Unpatriotic Dems In Virginia Erases Confederate Holiday

[Correll]

No, it didn't. You are focusing on a few people, and using them to smear a vastly larger population.


Because you hate that population. Because you are a bigot.

Few people my ass. Whole communities fought against integration

Here they are screaming at a six year old black girl

A six year old black girl who needed federal marshals to protect her while she goes to a white school

All racist Jim Crow laws in south were passed by Democratic legislators, signed by Democratic Governors and upheld by Democratic judges. You lefties cant blame anyone else for that, but yourself. You own it.

It quite

There were Republicans in southern states too.
They supported Jim Crow

It is a southern thing

Until suddenly, it wasn't. The ground was shifting under the facade of control for a long time, and went they dem racists lost power, it was swept away and was gone.

It was all part of the south’s “peculiar institution”
That institution not only dictated that blacks were inferior but they were somehow dirty and were not allowed to eat, sleep, use restrooms, swim, watch movies or sit next to whites. They even had separate libraries because white southerners would not read a book that a black person had red.

Those beliefs had existed for centuries and had nothing to do with the Democratic Party

And then as racism lost power and sway, the Republican Party which had been locked out of the South for so long, grew and grew and grew, until the Democratic Party gave up the fight.


Then suddenly the dems johnny come latelies had to talk louder and crazier to try to give the appearance of really caring about a policy that they embraced generations late.


An act they keep up to this very day, making a fuss over statues in the park, while the republican President is racking up new records in low black unemployment.



I look forward to your next post, whining about how bad your party was, back before either of us were born, and how that means that today, you guys are great.

 

[Pogo]

Few people my ass. Whole communities fought against integration

Here they are screaming at a six year old black girl

A six year old black girl who needed federal marshals to protect her while she goes to a white school

All racist Jim Crow laws in south were passed by Democratic legislators, signed by Democratic Governors and upheld by Democratic judges. You lefties cant blame anyone else for that, but yourself. You own it.

It quite

There were Republicans in southern states too.
They supported Jim Crow

It is a southern thing

Until suddenly, it wasn't. The ground was shifting under the facade of control for a long time, and went they dem racists lost power, it was swept away and was gone.

It was all part of the south’s “peculiar institution”
That institution not only dictated that blacks were inferior but they were somehow dirty and were not allowed to eat, sleep, use restrooms, swim, watch movies or sit next to whites. They even had separate libraries because white southerners would not read a book that a black person had red.

Those beliefs had existed for centuries and had nothing to do with the Democratic Party

And then as racism lost power and sway, the Republican Party which had been locked out of the South for so long, grew and grew and grew, until the Democratic Party gave up the fight.

Then suddenly the dems johnny come latelies had to talk louder and crazier to try to give the appearance of really caring about a policy that they embraced generations late.

An act they keep up to this very day, making a fuss over statues in the park, while the republican President is racking up new records in low black unemployment.

I look forward to your next post, whining about how bad your party was, back before either of us were born, and how that means that today, you guys are great.

"Locked out"?

When the fuck was the Republican Party "locked out"?

This oughta be good.

 

[Pogo]

Some resistance?

Like bombing churches, beating marchers in Selma, police dogs, fire hoses, beating Freedom Riders
All because people wanted to vote and be treated with dignity

Yes, some resistance. you want to try to post some more emotion triggering words and pictures to pretend that that refutes my point? (demagoguery)

The dems flipped on the issue because they were losing elections on the issue. Once they flipped on it, the racists lost any voice or representation in national policy from then forward. (at least the white anti-black racists)

You libs like to point to your former allies as representative of America, at least of that time.

Yet, they were being violent, because they had LOST, the policy battle, because the nation as a whole, was giving democratic support to the Republican led Equality Consensus.

That is my point. Would you like to address it, or would you like to just smear America some more, and pretend that is some how challenging my point, when it is not?

I'll address it, if I can get past the orgy of endless and pointless self-inflating carriage returns.........

