Why should blacks become republicans?

[rightwinger]

Because that's what the courts are calling them.

So why are the courts calling it voter suppression?

Read the link.

I did and I still don't get it. There were parts I found unnecessary such as nullifying the votes of those who voted at the wrong polling station and barring registration on election day but overall, I don't see the problem.

If they imposed this law only on minorities then I would be right there with them yelling "Discrimination!" But the law applies to everybody so I don't agree with their assessment that it is discriminatory or an attempt at voter suppression. The law was aimed at reducing voter fraud.

The federal appeals COURT made the decision.

I understand the Federal Appeals COURT made the decision, I just don't agree with it.

And based the evidence they saw, the law was not aimed at reducing voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

Of course there's voter fraud. There are documented cases of voter fraud across the country, including 15 cases in North Carolina between 1986 and 2017.

If the measures in the law were implemented then it would have reduced the chances of voter fraud. They just chose to interpret it as voter suppression. Problem is, there's nothing in the law that would suppress minority voting.

Whether or not voter fraud is as pervasive as some claim, one fraudulent vote is one too many. We've been told since grade school that the right to vote is sacrosanct, that each vote is important and each American's patriotic duty. "One man, one vote" has been the rallying cry for those fighting for voting rights here and in South Africa and is a principle upon which the government redistricts areas to make voter representation more fair, i.e., to make each vote count.

If each vote truly does count as we've been told then, as I said, one fraudulent vote is one too many. If we were to compromise that principle for the convenience of a few, we might as well quit lecturing on the importance of exercising that right.

The concern is that you chase away more legitimate voters than you prevent illegal voters

It is a trade off not worth making

 

[rightwinger]

Without delving too deep into the similarities and differences, the most glaring difference is the stance on immigration. The KKK wants to ban immigration from non-white countries whereas the Republican stance is simply to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

Read that and compare to TODAYS Republican rhetoric and policy

Remember “shithole countries”?
US Army on the borders?
Trump asking why we don’t get more immigrants from Norway?

You didn't say "rhetoric" in your original post on the topic. I believe the word you used was "platform". Whatever extreme ideas some individual Republicans may have on the matter, it is not Republican policy or the Republican platform to bar immigration from non-white countries.

As for the troops on the border, I believe that is in response to the migrant caravan supposedly headed to our border.

As for the "shithole" countries remark, that was a stupid thing to say and is indefensible. I will say though that I've worked with former military a lot over the years and a couple of them were deployed to Haiti at one time or another and the general consensus among soldiers deployed there is that it is a shithole country. I don't say that to excuse the remark but when he said it, people conflated it to be racist. If I was to tell you right now that Haiti is a shithole country, it would be because of the poverty and political corruption, not because they're black.

Yes, Republicans do clean up their language better than the KKK. But their premise is the same, their enemies are the same, their policies aren’t that different
Look at the Klan position on the media. Same as Republican rhetoric except they blame the Jews. Republicans know better but their base does not disagree
Look what the klan says about “Special Priveleges” for homosexuals. Same words Republicans say today

I'm afraid I have to somewhat agree on things like the media. Unlike the KKK and what some Republicans may say on the matter, I will only go as far as to say that I think - as a lot of conservatives do - that there is a liberal bias in the media. And Republicans not disagreeing does not mean they agree. People tend to forget that the only ones they hear from are the most vocal and loudest ones. This forum is a perfect example. Most of the people I know are conservatives but none of them are as vocal or share the same ideas you see spouted here. And most of them have neither the time nor the inclination to make the effort to be heard on a forum or otherwise. The loud ones only represent a fraction of the overall group.

As for rights for homosexuals, this is where the Republican party and I diverge. I'm entirely in favor of gay rights, including marriage and adoption. Most people approach social and political issues from a standpoint of should/should not. My standpoint on gay rights is why/why not. While some may have religious reservations about it, I don't. So why not let them marry? There's no practical reason not to. And if allowing gays to adopt gets one kid out of the foster system and into a loving home, why not?

Practical reason to outlaw homosexual marriage?

Let's go back to race. As an employer, it would not be my job to guarantee a job to any specific individual. Yet the government mandates that I "give" jobs to the individuals they approve of. If hire too many whites, it's a problem. If you give a job to someone who doesn't have a Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "Social Security Number," it's a problem. WTH???

