The Party of Tolerance: Truth vs. Fantasy

[TemplarKormac]

Only bad part about the length is that the liberal elite stops reading after the first half of the first sentence. Any post that won't fit on a bumper strip is lost on 'em.

No matter. At least there are people like you who take the time. In a nutshell, I accuse liberals of being hypocrites for claiming they are for women, blacks, gays and free exercise of religion. I listed examples.

You provided no examples showing that "liberals" are hypocrites in regards to their support for women's rights, minority rights, or the First Amendment's free exercise of religion clause.

All you did was provide examples of "liberals" criticizing conservatives, and Democrats taking the phrase "god-given" out of the DNC platform.

Uh yeah, try reading the thread before you comment on it. In all of those instances I cited. Did you hear any liberal speak out against this behavior?

 

[bripat9643]

Search the term "Southern Strategy" and then say that Republicans aren't racist.

Southern Democrat became Southern Republican around 1968, so when you claim to be "the party of Lincoln", you're lying. If Abraham Lincoln were to see the GOP Teabagger party in the 21st century, he'd shoot himself from immense shame.

Southern Democrats went back to being Southern Democrats after Nixon. Hence Carter. Care to try that again?

Are you trying to imply that Southern Republicans are the "party of Lincoln"?

Search the term "Southern Strategy" and read what comes up.

If you think the Party of Lincoln was "tolerant" you are sadly mistaken. Lincoln was a white supremacist. The Republican party, as originally conceived, only cared about using the federal treasury to grease the palms of favored crony capitalists.

 

[bripat9643]

Search the term "Southern Strategy" and then say that Republicans aren't racist.

Southern Democrat became Southern Republican around 1968, so when you claim to be "the party of Lincoln", you're lying. If Abraham Lincoln were to see the GOP Teabagger party in the 21st century, he'd shoot himself from immense shame.

Southern Democrats went back to being Southern Democrats after Nixon. Hence Carter. Care to try that again?

Yea thats the reason Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi all voted for Clinton? Tell me Templar are you really that retarded that you think racists voted for a black man for President?

Apparently you believe that anyone who didn't vote for Obama is a racist. That pretty much defines "intolerant."

 

[TemplarKormac]

LOL history is not your strong suit is it?

Really? Other than Strom Thurmond, can you name a single Southern Democrat who became a Republican?

Jesse Helms.

Nine years later.

Next.

 

[GreenBean]

Perhaps you don't recognize your own folly? Read my previous response.[/QUOTE
TEmplar, which party today is advocating states rights and secession? Could it be that political parties change over time?

Who was it said "Republicans don't belong here"? Wanna give that a go? And while I'm at it, are you saying states shouldn't have any rights? Oh, and I oppose succession. I favor preservation of the union. Oh, and guess which party gave birth to the KKK? Who tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act?

Next.

These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now, we've got to do something about this; we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. for if we don't move at all, then their allies [The Republicans] will line up against us and there will be no way of stopping them, we'll lose the filibuster and there will be no way of putting the brake on all sorts of wild legislation, it'll be reconstruction all over again - Lyndon Johnson

Civil Rights act 1964 Only 61 percent of Democrats supported that bill, versus 80 percent of Republicans.

Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Written by Republican Senator Everett Dirksen - 94 percent of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill versus 73 percent of Democrats. The final vote on the House version - only one Senate Republican voted against it compared to seventeen Democrats.

 

[Steinlight]

No matter. At least there are people like you who take the time. In a nutshell, I accuse liberals of being hypocrites for claiming they are for women, blacks, gays and free exercise of religion. I listed examples.

You provided no examples showing that "liberals" are hypocrites in regards to their support for women's rights, minority rights, or the First Amendment's free exercise of religion clause.

All you did was provide examples of "liberals" criticizing conservatives, and Democrats taking the phrase "god-given" out of the DNC platform.

Uh yeah, try reading the thread before you comment on it. In all of those instances I cited. Did you hear any liberal speak out against this behavior?

How does calling conservatives mean names infringe on the rights of women or minorities? How does taking the phrase "god given", out of the DNC platform infringe on religious liberties?

 

[TemplarKormac]

You provided no examples showing that "liberals" are hypocrites in regards to their support for women's rights, minority rights, or the First Amendment's free exercise of religion clause.

All you did was provide examples of "liberals" criticizing conservatives, and Democrats taking the phrase "god-given" out of the DNC platform.

Uh yeah, try reading the thread before you comment on it. In all of those instances I cited. Did you hear any liberal speak out against this behavior?

How does calling conservatives mean names infringe on the rights of women or minorities? How does taking the phrase "god given", out of the DNC platform infringe on religious liberties?

By attacking women, blacks and Christians who don't agree with them, they go against everything they purportedly stand for.