The "dems [sic]" didn't "flip" on the issue unless you're referring to what other wanker posters insist on referring to as the "party switch", that period of the turn of the 19th/20th century when the two party largely and gradually traded (rather than "switched") their constituencies, That's when the Southern faction, already the redheaded stepchild in the party, began to lose its grip. That crack in effect began in 1936 when FDR, at the height of his power and influence, got the party convention rules changed for Presidential nomination from a two-thirds majority to a simple 51% majority. Under the previous rules the South was able to hold the convention hostage --- as it infamously did in 1924 --- in resisting liberal civil rights-friendly candidates, by denying that two-thirds threshold.

The Ku Klux Klan was doing its part too, a few years earlier in 1928 when it endorsed Herbert Hoover and ran a national smear campaign against Al Smith (because he was a Catholic), as seen here:

Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas going from blue to red, and Alabama weak. The VP on the ticket was from Arkansas or it might have been worse for them. No doubt Roosevelt could smell the blood in the water.

In the first election year after WW2 had run its course, that Southern contingent, in an echo of 1860 Charleston, walked out of the convention upon hearing too much about "civil rights" from the incumbent Truman and the young mayor of Minneapolis Hubert Humphrey, and went to run their own campaign, even getting Truman kicked off the Democratic ballot where they could (in return Thurmond was kicked off his ballot when he then tried to run for Senator, ran as a write-in with no party, and won anyway).

1920s... 1930s... 1940s,

So those seeds were sown decades before the 1960s, during which time the South had been hanging on as the way-out right wing of the party, opposed to the thrust of the national party but loathe to join the "party of Lincoln", until the same renegade from 1948, Thurmond, took the plunge in 1964 So this is not a party "flipping' --- it's a batshit wing of a party flipping upon facing the reality that they'd been sitting in the wrong room and it was not going to get them anywhere.

Summa y'all still have yet to grok the distinction between ideologies and political parties.

That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

Again --- the numbers prove you wrong. See post 1279.

​

I make a comment about the broad trends of the nation and the parties over time and you post the vote count from a single bill, without context or even stated reasons as though that refutes it?


Consider your silliness noted and dismissed.


My point stands.


That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

NO Twaddles, you made an absolute statement. I would have re-quoted it here but you just did it for me directly above. And I showed you where ZERO Southern Republicans voted for CRA 1964, zero being fewer than the six Democrats who voted for it.

So you're wrong, and you can't face it. Which is par for this coarse. You've carried the same inability throughout this pointless exercise.

 

[Correll]

All racist Jim Crow laws in south were passed by Democratic legislators, signed by Democratic Governors and upheld by Democratic judges. You lefties cant blame anyone else for that, but yourself. You own it.

It quite

There were Republicans in southern states too.
They supported Jim Crow

It is a southern thing

Until suddenly, it wasn't. The ground was shifting under the facade of control for a long time, and went they dem racists lost power, it was swept away and was gone.

It was all part of the south’s “peculiar institution”
That institution not only dictated that blacks were inferior but they were somehow dirty and were not allowed to eat, sleep, use restrooms, swim, watch movies or sit next to whites. They even had separate libraries because white southerners would not read a book that a black person had red.

Those beliefs had existed for centuries and had nothing to do with the Democratic Party

And then as racism lost power and sway, the Republican Party which had been locked out of the South for so long, grew and grew and grew, until the Democratic Party gave up the fight.

Then suddenly the dems johnny come latelies had to talk louder and crazier to try to give the appearance of really caring about a policy that they embraced generations late.

An act they keep up to this very day, making a fuss over statues in the park, while the republican President is racking up new records in low black unemployment.

I look forward to your next post, whining about how bad your party was, back before either of us were born, and how that means that today, you guys are great.

"Locked out"?

When the fuck was the Republican Party "locked out"?

This oughta be good.

The dems , with their alliance with racists, managed to get a lock on the South, post Civil War.


It is not credible that you do not know that.

 

[Pogo]

Yyyyyyyyyyyyyyeah if you could, you know, go ahead and QUOTE where I did that, that'd be great.

Cue crickets.

I pointed out when you did in this thread, again and again. If you managed to not see when I did it then, what point is there in you requesting me to show you again?

Oh, is this more of those weird troll games you've been playing?

Whatever. I don't care about your games.

THe point remains.

When you hold that one race is inferior to another, such as not deserving the same treatment as all other races, and groups,

then you are racist against that group.

As you have demonstrated by holding Whites to a higher standard, then any other group.

