NYTimes Exterminates George Bush!

[mudwhistle]

 

[NYcarbineer]

88% of Mississippians voted for Goldwater in 1964. Goldwater was the Republican.

Goldwater was one of the few Republicans who voted against the 64 Civil Rights bill.

Conservative racist Democrats in the South began a shift to voting Republican as soon as it became clear that the new Republican Party was their new home.

So it remains to this day.

 

[mudwhistle]

So Johnson signs the Civil Rights bill, he's the racist.

Goldwater votes against it, then within months is the presidential nominee of the GOP, and somehow he's the black man's best friend.

You're fucking nuts.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You've turned into Vigilante. Good for you.

 

[mudwhistle]

88% of Mississippians voted for Goldwater in 1964. Goldwater was the Republican.

Goldwater was one of the few Republicans who voted against the 64 Civil Rights bill.

Conservative racist Democrats in the South began a shift to voting Republican as soon as it became clear that the new Republican Party was their new home.

So it remains to this day.

Bullshit. Democrats in the South still vote Democrat or they don't vote. All you have to do is talk to them to find this out like I have. The difference today is there are fewer Democrats in the South these days. Most of them are transplants from other states. Folks moving here to escape high taxes in liberal Meccas like New York, Minnesota, California, etc. The South is still affordable, so people are moving here and changing the demographics. I talk to them every election. Most of the Dixicrats said they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Obama, so they didn't vote.

 

[mudwhistle]

You've turned into Vigilante. Good for you.

And you're the same idiot you've always been.

 

[mudwhistle]

Democrats told everyone you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama. For almost 7 years they've been calling us racists for not agreeing with his anti-American policies. In our colleges and universities they're brainwashing our kids into rejecting alternative viewpoints. They practice censorship in the news. They specialize in identity politics. Any blacks who dare to be Republicans are called Uncle Toms and every other racist name in the book. They used a justified police shooting of a black thug who had just robbed a convenience store to base their attacks on Republicans. They finally admitted that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" is based on outright lies.

And we're supposed to support these lying assholes?????

 

[Stephanie]

The progressive/lefties are desperate and will crawl to any low for their Party. If it mean misleading the people then so be it...shun the Nyslimes, WashingtonCompost, LaSlimes, etc

 

[Statistikhengst]

So Johnson signs the Civil Rights bill, he's the racist.

Goldwater votes against it, then within months is the presidential nominee of the GOP, and somehow he's the black man's best friend.

You're fucking nuts.

Apparently, the electorate was smart enough to know this in 1964. LBJ won with 61.04% of the NPV, but Goldwater picked up 4 southern states that has essentially never gone Republican ever. Fascinating, what?

 

[mudwhistle]

So Johnson signs the Civil Rights bill, he's the racist.

Goldwater votes against it, then within months is the presidential nominee of the GOP, and somehow he's the black man's best friend.

You're fucking nuts.

Apparently, the electorate was smart enough to know this in 1964. LBJ won with 61.04% of the NPV, but Goldwater picked up 4 southern states that has essentially never gone Republican ever. Fascinating, what?

Only proves that the media was effective in helping a racist like LBJ win. I remember the main accusation was that Goldwater was a warmonger, yet it was LBJ who was profiting off of the Vietnam war.

 

[Redfish]

So Johnson signs the Civil Rights bill, he's the racist.

Goldwater votes against it, then within months is the presidential nominee of the GOP, and somehow he's the black man's best friend.

You're fucking nuts.

Apparently, the electorate was smart enough to know this in 1964. LBJ won with 61.04% of the NPV, but Goldwater picked up 4 southern states that has essentially never gone Republican ever. Fascinating, what?

The dems ran a campaign ad showing a bomb going off and claimed that Goldwater would start a nuclear war. It was an effective ad and won the election for the criminal known as LBJ.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It was authorized by the Democrat Senate.

In the same way the New York Times photoshopped Bush out of the Selma march, Synthia photoshops the democrats out of the Iraq war. Dishonesty is a major part of being a leftist.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well, actually:

NYT photographer We didn t crop George W. Bush from Selma pic - Nick Gass - POLITICO

“Just so you know, President Bush was not cropped out, he was not in that frame because he was so far to our right,” photographer Doug Mills wrote in an email to POLITICO.

In a note to photo editors on Sunday, Mills said he didn’t file the shot with Bush included because it was overexposed.