 

[bripat9643]

Southern Democrats went back to being Southern Democrats after Nixon. Hence Carter. Care to try that again?

Are you trying to imply that Southern Republicans are the "party of Lincoln"?

Search the term "Southern Strategy" and read what comes up.

Exactly, what is going around Southern States today? Secession talk and States rights talk. I guess those "democrats" still are talking of secession.

So that makes them racists?

 

[Steinlight]

Really? Other than Strom Thurmond, can you name a single Southern Democrat who became a Republican?

Jesse Helms.

Nine years later.

Next.

Nine years after what? Jesse Helms was a self styled "conservative" democrat during his stint at local policies in the 60s. He ran as a "conservative" republican in his 1972 senatorial bid.

Why doesn't he count?

And why are you denying the Southern Strategy? It is just a matter of historical fact. It was savvy politics. Atwater would be rolling in his grave if he found out how many people are ignorant of his historical campaign work.

 

[bripat9643]

Only bad part about the length is that the liberal elite stops reading after the first half of the first sentence. Any post that won't fit on a bumper strip is lost on 'em.

No matter. At least there are people like you who take the time. In a nutshell, I accuse liberals of being hypocrites for claiming they are for women, blacks, gays and free exercise of religion. I listed examples.

You provided no examples showing that "liberals" are hypocrites in regards to their support for women's rights, minority rights, or the First Amendment's free exercise of religion clause..

How about all the libturds, especially the gals from NOW, who defended Clinton's behavior in the Ofal Office? How more hypocritical could you possibly get?

 

[Steinlight]

Uh yeah, try reading the thread before you comment on it. In all of those instances I cited. Did you hear any liberal speak out against this behavior?

How does calling conservatives mean names infringe on the rights of women or minorities? How does taking the phrase "god given", out of the DNC platform infringe on religious liberties?

By attacking women, blacks and Christians who don't agree with them, they go against everything they purportedly stand for.

Liberals don't stand for criticizing women, blacks, or Christians for political views? Where does it say "liberals" stand for this?

 

[TemplarKormac]

How does calling conservatives mean names infringe on the rights of women or minorities? How does taking the phrase "god given", out of the DNC platform infringe on religious liberties?

By attacking women, blacks and Christians who don't agree with them, they go against everything they purportedly stand for.

Liberals don't stand for criticizing women, blacks, or Christians for political views? Where does it say "liberals" stand for this?

Weren't you reading my thread? Geez you're dense. So dense in fact, you cause things to go in orbit.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Jesse Helms.

Nine years later.

Next.

Nine years after what? Jesse Helms was a self styled "conservative" democrat during his stint at local policies in the 60s. He ran as a "conservative" republican in his 1972 senatorial bid.

Why doesn't he count?

And why are you denying the Southern Strategy? It is just a matter of historical fact. It was savvy politics. Atwater would be rolling in his grave if he found out how many people are ignorant of his historical campaign work.

He doesn't count simply because Thurmond defected in 1964, if his move were motivated by the Civil Rights movement, he would have stated so. Did he? As opposed to Strom Thurmond, he tried to filibuster a bill instituting Martin Luther King Day in 1983. Thurmond appointed Thomas Moss, an African American, to his staff in 1971. Helms to my knowledge never did anything of the sort. Also I'm not denying the Southern Strategy. I'm saying it dissipated. That is a historical fact. It wasn't until the 2000 Presidential election that the South voted majorly for a Republican for president again. Big difference.

That bit about Lee Atwater was a cheap shot. Move along.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Man, such incredibly weak arguments. Is that it?

 

[Steinlight]

By attacking women, blacks and Christians who don't agree with them, they go against everything they purportedly stand for.

Liberals don't stand for criticizing women, blacks, or Christians for political views? Where does it say "liberals" stand for this?

Weren't you reading my thread? Geez you're dense. So dense in fact, you cause things to go in orbit.

I am reading your thread.

How about you answer the questions instead of throwing out insults.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Liberals don't stand for criticizing women, blacks, or Christians for political views? Where does it say "liberals" stand for this?

Weren't you reading my thread? Geez you're dense. So dense in fact, you cause things to go in orbit.

I am reading your thread.

How about you answer the questions instead of throwing out insults.

You mean you weren't reading it before?

Until you posit a real argument, you will get nothing else. You aren't serious. You're not even attempting to disprove my points.

 

[candycorn]

This is GOP logic.

We are 90% white.

We would like to have more women. We would also like to have more blacks, Hispanics, and minorities. We'd also like to have more LGBTs in our ranks.

For some reason, those sluts, bitches, homies, spics, wetbacks, and gooks, rag heads, turban cowboys, queers, lezbos, fudge packers, and sick twisted freaks hate us.