You are a racist.

So you have nothing.

What a surprise.

Yawn.

I pointed out when you did in this thread, again and again. If you managed to not see when I did it then, what point is there in you requesting me to show you again?Oh, is this more of those weird troll games you've been playing?Whatever. I don't care about your games.THe point remains.When you hold that one race is inferior to another, such as not deserving the same treatment as all other races, and groups,then you are racist against that group.As you have demonstrated by holding Whites to a higher standard, then [sic] any other group.You are a racist.

Nnnnno Tweedles, you cut and pasted the same ipse dixit shit again expecting it to stick to the wall. Again I've posted *NOTHING* --- no thing -- about holding whites, or any other race to any different standard at all, and the fact that you can't show it leaves your point exploded on its launchpad.

Yeah, I never said you SAID it, you moron, I pointed out that that is what your ACTIONS were DOING. How many times you going to pretend to be too stupid to understand words?

AH, so it's not anything I posted, it's your mindreading abilities that look across the internets to see what I'm actually DOING.

Isn't that special.

You're a fucking FRAUD.

 

[Pogo]

It quite

There were Republicans in southern states too.
They supported Jim Crow

It is a southern thing

Until suddenly, it wasn't. The ground was shifting under the facade of control for a long time, and went they dem racists lost power, it was swept away and was gone.

It was all part of the south’s “peculiar institution”
That institution not only dictated that blacks were inferior but they were somehow dirty and were not allowed to eat, sleep, use restrooms, swim, watch movies or sit next to whites. They even had separate libraries because white southerners would not read a book that a black person had red.

Those beliefs had existed for centuries and had nothing to do with the Democratic Party

And then as racism lost power and sway, the Republican Party which had been locked out of the South for so long, grew and grew and grew, until the Democratic Party gave up the fight.

Then suddenly the dems johnny come latelies had to talk louder and crazier to try to give the appearance of really caring about a policy that they embraced generations late.

An act they keep up to this very day, making a fuss over statues in the park, while the republican President is racking up new records in low black unemployment.

I look forward to your next post, whining about how bad your party was, back before either of us were born, and how that means that today, you guys are great.

"Locked out"?

When the fuck was the Republican Party "locked out"?

This oughta be good.

The dems , with their alliance with racists, managed to get a lock on the South, post Civil War.

It is not credible that you do not know that.

How did those Southern Republicans in the box counting the votes for CRA 1964 get there if they were "locked out"?

I knew this would be good. I love to watch pretzels make themselves.

 

[Correll]

Yes, some resistance. you want to try to post some more emotion triggering words and pictures to pretend that that refutes my point? (demagoguery)

The dems flipped on the issue because they were losing elections on the issue. Once they flipped on it, the racists lost any voice or representation in national policy from then forward. (at least the white anti-black racists)

You libs like to point to your former allies as representative of America, at least of that time.

Yet, they were being violent, because they had LOST, the policy battle, because the nation as a whole, was giving democratic support to the Republican led Equality Consensus.

That is my point. Would you like to address it, or would you like to just smear America some more, and pretend that is some how challenging my point, when it is not?

I'll address it, if I can get past the orgy of endless and pointless self-inflating carriage returns.........

The "dems [sic]" didn't "flip" on the issue unless you're referring to what other wanker posters insist on referring to as the "party switch", that period of the turn of the 19th/20th century when the two party largely and gradually traded (rather than "switched") their constituencies, That's when the Southern faction, already the redheaded stepchild in the party, began to lose its grip. That crack in effect began in 1936 when FDR, at the height of his power and influence, got the party convention rules changed for Presidential nomination from a two-thirds majority to a simple 51% majority. Under the previous rules the South was able to hold the convention hostage --- as it infamously did in 1924 --- in resisting liberal civil rights-friendly candidates, by denying that two-thirds threshold.

The Ku Klux Klan was doing its part too, a few years earlier in 1928 when it endorsed Herbert Hoover and ran a national smear campaign against Al Smith (because he was a Catholic), as seen here:

Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas going from blue to red, and Alabama weak. The VP on the ticket was from Arkansas or it might have been worse for them. No doubt Roosevelt could smell the blood in the water.

