This Is A Short List Of Things Democrats Seem To Support

[rdean]

Well, this is where making posts with Googly Images takes you.

The KKK was founded in 1865, not '68, and by a half-dozen Confederate soldier veterans, not anybody having anything to do with politics, and it was extinguished by 1880 -- hasn't been continuous. And then it was revived in 1915 by a Georgia salesman, also having nothing to do with politics, and a decade later was working to get Republicans elected.

So it's fitting that the logo in the lower left says "Politifake". That's exactly what it is.

Yes...and that is a nice fake out by you.....you are trying to say that former Confederate soldiers would be less likely to vote, and if they voted they would be less likely to vote for the democrat party which was the party of the Confederacy. Nice try....and nice fail.

One day some scholar will check the voting rolls in where those democrats who started the klan lived.....

The klan was used by democrats to drive the freed blacks out of political office in the south using violence and murder.

You don't want to tangle with me on this Junior. I've been around this block more times than you've tied your own shoes without help.

Firstly there is no such thing as the "Democrat Party". Does not exist, never did. Second, there wasn't a whooooooole lot of voting going on in the seven months after the Civil War ended in 1865, and they weren't likely old enough to vote anyway. Thirdly, even if they had been, there wouldn't have been a choice of parties -- the Republican Party was only a decade old, wasn't established in the South and neither Lincoln nor Frémont, the two POTUS candidates, even ran in the South at all.

And we know where they lived (Pulaski, Tennessee) and we know their names (Captain John C. Lester, Major James R. Crowe, John D. Kennedy, Calvin Jones, Richard R. Reed, Frank O. McCord) and we know they founded it as a lark social club, which is why it has all those capricious K-alliterations. What we don't know is that they had any political affiliation. Again, there's not a whole lot of politicking during a WAR.

Dumbass.

We also know they recruited Civil War general Nathan Bedford Forrest to be the figurehead-- in April of 1867 (which I'm preeeety sure is before 1868) and that Forrest disbanded it in January of 1869 and washed his hands of it.

So 1868?.... No. By Democrats?... No. For the purpose of racism?... No. Vigilantes jumped in and did that. That's exactly why Forrest disbanded it.

Are you referring to the same Nathan Bedford Forrest that massacred black troops at Ft Pillow by having them nailed to logs and burned alive AFTER they surrendered???

The guy that was the keynote speaker at the 1868 Democrat National Convention???

Thanks Obiwan....I found this because of your post.....

1868 Democratic National Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 1868 Democratic National Convention was held at Tammany Hall in New York City. The slogan for the 1868 Democratic National Convention was, "This is a white man's country, Let a white man rule". The convention was notable for the return of Democratic Party politicians from the southern states.

I love this part:

The convention was notable for the return of Democratic Party politicians from the southern states.

We have a name for racist politicians from southern states. They are called "Republicans". Thank God the finally left the Democrats and joined up with the Confederate GOP.

 

[mudwhistle]

Just your average Democrat voter speaking their minds..........

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[Pogo]

Well, this is where making posts with Googly Images takes you.

The KKK was founded in 1865, not '68, and by a half-dozen Confederate soldier veterans, not anybody having anything to do with politics, and it was extinguished by 1880 -- hasn't been continuous. And then it was revived in 1915 by a Georgia salesman, also having nothing to do with politics, and a decade later was working to get Republicans elected.

So it's fitting that the logo in the lower left says "Politifake". That's exactly what it is.

Yes...and that is a nice fake out by you.....you are trying to say that former Confederate soldiers would be less likely to vote, and if they voted they would be less likely to vote for the democrat party which was the party of the Confederacy. Nice try....and nice fail.

One day some scholar will check the voting rolls in where those democrats who started the klan lived.....

The klan was used by democrats to drive the freed blacks out of political office in the south using violence and murder.

You don't want to tangle with me on this Junior. I've been around this block more times than you've tied your own shoes without help.

Firstly there is no such thing as the "Democrat Party". Does not exist, never did. Second, there wasn't a whooooooole lot of voting going on in the seven months after the Civil War ended in 1865, and they weren't likely old enough to vote anyway. Thirdly, even if they had been, there wouldn't have been a choice of parties -- the Republican Party was only a decade old, wasn't established in the South and neither Lincoln nor Frémont, the two POTUS candidates, even ran in the South at all.

And we know where they lived (Pulaski, Tennessee) and we know their names (Captain John C. Lester, Major James R. Crowe, John D. Kennedy, Calvin Jones, Richard R. Reed, Frank O. McCord) and we know they founded it as a lark social club, which is why it has all those capricious K-alliterations. What we don't know is that they had any political affiliation. Again, there's not a whole lot of politicking during a WAR.

Dumbass.

We also know they recruited Civil War general Nathan Bedford Forrest to be the figurehead-- in April of 1867 (which I'm preeeety sure is before 1868) and that Forrest disbanded it in January of 1869 and washed his hands of it.

So 1868?.... No. By Democrats?... No. For the purpose of racism?... No. Vigilantes jumped in and did that. That's exactly why Forrest disbanded it.

