pretty neutral, detached perspective (and I'm a distant descendant of the South's Gen. or Col. John Early, according to my parents years of geneological study). I don't believe either side was a an innocent saint and I think both sides had legitimate grievances against the other. I'm just sorry it came to such a bloody war and it couldn't be resolved in a better way. But oh well, what's done is done. It's simply a part of history to me. I just don't see the point in attaching intense personal emotional to things long gone by that are long-settled.

That's why I've always seen the Confederate flag as simply a traditional historical footnote, not some threat of hatred or violence against anyone.

We needed to kill 600,000 to end slavery

No we didn't. That's the most tragic aspect of the whole thing. Every other country in the world managed to end slavery without going to war or killing anyone.

We didn't go to war to end slavery.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

So-fucking-what? You liberals keep proving how weak-minded you are by virtue of the fact that you let a Confederate symbol control your emotions to such a degree. My god, you're too arrogant to realize that you've made yourselves into mental slaves over the Confederate flag, representing a country that hasn't existed in 150 years. And you're still pussy-hurt over it.

They are hurt because underneath it all they know the South was right.

Well, I generally look at the Civil War from a pretty neutral, detached perspective (and I'm a distant descendant of the South's Gen. or Col. John Early, according to my parents years of geneological study). I don't believe either side was a an innocent saint and I think both sides had legitimate grievances against the other. I'm just sorry it came to such a bloody war and it couldn't be resolved in a better way. But oh well, what's done is done. It's simply a part of history to me. I just don't see the point in attaching intense personal emotional to things long gone by that are long-settled.

That's why I've always seen the Confederate flag as simply a traditional historical footnote, not some threat of hatred or violence against anyone.

We needed to kill 600,000 to end slavery

We were two years into the war before it became about ending slavery.

 

[Staidhup]

The primary causes of the Civil War were based on economics and states rights versus centralized federal government control over the country. The final galvanizing and decisive issue was slavery. A very dark blight in our history that would one day extract blood to cleanse but never wash away the stain. The one fundamental issue that was compromised which stood in direct contradiction to the rights of all men as declared in the Constitution.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Interesting claim

So, few blacks run as Republicans
Republicans have had a hundred years to adopt policies that appeal to minorities and have failed to do it

That is an interesting claim. And even if it were true, it is not racism, to fail tot appeal to someone. So, if that is all it is, then your constant race baiting, makes you an asshole. As I have pointed out many times.


BUT we have plenty of policies that appeal to significant percentages of blacks.


Don't believe me? Ask a pro-life black how he or she can support the party that support "killing babies".


The block voting by blacks, is not driven by polices. Hell, Mac talks about that all the time.

You believe that blacks are incapable of realizing that Republicans do not represent their best interests?

In fact, no minorities favor Republican policies

1. I believe that any group, targeted with enough lies, can be lied to. That you lied about what I said, to make it "Racist" ironically just proved my point, you race baiting piece of shit.

2. Plenty of minorities favor republican polices. Like I said, ask a pro-life black to explain her support of the pro-abortion party.


You liberals have to lie, because you can't afford to lose those minorities.

The policies is not what stops black folk from voting Republican, many black people hold some conservative values, it's the racist attitude and feeling of superiority that Republicans have that turns black folks away from them.

RW is the one that said it was policies, not me, so take it up with him.


"Racist attitude" my ass. YOu are a vile liar.

The vile liar is you, you try to come on here and present yourself as being neutral. Your posts show you are nothing but a Trumper.

 

[rightwinger]

The primary causes of the Civil War were based on economics and states rights versus centralized federal government control over the country. The final galvanizing and decisive issue was slavery. A very dark blight in our history that would one day extract blood to cleanse but never wash away the stain. The one fundamental issue that was compromised which stood in direct contradiction to the rights of all men as declared in the Constitution.

The economics of slavery, a states rights to allow slavery....Period

 

[Markle]

Markle :

i know you are one of them thar poorly educated deplorables that trump loves long time, but a 2 second google research could open you up to all kinds of fact learnin'.... i know, i know - you are the lazy sort, so i'll do it for you just this once.

texas revisionist history - Google Search

now, go ahead & place the very much expected 'smile' emoji you will no doubt place as a reply to this post- because well.... it's what you all do when you really have no retort.

I get about 5 times more of those than I get replies to my post. Apparently all you dumbass snowflakes are terrified to respond to me.

delusional thinking suits you well.

How is that "delusional?" You're the one who just said "it's what you all do when you really have no retort."

i crossed paths with you on this board enough times to know just how delusional you are. cases in point: at least one thread where you basically were saying coal jobs [ that are coming back] will not adversely affect the areas either environmentally nor healthwise.

then of course is that whole 'there's no russian collusion because collusion isn't a legal term' line of crap you've said over & over & over as if repeating it will make it true.

Please provide your proof of collusion. Other than with the Democrats.

 

[Staidhup]

The primary causes of the Civil War were based on economics and states rights versus centralized federal government control over the country. The final galvanizing and decisive issue was slavery. A very dark blight in our history that would one day extract blood to cleanse but never wash away the stain. The one fundamental issue that was compromised which stood in direct contradiction to the rights of all men as declared in the Constitution.