In the first election year after WW2 had run its course, that Southern contingent, in an echo of 1860 Charleston, walked out of the convention upon hearing too much about "civil rights" from the incumbent Truman and the young mayor of Minneapolis Hubert Humphrey, and went to run their own campaign, even getting Truman kicked off the Democratic ballot where they could (in return Thurmond was kicked off his ballot when he then tried to run for Senator, ran as a write-in with no party, and won anyway).

1920s... 1930s... 1940s,

So those seeds were sown decades before the 1960s, during which time the South had been hanging on as the way-out right wing of the party, opposed to the thrust of the national party but loathe to join the "party of Lincoln", until the same renegade from 1948, Thurmond, took the plunge in 1964 So this is not a party "flipping' --- it's a batshit wing of a party flipping upon facing the reality that they'd been sitting in the wrong room and it was not going to get them anywhere.

Summa y'all still have yet to grok the distinction between ideologies and political parties.

That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

Again --- the numbers prove you wrong. See post 1279.

​

I make a comment about the broad trends of the nation and the parties over time and you post the vote count from a single bill, without context or even stated reasons as though that refutes it?


Consider your silliness noted and dismissed.


My point stands.


That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

NO Twaddles, you made an absolute statement. I would have re-quoted it here but you just did it for me directly above. And I showed you where ZERO Southern Republicans voted for CRA 1964, zero being fewer than the six Democrats who voted for it.

So you're wrong, and you can't face it. Which is par for this coarse. You've carried the same inability throughout this pointless exercise.

Oh, sorry, I couldn't event tell what you were trying to say with that.


Southern Republicans, of that time, were a tiny faction of the party. They certainly did not define the party. I'm not sure what the story was with them and their relationship with the larger national party, but the Party, as a whole, was solidly behind the bill and was in favor of civil rights before, during and after that vote,


YOur attempt to focus on one small faction of the Party and ignore what the vast majority were doing and what the stated party platform was,


is stupid.

 

[Correll]

I pointed out when you did in this thread, again and again. If you managed to not see when I did it then, what point is there in you requesting me to show you again?

Oh, is this more of those weird troll games you've been playing?

Whatever. I don't care about your games.

THe point remains.

When you hold that one race is inferior to another, such as not deserving the same treatment as all other races, and groups,

then you are racist against that group.

As you have demonstrated by holding Whites to a higher standard, then any other group.

You are a racist.

So you have nothing.

What a surprise.

Yawn.

I pointed out when you did in this thread, again and again. If you managed to not see when I did it then, what point is there in you requesting me to show you again?Oh, is this more of those weird troll games you've been playing?Whatever. I don't care about your games.THe point remains.When you hold that one race is inferior to another, such as not deserving the same treatment as all other races, and groups,then you are racist against that group.As you have demonstrated by holding Whites to a higher standard, then [sic] any other group.You are a racist.

Nnnnno Tweedles, you cut and pasted the same ipse dixit shit again expecting it to stick to the wall. Again I've posted *NOTHING* --- no thing -- about holding whites, or any other race to any different standard at all, and the fact that you can't show it leaves your point exploded on its launchpad.

Yeah, I never said you SAID it, you moron, I pointed out that that is what your ACTIONS were DOING. How many times you going to pretend to be too stupid to understand words?

AH, so it's not anything I posted, it's your mindreading abilities that look across the internets to see what I'm actually DOING.

Isn't that special.

You're a fucking FRAUD.

Your pretense of confusion, about my clear posts, is not credible.


You keep demanding that I post quotes of you saying something, when I clearly made the point that your actions were do DOING something.


That you pretend my judging your actions, is me claiming mind reading, is you just being a liar.

 

[Pogo]

So you have nothing.

What a surprise.

Yawn.

I pointed out when you did in this thread, again and again. If you managed to not see when I did it then, what point is there in you requesting me to show you again?Oh, is this more of those weird troll games you've been playing?Whatever. I don't care about your games.THe point remains.When you hold that one race is inferior to another, such as not deserving the same treatment as all other races, and groups,then you are racist against that group.As you have demonstrated by holding Whites to a higher standard, then [sic] any other group.You are a racist.