Okay fuckwit....you are saying that these former confederate soldiers never, ever voted in their entire lives,
and if they did vote it wouldn't have been for the democrat party over the Republican party....you are a fuckwit and prove it with every post.
.

Likely they did not, considering they were around 20 years old and the voting age being 21, some might have squeaked though in 1864 only --- which was in the throes of War, but that's speculation. And Lincoln didn't run in the South anyway. And this would have made them around 15 years old in 1860, which again did not feature a Republican in the South.

I think the ignorance is all yours here, boy.

The leader of the Confederacy was a democrat, and Nathan Bedford Forrest was a democrat......and yet the founders of the Ku klux klan would not have been democrats....you lefties will do anything to deny the truth and reality......sell your bullshit somewhere else sunshine........no one here is buying it anymore...

Wrong. Forrest was a general in the War, not "the leader of the Confederacy" -- that would be Jefferson Davis. Do you know absolutely nothing of your own history?

And no, the founders of the KKK would have had no political party, nor is there an iota of information anywhere saying so. First they were too young, and second there was a FUCKING WAR ON until a few months before they did that, and third, it wasn't founded for a political purpose.

Dip shit...read that closer, I put a comma between the leader of the Confederacy and Forrest.....and Davis was a democrat as was Forrest.

And again....you are saying that the founders of the klan never, ever voted in any election in their entire lives...that is what you are saying?....dipstick.

And your evidence that they did, and who they voted for, is where?



Exactly. Argument from Ignorance fallacy. Which is appropriate for you.

 

[Pogo]

Just your average Democrat voter speaking their minds..........

Nothing like an endless diarrhea of Googly Images in two-point type that can't even be read.

Are you just incapable of articulating a point on your own?

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama Aide #BarvettaSingletary Allowed To Resign After Shooting at Cop Boyfriend
by Jennifer Davis on September 5, 2015

In recent months we have heard from so many people that minority lives matter but one Obama aide evidently doesn’t believe that applies when the life involved happens to be a man whom she suspects of cheating. Barvetta Singletary, a special assistant to the President and legislative liaison to the House, was charged with assault and reckless endangerment for discharging her boyfriends duty weapon in his general direction after an argument. All of this transpired in early August, but she remained employed, and on paid leave, until she tendered her resignation this week.

Brevetta Singletary’s mug shot

Yes, dear reader, that is right. Her boyfriend is a Capital Hill police officer. It seems that this all started after they had finished after a invitation to come over for sex via text (how romantic-ack) and she decided to confront him about another woman he was dating. Singletary upped the ante when her boyfriend refused to answer her questions and requested to see his cell phone. The boyfriend refused and that is when she grabbed his .40 caliber Glock 23 service weapon and pointed it at him saying “‘You taught me how to use this. Don’t think I won’t use it.”, and fired a round. Afterward she allegedly wiped the gun down down after firing it.

Singletary in happier time with Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC)

The situation did not end there! Evidently she asked him to get out of her house, she followed him and again demanded to see his cell phone when they got to his car. Once again he refused, so she grabbed his two cell phones and his duty weapon and ran inside-with him in pursuit. She fired another shot in his general direction and he (understandably) fled the scene.

When news of Singletary’s resignation hit Friday, Twitter blew up with people expressing their horror that she did not get fired, but was allowed to resign. Even CNN contributor Amanda Carpenter seemed aghast that one would be given the opportunity to resign, not just be dismissed.

Obama Aide #BarvettaSingletary Allowed To Resign After Shooting at Cop Boyfriend - Victory Girls Blog

 

[Pogo]

MLK was not a "Republican", Dumbass. This is the hole that trying to make fake points with Googly Images puts you in.

And in the larger picture, "Democrat" and "Republican" don't mean at all now what they meant in the 19th century. The DP was the "states rights" party suspicious of Federal power, while the RP was home to the Liberals and former Whigs -- the party of "big gummint".

But you have fun, trolling the Internets for easily-debunked fake association fallacies in the valiant pursuit of Dumb-Down.

/meme

 

[Obiwan]

MLK was not a "Republican", Dumbass. This is the hole that trying to make fake points with Googly Images puts you in.

And in the larger picture, "Democrat" and "Republican" don't mean at all now what they meant in the 19th century. The DP was the "states rights" party suspicious of Federal power, while the RP was home to the Liberals and former Whigs -- the party of "big gummint".

/meme

Here we go again, with your claim that Democrats are Republicans, and Republicans are really Democrats...

Can't you be happy with men being women, and white folks suddenly turning black????

 

[rdean]

Showing Republicans from over 50 years ago before the Confederate conservatives fled the Democratic Party and became Republicans when the blacks joined the Democrats. I guess there is a point there. Raw and undiluted ignorance about American history. So, were Lincoln and King "Confederates"? That's the only way you could make this historical rewrite work.

 

[peach174]

MLK was not a "Republican", Dumbass. This is the hole that trying to make fake points with Googly Images puts you in.

