The Dems' Desperation To Rewrite History

[Uncensored2008]

LOL (again) another new effort by a RWer to establish a universal truth which isn't, by an appeal to ignorance and an appeal to authority.

BTW, have you yet figured out the type of demagoguery you alleged?

Again, I point out that democrats are shameless liars. Anyone who cares to check can easily confirm that the segregationists were leftists. Will you humiliate yourself for your filthy party by claiming that Fritz Hollings was "conservative?"

Ernest Hollings - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Oh but that doesn't count, right? I mean whitey votes Republican - democrats hate whitey - ergo the Segregationists were Republican. Party above all, amirite?

So what about Faubus? You lying fucks love to claim he was "conservative," doncha?

Orval Faubus - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Too funny, a lying piece of dog crap complaining about liars. find that post you accused me of making yet?

So then, let me make sure I get this straight Comrade - you are saying that Fritz Hollings was a right wing conservative?

That's your claim, right sploogy?

IF you leftists seek to completely rewrite history, you better get moving, since everything I claim is confirmed by every source, with the exception of Zinn's fabricated "Peoples History."

NOW, I did make a mistake earlier, it was Orval Faubus Sr. who was the WWI ace pilot and joined the Communist party, Orval Jr. was just a left-wing, union owned democrat.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How do you explain the electoral swing between 1956 and 1964 if not for national white resistance to the Civil Rights Act?

Are those goal posts heavy?

You phrased this as if there were some sort of movement - when if fact there was none. No organization save the DNC/KKK opposing civil rights.

Further, the democrats did very well in the 1960 elections, so there actually was no swing.

"Compare the 1964 map to its 1956 counterpart, showing Dwight Eisenhower’s equally lopsided win in the earlier year.

"In 1956 the 'solid South' holds true to its historic allegiance to the Democratic Party, even in the face of Eisenhower’s sweep of the rest of the country.

"Eight years later, the South is out of step with the nation once again, this time in a way that no one could have imagined in 1956.

"The votes of the Deep South now belonged to the Republican Party and, more tellingly, to its conservative, anti-civil rights candidate, Goldwater.

Race and the Modern GOP - Doug McAdam and Karina Kloos - POLITICO Magazine

Yet the shameful democrats still won - so your claim of a national white resistance is utterly false and patently absurd.

 

[paperview]

Tell me Wabitt, how many people voted for Wallace only because he was a racist? How do you know what motivated people to vote for Wallace? You barely have enough information to properly tie your shoes.

Not sure how you consistently post the most worthless drivel. Is it a talent?
People voted for Wallace for a variety of reasons. People also voted for Carter for a variety of reasons.
It is irrelevant and a stupid argument.
The salient point is that once you strip out the racist baggage Wallace was a progressive. He supported big government and higher expenditures on projects to produce jobs in his states. About what Obama proposes now.

So Wallace's progressivism, or populism, or both, did not include his racism/segregationist beliefs. That is what you're saying.

That is what we're saying.

*Boom*

Is that the sound of reality crashing your tiny brain with the realization that once you strip out the racial angle Wallace was a progressive/populist and therefore right at home in today's Democrat Party? You know, what I've been saying here for pages and pages?

Wallace was a states rights populist. That usually sells pretty good in the South.

Thanks for admitting he was a populist/progressive.
My work here is done. Wallace was not a conservative.

Except for the part where he says boldly and often:

"I am a conservative. "

Speech by George C. Wallace The Civil Rights Movement fraud, sham and hoax 1964 < 1951- < Documents < American History From Revolution To Reconstruction and beyond

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wallace was a states rights populist. That usually sells pretty good in the South.

Wallace was also fairly moderate on non-race issues. He was a democrat, always.

But unlike Hollings and Gore, he was not a drooling socialist looking to put the Federal Government in charge of every aspect of life.

Populist is a good description of Wallace.

 

[The Rabbi]

So Wallace's progressivism, or populism, or both, did not include his racism/segregationist beliefs. That is what you're saying.

That is what we're saying.

*Boom*

Is that the sound of reality crashing your tiny brain with the realization that once you strip out the racial angle Wallace was a progressive/populist and therefore right at home in today's Democrat Party? You know, what I've been saying here for pages and pages?

Wallace was a states rights populist. That usually sells pretty good in the South.

Thanks for admitting he was a populist/progressive.
My work here is done. Wallace was not a conservative.

Except for the part where he says boldly and often:

"I am a conservative. "

Speech by George C. Wallace The Civil Rights Movement fraud, sham and hoax 1964 < 1951- < Documents < American History From Revolution To Reconstruction and beyond

Milton Friedman always said he was a Liberal.
You understand these terms have changed radically in 50 years, right? I mean, you're not that stupid. OK, yeah, you are.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wallace was a states rights populist. That usually sells pretty good in the South.

Wallace was also fairly moderate on non-race issues. He was a democrat, always.

But unlike Hollings and Gore, he was not a drooling socialist looking to put the Federal Government in charge of every aspect of life.

Populist is a good description of Wallace.