Nnnnno Tweedles, you cut and pasted the same ipse dixit shit again expecting it to stick to the wall. Again I've posted *NOTHING* --- no thing -- about holding whites, or any other race to any different standard at all, and the fact that you can't show it leaves your point exploded on its launchpad.

Yeah, I never said you SAID it, you moron, I pointed out that that is what your ACTIONS were DOING. How many times you going to pretend to be too stupid to understand words?

AH, so it's not anything I posted, it's your mindreading abilities that look across the internets to see what I'm actually DOING.

Isn't that special.

You're a fucking FRAUD.

Your pretense of confusion, about my clear posts, is not credible.


You keep demanding that I post quotes of you saying something, when I clearly made the point that your actions were do DOING something.


That you pretend my judging your actions, is me claiming mind reading, is you just being a liar.

You have no way to know what the fuck my actions are. All you have is words, and you CAN'T FIND any that constitute what you'd like to claim. And having failed THAT, you persist in the claim DESPITE having by your own admission NO EVIDENCE. And that makes you a liar. FUCK outta here.

 

[Correll]

Until suddenly, it wasn't. The ground was shifting under the facade of control for a long time, and went they dem racists lost power, it was swept away and was gone.

It was all part of the south’s “peculiar institution”
That institution not only dictated that blacks were inferior but they were somehow dirty and were not allowed to eat, sleep, use restrooms, swim, watch movies or sit next to whites. They even had separate libraries because white southerners would not read a book that a black person had red.

Those beliefs had existed for centuries and had nothing to do with the Democratic Party

And then as racism lost power and sway, the Republican Party which had been locked out of the South for so long, grew and grew and grew, until the Democratic Party gave up the fight.

Then suddenly the dems johnny come latelies had to talk louder and crazier to try to give the appearance of really caring about a policy that they embraced generations late.

An act they keep up to this very day, making a fuss over statues in the park, while the republican President is racking up new records in low black unemployment.

I look forward to your next post, whining about how bad your party was, back before either of us were born, and how that means that today, you guys are great.

"Locked out"?

When the fuck was the Republican Party "locked out"?

This oughta be good.

The dems , with their alliance with racists, managed to get a lock on the South, post Civil War.

It is not credible that you do not know that.

How did those Southern Republicans in the box counting the votes for CRA 1964 get there if they were "locked out"?

I knew this would be good. I love to watch pretzels make themselves.

Not sure. I'm sure it each one of the few that managed to break though, was an epic battle or story in it's own right.


Why do you ask?


Oh, wait, you trying to focus on the few republicans that managed to get elected as though that proves something?


LOL!!!

 

[Pogo]

It was all part of the south’s “peculiar institution”
That institution not only dictated that blacks were inferior but they were somehow dirty and were not allowed to eat, sleep, use restrooms, swim, watch movies or sit next to whites. They even had separate libraries because white southerners would not read a book that a black person had red.

Those beliefs had existed for centuries and had nothing to do with the Democratic Party

And then as racism lost power and sway, the Republican Party which had been locked out of the South for so long, grew and grew and grew, until the Democratic Party gave up the fight.

Then suddenly the dems johnny come latelies had to talk louder and crazier to try to give the appearance of really caring about a policy that they embraced generations late.

An act they keep up to this very day, making a fuss over statues in the park, while the republican President is racking up new records in low black unemployment.

I look forward to your next post, whining about how bad your party was, back before either of us were born, and how that means that today, you guys are great.

"Locked out"?

When the fuck was the Republican Party "locked out"?

This oughta be good.

The dems , with their alliance with racists, managed to get a lock on the South, post Civil War.

It is not credible that you do not know that.

How did those Southern Republicans in the box counting the votes for CRA 1964 get there if they were "locked out"?
I knew this would be good. I love to watch pretzels make themselves.

Not sure. I'm sure it each one of the few that managed to break though, was an epic battle or story in it's own right.
Why do you ask?
Oh, wait, you trying to focus on the few republicans that managed to get elected as though that proves something?

LOL!!!

Proves they weren't "locked out", doesn't it.