And in the larger picture, "Democrat" and "Republican" don't mean at all now what they meant in the 19th century. The DP was the "states rights" party suspicious of Federal power, while the RP was home to the Liberals and former Whigs -- the party of "big gummint".

But you have fun, trolling the Internets for easily-debunked fake association fallacies in the valiant pursuit of Dumb-Down.

/meme

His niece says he was a Republican.
Dr. Alveda C. King is not a liar.

 

[mudwhistle]

This thread is stupid and if the OP believes what he posted about Republicans he simply can't be taken seriously as a human being.

Allow me to translate this post from leftwing babble to English.......

Begin Translation:

If I believed in God I would say "Oh, My God, stop this." This Mudwhistle poster is pointing out the truth about the left and democrats and he is doing it really effectively.......we can try our usual lies to combat it....but this damned internet makes that harder and harder. In the old days, we could lie about republicans all we wanted, then our democrats in the press and hollywood would repeat the lie and normal Americans would believe it since they don't usually pay attention and used to just trust the democrart press. And on top of that, any attempt to refute the lie would require actually going to a "library" where the conservative would have to poor through micro fiche and the book stacks looking for reference materials in order to find the truth......it would take them days to get the truth out while our lies would be broadcast around the world.

Now.....they can refute our lies in nanoseconds....

Damned internet.

How can we maintain control over normal Americans if our lies can be exposed so easily...........GAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!

End of Translation.

Control the internet.

Punish anyone who posts *lies* we don't like on the internet.

 

[Pogo]

MLK was not a "Republican", Dumbass. This is the hole that trying to make fake points with Googly Images puts you in.

And in the larger picture, "Democrat" and "Republican" don't mean at all now what they meant in the 19th century. The DP was the "states rights" party suspicious of Federal power, while the RP was home to the Liberals and former Whigs -- the party of "big gummint".

But you have fun, trolling the Internets for easily-debunked fake association fallacies in the valiant pursuit of Dumb-Down.

/meme

His niece says he was a Republican.
Dr. Alveda C. King is not a liar.

Sigh.... we've done this before --- and Alveda King has retracted this anyway:

>> I have few regrets in my life. At the top of the list is the demise of two children in my womb, and one miscarriage. Next to that, I regret having said to a group of peers that my Uncle M. L. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) was a Republican. My Grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr. was a registered Republican. Uncle M. L. was an independent. I assumed that since Granddaddy was a Republican, Uncle M. L. was too. After all, before the election of President John F. Kennedy, the majority of African American voters were Republicans*. Granddaddy convinced a large block of Blacks to vote for President John Kennedy after he helped to get my uncle out of jail during those turbulent days. Uncle M. L. tended to vote Democrat, but remained independent because he found weaknesses in both parties. The truth of the matter is that God isn't a Republican or a Democrat or a Tea Party voter. God doesn't vote. The squabbling and division among the parties is tragic. << -- Alveda King: 'Put the Political Strife Out to Pasture'
​

Which aligns with what King himself said:

>> I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses.
And I’m not inextricably bound to either party. I’m not concerned about telling you what party to vote for. But what I’m saying is this, that we must gain the ballot and use it wisely2.”

(2. During a sermon in Atlanta one month earlier, King revealed that he had been offered money by both political parties to rally black voters for the 1956 election: They told me they had $75,000 to spend towards obtaining the Negro vote. A large part of this money would have been set aside for my own advantage. I studied their offers long and prayed over it again and again. Then I told them I couldn’t do it. I knew it would have given me anopportunity to educate my children and would have given me my first possessions in the world, but I could not sacrifice my soul in the structure of partisan politics” (“King Warns Leaders Of PartisanPolitics,” Montgomery Advertiser, 14 January 1958). << -- Interview transcript here
​

--- and of course that letter to a supporter that said:

>> Thanks for your very kind letter of September 17, making inquiry concerning the way the Negro will vote in the coming election. I am of the impression that the Negro voter will go largely for the Democratic Party.

I haven’t fully decided which candidate I will vote for. In the past I have always voted the Democratic ticket. At this point I am still in a state of indecision. Stevenson seems to be more forthright on the race question than Eisenhower, but the Democratic Party is so inexplicably bound to the South that it does leave doubt in the minds of those interested in civil rights. Let us all hope that the candidate most concerned with the welfare for all people of America will win the election.

Sincerely yours,
M. L. King, Jr.,
President
(letter to Viva Sloan, 2 October 1956) << -- The Martin Luther King Jr. Papers

​

This is where you get taken when you depend on Googly Images and YouTube for your history -- instead of actual history. Sorry, history is history.... you don't get to rewrite it.


* - actually Alveda King is wrong here too; African Americans started voting toward the Democratic Party early in FDR's administration. They did spike in 1964 but the pattern was already established for three decades. We've done this before too. Part of the evolution/devolution of the two parties since the 19th century noted earlier.

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[Pogo]

​

Still unable to articulate anything on your own huh?

Poor Mush.

 

[mudwhistle]

Tea Party Rally........

Democratic Rally........

 

[mudwhistle]