Republicans have long held that you should never be taxed on what you make, yet they join the silly chorus that only "legal" Americans should have Rights in this country. Really? Why? If we stand by Republican principles, you run a nation by taxing consumption, not by what the individual produces. But, both sides don't like those who forego paying the income tax.

What does paying an income tax do? It finances that half of America that is dependent upon a government check for a living. So, gays, being unable to repopulate our nation are impractical as citizens with the Rights and privileges of those who must keep reproducing to keep the country going.

The alternative is give this country to the Muslims and let them stone the gays to death. Now, maybe in a Republic, if we follow the law, the gays might not get to marry, adopt kids, etc. but they can practice their behavior at their own expense.

Without delving too deep into the similarities and differences, the most glaring difference is the stance on immigration. The KKK wants to ban immigration from non-white countries whereas the Republican stance is simply to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

Read that and compare to TODAYS Republican rhetoric and policy

Remember “shithole countries”?
US Army on the borders?
Trump asking why we don’t get more immigrants from Norway?

You didn't say "rhetoric" in your original post on the topic. I believe the word you used was "platform". Whatever extreme ideas some individual Republicans may have on the matter, it is not Republican policy or the Republican platform to bar immigration from non-white countries.

As for the troops on the border, I believe that is in response to the migrant caravan supposedly headed to our border.

As for the "shithole" countries remark, that was a stupid thing to say and is indefensible. I will say though that I've worked with former military a lot over the years and a couple of them were deployed to Haiti at one time or another and the general consensus among soldiers deployed there is that it is a shithole country. I don't say that to excuse the remark but when he said it, people conflated it to be racist. If I was to tell you right now that Haiti is a shithole country, it would be because of the poverty and political corruption, not because they're black.

Yes, Republicans do clean up their language better than the KKK. But their premise is the same, their enemies are the same, their policies aren’t that different
Look at the Klan position on the media. Same as Republican rhetoric except they blame the Jews. Republicans know better but their base does not disagree
Look what the klan says about “Special Priveleges” for homosexuals. Same words Republicans say today

I'm afraid I have to somewhat agree on things like the media. Unlike the KKK and what some Republicans may say on the matter, I will only go as far as to say that I think - as a lot of conservatives do - that there is a liberal bias in the media. And Republicans not disagreeing does not mean they agree. People tend to forget that the only ones they hear from are the most vocal and loudest ones. This forum is a perfect example. Most of the people I know are conservatives but none of them are as vocal or share the same ideas you see spouted here. And most of them have neither the time nor the inclination to make the effort to be heard on a forum or otherwise. The loud ones only represent a fraction of the overall group.

As for rights for homosexuals, this is where the Republican party and I diverge. I'm entirely in favor of gay rights, including marriage and adoption. Most people approach social and political issues from a standpoint of should/should not. My standpoint on gay rights is why/why not. While some may have religious reservations about it, I don't. So why not let them marry? There's no practical reason not to. And if allowing gays to adopt gets one kid out of the foster system and into a loving home, why not?

Practical reason to outlaw homosexual marriage?

Let's go back to race. As an employer, it would not be my job to guarantee a job to any specific individual. Yet the government mandates that I "give" jobs to the individuals they approve of. If hire too many whites, it's a problem. If you give a job to someone who doesn't have a Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "Social Security Number," it's a problem. WTH???

Republicans have long held that you should never be taxed on what you make, yet they join the silly chorus that only "legal" Americans should have Rights in this country. Really? Why? If we stand by Republican principles, you run a nation by taxing consumption, not by what the individual produces. But, both sides don't like those who forego paying the income tax.

What does paying an income tax do? It finances that half of America that is dependent upon a government check for a living. So, gays, being unable to repopulate our nation are impractical as citizens with the Rights and privileges of those who must keep reproducing to keep the country going.

The alternative is give this country to the Muslims and let them stone the gays to death. Now, maybe in a Republic, if we follow the law, the gays might not get to marry, adopt kids, etc. but they can practice their behavior at their own expense.

The inability to procreate is the reason you deny gay marriage?

Gays cannot procreate whether they are married or not. Allowing gay marriage will not reduce the number of children. It will increase adoptions and births through artificial inseminations....so there is a net gain for society

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

What is different from today’s GOP platform on immigration, education, abortion, gun control, America first, the media, homosexuality

Platform of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan
http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/mino/kkk/kkk.htm

Without delving too deep into the similarities and differences, the most glaring difference is the stance on immigration. The KKK wants to ban immigration from non-white countries whereas the Republican stance is simply to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

Read that and compare to TODAYS Republican rhetoric and policy

Remember “shithole countries”?
US Army on the borders?
Trump asking why we don’t get more immigrants from Norway?