“I did not even send this frame because it’s very wide and super busy and Bush is super-overexposed because he was in the sun and Obama and the others are in the shade,” Mills wrote, per Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan.

Must really suck to be you.

Kind of a Freudian slip there Statist, so the party press cut the Bush's out of the photo because they are "too far to the right?"

Yeah, we already knew that....

 

[Synthaholic]

The Dems held the majority at that point

That's a lie.

Why am I not shocked?

 

[Synthaholic]

Third thread on this.

The choice was obvious: include the entire First Family and cut out Bush or publish the entire image with faces so small they would be recognizable. Bush just isn't important enough to include.

I still say I wish would have just edited him out before he did the enormous damage he did.

I disagree, respectfully. The president of a former President at this event is indeed important to record. The NYT could have put two photos in. It often puts in two photos for lots of things.

Whether it's deliberate or not, I don't know. But it was bad judgement. On this one, NLT, amazingly, gets a point from me.

And you get a point from me. Amazing, ain't it?

Well, hold the jury on that one:

Well, actually:

NYT photographer We didn t crop George W. Bush from Selma pic - Nick Gass - POLITICO

“Just so you know, President Bush was not cropped out, he was not in that frame because he was so far to our right,” photographer Doug Mills wrote in an email to POLITICO.

In a note to photo editors on Sunday, Mills said he didn’t file the shot with Bush included because it was overexposed.

“I did not even send this frame because it’s very wide and super busy and Bush is super-overexposed because he was in the sun and Obama and the others are in the shade,” Mills wrote, per Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan.

So he didn't crop a photo, he composed it in such a way that he didn't have to. OK, gotcha.

Actually, yes.

And when you look at the original panorama, indeed, the former President and his lovely wife are in very bright light, whilst the President and his lovely wife and kids are in shade.

It still may have been bad judgement, but maybe it was simply a photographer doing his job.

It certainly is amazing the lengths that Righties will go to bellyache.

They can't help themselves, turning an historic commemoration into just another whine about the "aggrieved White victim".

 

[Pogo]

Democrats told everyone you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama. For almost 7 years they've been calling us racists for not agreeing with his anti-American policies. In our colleges and universities they're brainwashing our kids into rejecting alternative viewpoints. They practice censorship in the news. They specialize in identity politics. Any blacks who dare to be Republicans are called Uncle Toms and every other racist name in the book. They used a justified police shooting of a black thug who had just robbed a convenience store to base their attacks on Republicans. They finally admitted that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" is based on outright lies.

And we're supposed to support these lying assholes?????

Whoa. Lot going on there. Run that back...

Democrats told everyone you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama.

Strawman...

For almost 7 years they've been calling us racists for not agreeing with his anti-American policies.

Strawman-on-strawman action.

In our colleges and universities they're brainwashing our kids into rejecting alternative viewpoints.

Strawmanège-a-trois! Ooh la la.

They practice censorship in the news.

Strawman with four wheel drive...

They specialize in identity politics.



Any blacks who dare to be Republicans are called Uncle Toms and every other racist name in the book.

The quintupessential Strawman...

They used a justified police shooting of a black thug who had just robbed a convenience store to base their attacks on Republicans. They finally admitted that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" is based on outright lies.



And we're supposed to support these lying assholes?????

Strawman cleanup in aisle six...

Your logical fallacy is:

Blanket generalization.

​

 

[mudwhistle]

Democrats told everyone you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama. For almost 7 years they've been calling us racists for not agreeing with his anti-American policies. In our colleges and universities they're brainwashing our kids into rejecting alternative viewpoints. They practice censorship in the news. They specialize in identity politics. Any blacks who dare to be Republicans are called Uncle Toms and every other racist name in the book. They used a justified police shooting of a black thug who had just robbed a convenience store to base their attacks on Republicans. They finally admitted that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" is based on outright lies.

And we're supposed to support these lying assholes?????

Whoa. Lot going on there. Run that back...

Democrats told everyone you're a racist if you don't vote for Obama.

Strawman...

For almost 7 years they've been calling us racists for not agreeing with his anti-American policies.

Strawman-on-strawman action.

In our colleges and universities they're brainwashing our kids into rejecting alternative viewpoints.

Strawmanège-a-trois! Ooh la la.

They practice censorship in the news.

Strawman with four wheel drive...

They specialize in identity politics.