 

[Correll]

I pointed out when you did in this thread, again and again. If you managed to not see when I did it then, what point is there in you requesting me to show you again?Oh, is this more of those weird troll games you've been playing?Whatever. I don't care about your games.THe point remains.When you hold that one race is inferior to another, such as not deserving the same treatment as all other races, and groups,then you are racist against that group.As you have demonstrated by holding Whites to a higher standard, then [sic] any other group.You are a racist.

Nnnnno Tweedles, you cut and pasted the same ipse dixit shit again expecting it to stick to the wall. Again I've posted *NOTHING* --- no thing -- about holding whites, or any other race to any different standard at all, and the fact that you can't show it leaves your point exploded on its launchpad.

Yeah, I never said you SAID it, you moron, I pointed out that that is what your ACTIONS were DOING. How many times you going to pretend to be too stupid to understand words?

AH, so it's not anything I posted, it's your mindreading abilities that look across the internets to see what I'm actually DOING.

Isn't that special.

You're a fucking FRAUD.

Your pretense of confusion, about my clear posts, is not credible.


You keep demanding that I post quotes of you saying something, when I clearly made the point that your actions were do DOING something.


That you pretend my judging your actions, is me claiming mind reading, is you just being a liar.

You have no way to know what the fuck my actions are. All you have is words, and you CAN'T FIND any that constitute what you'd like to claim. And having failed THAT, you persist in the claim DESPITE having by your own admission NO EVIDENCE. And that makes you a liar. FUCK outta here.

Your actions you've done on this site as you judge one group, by a standard that you apply to no other group.


I was clear about that, and your pretense of not understanding that, is not credible.


It is obvious to both of us, that you know I am right, and that you are upset that you have been exposed as a hypocritical racist.


While all I want, if for southern whites to just have their right to celebrate their heritage respected with the same generosity of spirit that everyone else gets.

 

[Correll]

And then as racism lost power and sway, the Republican Party which had been locked out of the South for so long, grew and grew and grew, until the Democratic Party gave up the fight.

Then suddenly the dems johnny come latelies had to talk louder and crazier to try to give the appearance of really caring about a policy that they embraced generations late.

An act they keep up to this very day, making a fuss over statues in the park, while the republican President is racking up new records in low black unemployment.

I look forward to your next post, whining about how bad your party was, back before either of us were born, and how that means that today, you guys are great.

"Locked out"?

When the fuck was the Republican Party "locked out"?

This oughta be good.

The dems , with their alliance with racists, managed to get a lock on the South, post Civil War.

It is not credible that you do not know that.

How did those Southern Republicans in the box counting the votes for CRA 1964 get there if they were "locked out"?
I knew this would be good. I love to watch pretzels make themselves.

Not sure. I'm sure it each one of the few that managed to break though, was an epic battle or story in it's own right.
Why do you ask?
Oh, wait, you trying to focus on the few republicans that managed to get elected as though that proves something?

LOL!!!

Proves they weren't "locked out", doesn't it.

YOu really want to argue some semantics? It is just another way for me to crush you. I will do it. And as you get more and more pissy about it, I will not be gentle.


How about this instead.


You admit that I have raised a good point. That all heroes and heritages are flawed and mixed, and that you now realize that you should extend to the white southerns the same generosity of spirit that you extend to every other cultural that you do not share, but still tolerate.


That, or I crush you like a bug. YOur choice.

 

[bodecea]

Have Republicans ever opposed the use of nuclear weapons or the internment of Japanese?

For the sake of this discussion only lets say they haven't...do you realize that still means that the left is the only ones to intern American citizens and use nuclear weapons on their fellow man?

Once AGAIN stoopid --- political parties do not wield weapons or run wars.

Holy SHIT you're a moron.

They did in in Civil War.

Nope...the South seceded and dropped any political parties.....just like in the 1960s on, they gave up on their political parties in order to keep their racism. It was more important to them.

They "dropped" political parties for how long? And when war was done, what did South do? They re-established Democratic party just like before the war. But it didn't stop there, they were waiting for 12 years until Union Army, that was enforcing 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendment left, to continue with their racist practices, and that's where Jim Crow laws were established... by the same Democrats who seceded from US to create CSA.

They dropped political parties until they got their asses beat. Then they, for the most part, became Democrats because they demonized the Republicans for kicking their asses.

 

[bodecea]

View attachment 308116

Except they weren't built by slaves....