Wallace was a populist and progressive. He expanded state government. He engineered big projects to provide jobs and patronage. He expanded schools massively. This is why he won the last time with a majority of the black vote. ONce he dropped the racist stuff he was a Democrat through and through.

 

[The Rabbi]

Democrat good, republican bad. Neither party will do much to stop the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Still, a democrat will help you when you're down, a republican will kick you when you're down, as many posts on these forums prove. This thread is about repubs accusing dems trying to reinvent themselves. All I see is the opposite. Republicans trying to compare democrats to nazis, kkk'ers, racists, on and on. Please mr. nigg... I mean black man, come to the warm embrace of the loving republicans, we're the ones that set you free and all that. Get your lazy asses off welfare, then register republican.

That's all the GOP has to offer. I sure hope the middle class wakes the fuck up.

THat's the middle class that is worse off today on every measure than it was the day Bush left office?
Yeah, I hope they wake the hell up and kick every Democrat and about half the GOP out of office.

 

[NYcarbineer]

*Boom*

Is that the sound of reality crashing your tiny brain with the realization that once you strip out the racial angle Wallace was a progressive/populist and therefore right at home in today's Democrat Party? You know, what I've been saying here for pages and pages?

Wallace was a states rights populist. That usually sells pretty good in the South.

Thanks for admitting he was a populist/progressive.
My work here is done. Wallace was not a conservative.

Except for the part where he says boldly and often:

"I am a conservative. "

Speech by George C. Wallace The Civil Rights Movement fraud, sham and hoax 1964 < 1951- < Documents < American History From Revolution To Reconstruction and beyond

Milton Friedman always said he was a Liberal.
You understand these terms have changed radically in 50 years, right? I mean, you're not that stupid. OK, yeah, you are.

Then explain your praise for segregationist Zell Miller.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wallace was a states rights populist. That usually sells pretty good in the South.

Wallace was also fairly moderate on non-race issues. He was a democrat, always.

But unlike Hollings and Gore, he was not a drooling socialist looking to put the Federal Government in charge of every aspect of life.

Populist is a good description of Wallace.

Wallace was a populist and progressive. He expanded state government. He engineered big projects to provide jobs and patronage. He expanded schools massively. This is why he won the last time with a majority of the black vote. ONce he dropped the racist stuff he was a Democrat through and through.

democrats are desperate to use the "Big Lie" to rewrite the racist history of their party.

 

[georgephillip]

How do you explain the electoral swing between 1956 and 1964 if not for national white resistance to the Civil Rights Act?

Are those goal posts heavy?

You phrased this as if there were some sort of movement - when if fact there was none. No organization save the DNC/KKK opposing civil rights.

Further, the democrats did very well in the 1960 elections, so there actually was no swing.

"Compare the 1964 map to its 1956 counterpart, showing Dwight Eisenhower’s equally lopsided win in the earlier year.

"In 1956 the 'solid South' holds true to its historic allegiance to the Democratic Party, even in the face of Eisenhower’s sweep of the rest of the country.

"Eight years later, the South is out of step with the nation once again, this time in a way that no one could have imagined in 1956.

"The votes of the Deep South now belonged to the Republican Party and, more tellingly, to its conservative, anti-civil rights candidate, Goldwater.

Race and the Modern GOP - Doug McAdam and Karina Kloos - POLITICO Magazine

Yet the shameful democrats still won - so your claim of a national white resistance is utterly false and patently absurd.

In 1956 conservative crackers in seven southern states voted Democrat while voters in the other forty-three states backed Ike; eight years later, conservative crackers in five of those seven southern states backed Goldwater. Keep pretending race was not the REASON.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Then explain your praise for segregationist Zell Miller.

Like all segregationists, Miller is an outspoken democrat.

{I know what Dan Quayle means when he says it's best for children to have two parents. You bet it is! And it would be nice for them to have trust funds, too. We can't all be born rich and handsome and lucky. And that's why we have a Democratic Party. My family would still be isolated and destitute if we had not had F.D.R.'s Democratic brand of government. I made it because Franklin Delano Roosevelt energized this nation. I made it because Harry Truman fought for working families like mine. I made it because John Kennedy's rising tide lifted even our tiny boat. I made it because Lyndon Johnson showed America that people who were born poor didn't have to die poor. And I made it because a man with whom I served in the Georgia Senate, a man named Jimmy Carter, brought honesty and decency and integrity to public service.[5]}

Zell Miller - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Uncensored2008]

In 1956 conservative crackers in seven southern states voted Democrat while voters in the other forty-three states backed Ike; eight years later, conservative crackers in five of those seven southern states backed Goldwater. Keep pretending race was not the REASON.

I realize that you are desperate to use the "Big Lie" to rewrite history, but those big government, FDR democrats were not in the same universe as "conservative."

You of the Khmer Rouge depend on ignorance to spread your vile filth - when confronted with an educated populace, you are left impotent.

 

[OnePercenter]

THat's the middle class that is worse off today on every measure than it was the day Bush left office?
Yeah, I hope they wake the hell up and kick every Democrat and about half the GOP out of office.

Because BushCo crashed the economy you Koch shill.