Any blacks who dare to be Republicans are called Uncle Toms and every other racist name in the book.

The quintupessential Strawman...

They used a justified police shooting of a black thug who had just robbed a convenience store to base their attacks on Republicans. They finally admitted that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" is based on outright lies.



And we're supposed to support these lying assholes?????

Strawman cleanup in aisle six...

Your logical fallacy is:

Blanket generalization.

View attachment 37648 ​

Blanket generalization. Agreed. But not on my part.
Every bit of it is true sadly.

 

[Pogo]

Complete horseshit. No wonder you had to have a Googly image make your point so that you could run away.

Number one, Fallacy of Composition assumes that some sample group, e.g. Southerners, are predominantly Democrats, ergo every action they take is driven by their, of all things, political philosophy. Which was conservative anyway.

Number two, fundamental ignorance of what political parties are and how they work. A political party is a device to acquire and consolidate power. That's it, end of definition. To imagine a political party is some sort of fixed point in space that never ever shifts with the political winds is to be at best a blind partisan hack and at worse a moron.

Moreover by the beginning of the Civil War for practical purposes only the Democratic Party even existed; the RP was six years old and just getting started. Whigs were dead. Know-Nothings, Anti-Masons, Free Soilers and several others had sparked, fizzled and died off. The election of as recently as 1824 didn't even have parties involved. To apply the circumstances we have today where a single party (cleverly disguised as two) completely and totally dominate everything to an era when we the people changed political parties like shirts is profound ignorance. Go look up the "First Party System" and "Second Party System" in a history book. Git chew a edumacation. This application of contemporary dichotomy to the past is Blatantly Beyond Bullshit.

All of this time the issue of slavery was building, hotly debated, even causing some of those myriad parties to rise an fall. James Buchanan is widely held to be the worst or second-worst POTUS ever for his failure to address it. But to suggest the Civil War was somehow caused by "Democrats" in the South one day up and seceding out of nothing is to not only display the same abject ignorance of American history but to rudely insult the reader's intelligence.

More moreover on this point -- in the election of 1860 the Republican candidate obviously was Lincoln, being the second candidate that party ever ran. Who was the Democratic nominee? Steven Douglas.

How may states did Lincoln win in the South? Zero.
How many states did Douglas win in the South? Zero.

The South wasn't having the DP, disrupted the convention which had to be suspended, walked out and formed their own parties and candidates (two of them) -- a pattern that would re-enact itself several times in the future (1924, 1948, 1964) so to identify the South with a political party philosophically is outright disingenuousness ---- and articulates that same American history ignorance again. Because as just stated above, the purpose of a political party is to acquire power -- not to represent an ideology. The latter changes with the wind; the former never does.

More to follow on this complete crock of anti-American revisionist claptrap. Got things to do. I shall return.

 

[Statistikhengst]

So Johnson signs the Civil Rights bill, he's the racist.

Goldwater votes against it, then within months is the presidential nominee of the GOP, and somehow he's the black man's best friend.

You're fucking nuts.

Apparently, the electorate was smart enough to know this in 1964. LBJ won with 61.04% of the NPV, but Goldwater picked up 4 southern states that has essentially never gone Republican ever. Fascinating, what?

Only proves that the media was effective in helping a racist like LBJ win. I remember the main accusation was that Goldwater was a warmonger, yet it was LBJ who was profiting off of the Vietnam war.

Uh, no.

Barry Goldwater did himself in with his comments about nuking our foes.

 

[NYcarbineer]

88% of Mississippians voted for Goldwater in 1964. Goldwater was the Republican.

Goldwater was one of the few Republicans who voted against the 64 Civil Rights bill.

Conservative racist Democrats in the South began a shift to voting Republican as soon as it became clear that the new Republican Party was their new home.

So it remains to this day.

Bullshit. Democrats in the South still vote Democrat or they don't vote. All you have to do is talk to them to find this out like I have. The difference today is there are fewer Democrats in the South these days. Most of them are transplants from other states. Folks moving here to escape high taxes in liberal Meccas like New York, Minnesota, California, etc. The South is still affordable, so people are moving here and changing the demographics. I talk to them every election. Most of the Dixicrats said they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Obama, so they didn't vote.

So you dispute what? That 88% of MS voters in 1964 voted for the Republican Goldwater?

They did. A state that was Democrat for a hundred years suddenly went Republican. Why?

Because Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights act and Johnson didn't.

Wake up.