 

[bodecea]

Very true

And the left realizes it was wrong.
It is the right who still demonize immigrants and fight against nuclear disarmament

Japanese Americans were not just immigrants, they were citizens.

When exactly Democrats apologized to them for internment camps?

When they were given reparations.

Who signed that law?

Ronald Reagan and if we are using that analogy, who signed the CRA and the VRA?

That's exactly what I was aiming at. When you look who voted against CRA, how can you take a credit for Johnson signing it, when even he was against CRA for decades? Democrats like to take credit for things they haven't done, and blame others for things they've done.

If you can give credit to Johnson for signing CRA, then at least you should give credit to Reagan for signing CLA of 1988.

While we're at it, maybe we should give credits to Democrats for voting, signing and enforcing segregation, Jim Crow laws, Lynching laws... you know, give credits when credits are due.

How many of those Democrats who signed Jim Crow laws are alive today? Can you list them, please?

 

[Ame®icano]

I'll address it, if I can get past the orgy of endless and pointless self-inflating carriage returns.........

The "dems [sic]" didn't "flip" on the issue unless you're referring to what other wanker posters insist on referring to as the "party switch", that period of the turn of the 19th/20th century when the two party largely and gradually traded (rather than "switched") their constituencies, That's when the Southern faction, already the redheaded stepchild in the party, began to lose its grip. That crack in effect began in 1936 when FDR, at the height of his power and influence, got the party convention rules changed for Presidential nomination from a two-thirds majority to a simple 51% majority. Under the previous rules the South was able to hold the convention hostage --- as it infamously did in 1924 --- in resisting liberal civil rights-friendly candidates, by denying that two-thirds threshold.

The Ku Klux Klan was doing its part too, a few years earlier in 1928 when it endorsed Herbert Hoover and ran a national smear campaign against Al Smith (because he was a Catholic), as seen here:

Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas going from blue to red, and Alabama weak. The VP on the ticket was from Arkansas or it might have been worse for them. No doubt Roosevelt could smell the blood in the water.

In the first election year after WW2 had run its course, that Southern contingent, in an echo of 1860 Charleston, walked out of the convention upon hearing too much about "civil rights" from the incumbent Truman and the young mayor of Minneapolis Hubert Humphrey, and went to run their own campaign, even getting Truman kicked off the Democratic ballot where they could (in return Thurmond was kicked off his ballot when he then tried to run for Senator, ran as a write-in with no party, and won anyway).

1920s... 1930s... 1940s,

So those seeds were sown decades before the 1960s, during which time the South had been hanging on as the way-out right wing of the party, opposed to the thrust of the national party but loathe to join the "party of Lincoln", until the same renegade from 1948, Thurmond, took the plunge in 1964 So this is not a party "flipping' --- it's a batshit wing of a party flipping upon facing the reality that they'd been sitting in the wrong room and it was not going to get them anywhere.

Summa y'all still have yet to grok the distinction between ideologies and political parties.

That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

Again --- the numbers prove you wrong. See post 1279.

​

I make a comment about the broad trends of the nation and the parties over time and you post the vote count from a single bill, without context or even stated reasons as though that refutes it?


Consider your silliness noted and dismissed.


My point stands.


That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

NO Twaddles, you made an absolute statement. I would have re-quoted it here but you just did it for me directly above. And I showed you where ZERO Southern Republicans voted for CRA 1964, zero being fewer than the six Democrats who voted for it.

So you're wrong, and you can't face it. Which is par for this coarse. You've carried the same inability throughout this pointless exercise.

Oh, sorry, I couldn't event tell what you were trying to say with that.


Southern Republicans, of that time, were a tiny faction of the party. They certainly did not define the party. I'm not sure what the story was with them and their relationship with the larger national party, but the Party, as a whole, was solidly behind the bill and was in favor of civil rights before, during and after that vote,


YOur attempt to focus on one small faction of the Party and ignore what the vast majority were doing and what the stated party platform was,


is stupid.

You notice how lefties always claim how Democrats of the past are not the same Democrats of today. Party of slavery, KKK, segregation, lynching, Jim Crow laws, party of opposition to civil rights, somehow they evolved, changed, switched, they are the good guys, but for some reason always kept the same name.