 

[The Rabbi]

THat's the middle class that is worse off today on every measure than it was the day Bush left office?
Yeah, I hope they wake the hell up and kick every Democrat and about half the GOP out of office.

Because BushCo crashed the economy you Koch shill.

So Bush has been out of office for nearly 6 years and the economy is his fault.
Obama has been in office for nearly 6 years and the economy is not his fault.
Did you learn that at "Columbia"?? LOL!

 

[hazlnut]

This is rich. Lefwing hacksite Politico has a bit of racialist propaganda aimed at Low Info types. They are attempting to gin up the GOP Racism canard...with a photo of George Wallace.

Race and the Modern GOP - Doug McAdam and Karina Kloos - POLITICO Magazine

Too funny by half.

View attachment 32421

If you had bothered to read the rucking' thing it might make sense to your wee little head.

Why do you dumb tea baggers always post stuff w/o reading?

Does reading give you headaches?

 

[OnePercenter]

So Bush has been out of office for nearly 6 years and the economy is his fault.
Obama has been in office for nearly 6 years and the economy is not his fault.
Did you learn that at "Columbia"?? LOL!

BushCo is responsible for the largest economic crash in history. What does Koch think?

 

[Rikurzhen]

Not sure how you consistently post the most worthless drivel. Is it a talent?
People voted for Wallace for a variety of reasons. People also voted for Carter for a variety of reasons.
It is irrelevant and a stupid argument.
The salient point is that once you strip out the racist baggage Wallace was a progressive. He supported big government and higher expenditures on projects to produce jobs in his states. About what Obama proposes now.

Thanks so much for sharing Wabbit.

I do need to apologize for insulting all Bunnies, I had no intention to insult the intelligence of those ladies who work for Mr Heffner. They are women of substance, Wabbit's substance is the stuff kaopectate was developed to prevent.

Tell me Wabitt, how many people voted for Wallace only because he was a racist? How do you know what motivated people to vote for Wallace? You barely have enough information to properly tie your shoes.

Carter was a liberal. Carter won the same states Wallace did.
Facts really suck when you're wrong, don't they?

Rabbi logic in a nutshell --> Oh, look ... that tree is green ... that car is green ... that must mean that car is a tree.

Not sure how you consistently post the most worthless drivel. Is it a talent?
People voted for Wallace for a variety of reasons. People also voted for Carter for a variety of reasons.
It is irrelevant and a stupid argument.
The salient point is that once you strip out the racist baggage Wallace was a progressive. He supported big government and higher expenditures on projects to produce jobs in his states. About what Obama proposes now.

So Wallace's progressivism, or populism, or both, did not include his racism/segregationist beliefs. That is what you're saying.

That is what we're saying.

*Boom*

Is that the sound of reality crashing your tiny brain with the realization that once you strip out the racial angle Wallace was a progressive/populist and therefore right at home in today's Democrat Party? You know, what I've been saying here for pages and pages?

From his wikipedia bio:

His platform contained generous increases for beneficiaries of Social Security and Medicare. Wallace's foreign policy positions set him apart from the other candidates in the field. "If the Vietnam War was not winnable within 90 days of his taking office, Wallace pledged an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops ... Wallace described foreign aid as money 'poured down a rat hole' and demanded that European and Asian allies pay more for their defense."

Richard M. Nixon feared that Wallace might split the conservative vote and allow the Democratic nominee, Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey, to prevail. Some Democrats feared Wallace's appeal to organized blue-collar workers would damage Humphrey in northern states like Ohio, New Jersey, and Michigan. Wallace ran a "law and order" campaign similar to Nixon's, further incensing Republicans.
​

The South has always been poorer than the North, so plenty of old folks would find his socalist spending proposals to their liking. Same with law and order voters. Remember the 1968 riots were eye opening to middle America.

 

[Rikurzhen]

LOL, anyone wonder why I believe Rabbi is dumb as a bunny; from now on he's Wabbit to me.

Rabbi isn't dumb, he's a shill.

Says the guy who has faked his entire resume here.

That was hilarious when I first encountered it. Pretending to be a rich trust fund kid who writes and thinks like HS dropout who hit the bong way too much and the dude was so clueless to the fact that no one was buying it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

LOL, anyone wonder why I believe Rabbi is dumb as a bunny; from now on he's Wabbit to me.

Rabbi isn't dumb, he's a shill.

Says the guy who has faked his entire resume here.
Cumcatcher is just an angry retired government cock sucker. He has nothing of substance to contribute and is totally out of his league in responding to posts.

Rabbi (Wabbit) is a liar, a fool, vulgar, a homophobe (very likely at least gay curous) and a partisan hack who has never had an original thought in his life.

The highlights of Wabbit's resume are posted in my paragraph above, though I left out asshole since that is apparent to most. The one thing of which I am unsure is this: Is Wabbit willfully ignorant or is it congenital? I suspect the latter; I might pity him, but the asshole part of this character (disorders) makes empthy for him nearly impossible.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'd like to hear which parts of the article were in fact historically inaccurate.

Give us a list.

Can anyone direct me to the post(s) that give us that list?