They're the intolerant ones; we're not.​

This is Democrat Logic

We are for blacks, although being majorly white ourselves.

We care about women, gays, blacks and Christians---so long as they tow the line.

For some reason those terroristic-anarchistic-astro turfed-arson prone-racist-bigoted-gun loving-misogynistic-redneck-Christian Taliban all hate us. Why do they hate us? We're more tolerant than they are.

Whoops, did I just blow your utopian fantasy out of the water?

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Stop the clock!

That was really, really interesting. And so original.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. There is some truth to what he says although I'm not sure how you become "majorly white". At least he didn't do that whole "I have a lot of minority friends" then proceeds to name all four of them.

In truth there is some intolerance on both sides of the aisle. Comparing the two parties is laughable with the Democrats being far more inclusive of other races and both sexes if you go by the numbers of elected officials. There is no contest.

Comparing the ideologies? He has some points. The far ends of both ideologies are not trusting of the other side. Those toward the middle? Far more engaging. But like it or not, most conservatives identify with the GOP and most liberals identify with the Democrats. And as proven by the sheer numbers in federal level seats, Dems are far more inclusive.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is Democrat Logic

We are for blacks, although being majorly white ourselves.

We care about women, gays, blacks and Christians---so long as they tow the line.

For some reason those terroristic-anarchistic-astro turfed-arson prone-racist-bigoted-gun loving-misogynistic-redneck-Christian Taliban all hate us. Why do they hate us? We're more tolerant than they are.

Whoops, did I just blow your utopian fantasy out of the water?

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Stop the clock!

That was really, really interesting. And so original.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. There is some truth to what he says although I'm not sure how you become "majorly white". At least he didn't do that whole "I have a lot of minority friends" then proceeds to name all four of them.

In truth there is some intolerance on both sides of the aisle. Comparing the two parties is laughable with the Democrats being far more inclusive of other races and both sexes if you go by the numbers of elected officials. There is no contest.

Comparing the ideologies? He has some points. The far ends of both ideologies are not trusting of the other side. Those toward the middle? Far more engaging. But like it or not, most conservatives identify with the GOP and most liberals identify with the Democrats. And as proven by the sheer numbers in federal level seats, Dems are far more inclusive.

Dems wouldn't let Pro life Democrats speak at the convention. They held closed door meetings on Capitol Hill without the Republicans, passed a healthcare overhaul without one Republican vote. They attack people who don't think like they do.

Inclusive? Are you joking?

 

[Gracie]

Which party is more tolerant? Who is the least tolerant?

I keep saying and I will say it again because I am pretty sure it isn't just me:

I don't like boxes. Both sides are tolerant and both sides are least tolerant. It all isn't just black and white. Lots of gray. I am gray.

 

[Steinlight]

Nine years later.

Next.

Nine years after what? Jesse Helms was a self styled "conservative" democrat during his stint at local policies in the 60s. He ran as a "conservative" republican in his 1972 senatorial bid.

Why doesn't he count?

And why are you denying the Southern Strategy? It is just a matter of historical fact. It was savvy politics. Atwater would be rolling in his grave if he found out how many people are ignorant of his historical campaign work.

He doesn't count simply because Thurmond defected in 1964, if his move were motivated by the Civil Rights movement, he would have stated so. Did he? As opposed to Strom Thurmond, he tried to filibuster a bill instituting Martin Luther King Day in 1983. Thurmond appointed Thomas Moss, an African American, to his staff in 1971. Helms to my knowledge never did anything of the sort. Also I'm not denying the Southern Strategy. I'm saying it dissipated. That is a historical fact. It wasn't until the 2000 Presidential election that the South voted majorly for a Republican for president again. Big difference.

That bit about Lee Atwater was a cheap shot. Move along.

In short, yes, Helms did leave in part due to his opposition to the Civil Rights Bill.
"An unreconstructed Southern conservative, he began his political career in the Democratic Party in the days when many white Southern politicians championed racial segregation and most blacks were disfranchised. He moved to the Republican party in the 1970s. Helms was the most stridently conservative politician of the post-1960s era,[4] especially in opposition to federal intervention into what he considered state affairs (integration, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act). Helms conducted a 16-day filibuster to stop the Senate from approving a federal holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr."

Conservatives(southerners mostly) left the Democrat party in droves because the Democratic Party Leadership from the 60s forward(primarily in the 70s though) took a decidedly more liberal direction.

Also, you are simply wrong about the dissipation of Southern support for the GOP. In every election since 1972(minus 1976 where the South supported Jimmy Carter, a fellow southerner), the GOP has won the majority or the entirety of the South. Reagan, Bush I, Dole, Bush II, McCain, and Romney all won the South.