On the other hand... Republicans, who were since the establishment of the party always supporting civil rights and party that opposed everything that Democrat stand for in the past are in minds of leftists always somehow bad guys, conservative Southerners incapable of change and acceptance.

 

[Ame®icano]

Japanese Americans were not just immigrants, they were citizens.

When exactly Democrats apologized to them for internment camps?

When they were given reparations.

Who signed that law?

Ronald Reagan and if we are using that analogy, who signed the CRA and the VRA?

That's exactly what I was aiming at. When you look who voted against CRA, how can you take a credit for Johnson signing it, when even he was against CRA for decades? Democrats like to take credit for things they haven't done, and blame others for things they've done.

If you can give credit to Johnson for signing CRA, then at least you should give credit to Reagan for signing CLA of 1988.

While we're at it, maybe we should give credits to Democrats for voting, signing and enforcing segregation, Jim Crow laws, Lynching laws... you know, give credits when credits are due.

How many of those Democrats who signed Jim Crow laws are alive today? Can you list them, please?

I don't think any of them is alive today. So, if they're all dead, everything is forgotten? Not so fast, road runner.

I got better question... how many of those Democrats who signed Jim Crow, and lynching laws were kicked out of the party that claims it stands for civil rights? Can you list them, please?

 

[bodecea]

The CRA act would not have passed without LBJ

I doubt if JFK could have gotten as strong a bill

The nation as as a whole was moving that way, long led by the Republicans.


Without the dems flipping, we would still have continued moving this way, you dems would just have become less and less relevant.



As you should have.

Moving that way?
The attempt towards integration was met with terrorist attacks in the south

Correct. You do realize that what you said, does not conflict with what I said, right?

That is the complete opposite of your ridiculous claim that the nation was moving towards integration.......It wasn’t

If it was, returning black soldiers would have been treated as heroes instead of second class citizens

That the nation as a whole was moving towards more and more civil rights and equality for blacks, which is my position, is not refuted by the existence of some resistance, ie what you posted.


You are acting like you think it did.


I mean, am I being mean to you? Is there a reason that you are not up to normal functioning today? If so, let me know and I will make allowances.

That's why Wilson banned blacks from the Civil Service when they used to serve? Because the nation as a whole was moving towards more and more civil rights?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

Again --- the numbers prove you wrong. See post 1279.

​

I make a comment about the broad trends of the nation and the parties over time and you post the vote count from a single bill, without context or even stated reasons as though that refutes it?


Consider your silliness noted and dismissed.


My point stands.


That would be interesting historical detail on the process, if you had not so torpedoed your credibility that I can't trust anything you say.


Also, the republican [sic] party never wavered in it's [sic] support of equality and civil rights. The southern voters that more and more voted Republican were always the pro-civil rights voters of the South, until long after the issue had become politically moot.

NO Twaddles, you made an absolute statement. I would have re-quoted it here but you just did it for me directly above. And I showed you where ZERO Southern Republicans voted for CRA 1964, zero being fewer than the six Democrats who voted for it.

So you're wrong, and you can't face it. Which is par for this coarse. You've carried the same inability throughout this pointless exercise.

Oh, sorry, I couldn't event tell what you were trying to say with that.


Southern Republicans, of that time, were a tiny faction of the party. They certainly did not define the party. I'm not sure what the story was with them and their relationship with the larger national party, but the Party, as a whole, was solidly behind the bill and was in favor of civil rights before, during and after that vote,


YOur attempt to focus on one small faction of the Party and ignore what the vast majority were doing and what the stated party platform was,


is stupid.

You notice how lefties always claim how Democrats of the past are not the same Democrats of today. Party of slavery, KKK, segregation, lynching, Jim Crow laws, party of opposition to civil rights, somehow they evolved, changed, switched, they are the good guys, but for some reason always kept the same name.

On the other hand... Republicans, who were since the establishment of the party always supporting civil rights and party that opposed everything that Democrat stand for in the past are in minds of leftists always somehow bad guys, conservative Southerners incapable of change and acceptance.

You notice how the right wing loves to try and take credit for Civil Rights legislation, but today they are the party that is anti-minority.

Also it is the right wing who want to honor and defend the very Democrats that they claim were racist.