The economics of slavery, a states rights to allow slavery....Period

Actually Money and Banking, Manufacturing, control over all exports and imports, not to mention who controlled the trading houses. The economics of slavery was directly proportional to populations of available workforce in both the south and west. The subjugation of states rights to the power of northeastern centers of commerce had a stranglehold over agrarian regions of the country. One interesting fact that seems to be omitted is the number of slave owning families in the South and West, a miniscule minority, yet the number of volunteers willing to risk their lives for the South that did not own slaves was a higher percentage than that of the north, which is a contradiction to the slavery issue as the fundamental basis for the conflict.

 

[rightwinger]

Markle :

i know you are one of them thar poorly educated deplorables that trump loves long time, but a 2 second google research could open you up to all kinds of fact learnin'.... i know, i know - you are the lazy sort, so i'll do it for you just this once.

texas revisionist history - Google Search

now, go ahead & place the very much expected 'smile' emoji you will no doubt place as a reply to this post- because well.... it's what you all do when you really have no retort.

I get about 5 times more of those than I get replies to my post. Apparently all you dumbass snowflakes are terrified to respond to me.

delusional thinking suits you well.

How is that "delusional?" You're the one who just said "it's what you all do when you really have no retort."

i crossed paths with you on this board enough times to know just how delusional you are. cases in point: at least one thread where you basically were saying coal jobs [ that are coming back] will not adversely affect the areas either environmentally nor healthwise.

then of course is that whole 'there's no russian collusion because collusion isn't a legal term' line of crap you've said over & over & over as if repeating it will make it true.

Please provide your proof of collusion. Other than with the Democrats.

Trump tower

 

[rightwinger]

The primary causes of the Civil War were based on economics and states rights versus centralized federal government control over the country. The final galvanizing and decisive issue was slavery. A very dark blight in our history that would one day extract blood to cleanse but never wash away the stain. The one fundamental issue that was compromised which stood in direct contradiction to the rights of all men as declared in the Constitution.

The economics of slavery, a states rights to allow slavery....Period

Actually Money and Banking, Manufacturing, control over all exports and imports, not to mention who controlled the trading houses. The economics of slavery was directly proportional to populations of available workforce in both the south and west. The subjugation of states rights to the power of northeastern centers of commerce had a stranglehold over agrarian regions of the country. One interesting fact that seems to be omitted is the number of slave owning families in the South and West, a miniscule minority, yet the number of volunteers willing to risk their lives for the South that did not own slaves was a higher percentage than that of the north, which is a contradiction to the slavery issue as the fundamental basis for the conflict.

Cotton was 90 percent of the southern economy. An economy built on free labor

40 percent of the population was slave

As usual, the extremely wealthy made the profit and got the extreme poor to do the fighting

 

[bripat9643]

The primary causes of the Civil War were based on economics and states rights versus centralized federal government control over the country. The final galvanizing and decisive issue was slavery. A very dark blight in our history that would one day extract blood to cleanse but never wash away the stain. The one fundamental issue that was compromised which stood in direct contradiction to the rights of all men as declared in the Constitution.

The economics of slavery, a states rights to allow slavery....Period

It doesn't really matter. Nothing in the Constitution bars a state from seceding. That's the bottom line.

 

[bripat9643]

I get about 5 times more of those than I get replies to my post. Apparently all you dumbass snowflakes are terrified to respond to me.

delusional thinking suits you well.

How is that "delusional?" You're the one who just said "it's what you all do when you really have no retort."

i crossed paths with you on this board enough times to know just how delusional you are. cases in point: at least one thread where you basically were saying coal jobs [ that are coming back] will not adversely affect the areas either environmentally nor healthwise.

then of course is that whole 'there's no russian collusion because collusion isn't a legal term' line of crap you've said over & over & over as if repeating it will make it true.

Please provide your proof of collusion. Other than with the Democrats.

Trump tower

So, talking to people is "collusion?" Shouldn't we arrest everyone in the Hillary campaign?

 

[rightwinger]

The primary causes of the Civil War were based on economics and states rights versus centralized federal government control over the country. The final galvanizing and decisive issue was slavery. A very dark blight in our history that would one day extract blood to cleanse but never wash away the stain. The one fundamental issue that was compromised which stood in direct contradiction to the rights of all men as declared in the Constitution.

The economics of slavery, a states rights to allow slavery....Period

It doesn't really matter. Nothing in the Constitution bars a state from seceding. That's the bottom line.

Afraid it does

 

[rightwinger]

delusional thinking suits you well.

How is that "delusional?" You're the one who just said "it's what you all do when you really have no retort."

i crossed paths with you on this board enough times to know just how delusional you are. cases in point: at least one thread where you basically were saying coal jobs [ that are coming back] will not adversely affect the areas either environmentally nor healthwise.

then of course is that whole 'there's no russian collusion because collusion isn't a legal term' line of crap you've said over & over & over as if repeating it will make it true.

Please provide your proof of collusion. Other than with the Democrats.

Trump tower

So, talking to people is "collusion?" Shouldn't we arrest everyone in the Hillary campaign?

Talking to criminals about helping you win an election is collusion