You didn't say "rhetoric" in your original post on the topic. I believe the word you used was "platform". Whatever extreme ideas some individual Republicans may have on the matter, it is not Republican policy or the Republican platform to bar immigration from non-white countries.

As for the troops on the border, I believe that is in response to the migrant caravan supposedly headed to our border.

As for the "shithole" countries remark, that was a stupid thing to say and is indefensible. I will say though that I've worked with former military a lot over the years and a couple of them were deployed to Haiti at one time or another and the general consensus among soldiers deployed there is that it is a shithole country. I don't say that to excuse the remark but when he said it, people conflated it to be racist. If I was to tell you right now that Haiti is a shithole country, it would be because of the poverty and political corruption, not because they're black.

Yes, Republicans do clean up their language better than the KKK. But their premise is the same, their enemies are the same, their policies aren’t that different
Look at the Klan position on the media. Same as Republican rhetoric except they blame the Jews. Republicans know better but their base does not disagree
Look what the klan says about “Special Priveleges” for homosexuals. Same words Republicans say today

Under Trump the true racist has learned how to say "illegal alien" (ignoring the concept of a presumption of innocence) instead of mud people, spics, sand N word, beaner, etc.

An immigrant who is here illegally is by definition, an illegal immigrant. It's basic immigration law that every country on this planet shares.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You're familiar with the KKK agenda? Been at a few meetings lately?

Since you're so familiar with both, post a few comparisons for our amusement.

In the meantime we'll continue to note your contempt for black people.

What is different from today’s GOP platform on immigration, education, abortion, gun control, America first, the media, homosexuality

Platform of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan
http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/mino/kkk/kkk.htm

Without delving too deep into the similarities and differences, the most glaring difference is the stance on immigration. The KKK wants to ban immigration from non-white countries whereas the Republican stance is simply to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

January 11th 2018:
"President Trump on Thursday balked at an immigration deal that would include protections for people from Haiti and some nations in Africa, demanding to know at a White House meeting why he should accept immigrants from “shithole countries” rather than from places like Norway, according to people with direct knowledge of the conversation."

The above sounds VERY similar to the Klans stance on immigration, in fact, it is even more emphatic than how the Klan phrased it.

What Trump said is irrelevant. These ideas do not conform to the Republican platform on immigration.

Trump is A REPUBLICAN and he is POTUS.His ideas absolutely do "conform" to those of his party, and are totally relevant

No, they do not and they are not. As a Republican who has conversed with may other Republicans on the matter of immigration, I can tell you most assuredly that the conservative position on immigration is merely to stop illegal immigration. I personally will not be held responsible for any stupid comments made by Trump or the KKK or any racists.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

So why are the courts calling it voter suppression?

Read the link.

I did and I still don't get it. There were parts I found unnecessary such as nullifying the votes of those who voted at the wrong polling station and barring registration on election day but overall, I don't see the problem.

If they imposed this law only on minorities then I would be right there with them yelling "Discrimination!" But the law applies to everybody so I don't agree with their assessment that it is discriminatory or an attempt at voter suppression. The law was aimed at reducing voter fraud.

The federal appeals COURT made the decision.

I understand the Federal Appeals COURT made the decision, I just don't agree with it.

And based the evidence they saw, the law was not aimed at reducing voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

Of course there's voter fraud. There are documented cases of voter fraud across the country, including 15 cases in North Carolina between 1986 and 2017.

If the measures in the law were implemented then it would have reduced the chances of voter fraud. They just chose to interpret it as voter suppression. Problem is, there's nothing in the law that would suppress minority voting.

Whether or not voter fraud is as pervasive as some claim, one fraudulent vote is one too many. We've been told since grade school that the right to vote is sacrosanct, that each vote is important and each American's patriotic duty. "One man, one vote" has been the rallying cry for those fighting for voting rights here and in South Africa and is a principle upon which the government redistricts areas to make voter representation more fair, i.e., to make each vote count.

If each vote truly does count as we've been told then, as I said, one fraudulent vote is one too many. If we were to compromise that principle for the convenience of a few, we might as well quit lecturing on the importance of exercising that right.

Voting is more of a privilege than a Right. What we claim to hold so sacred, we don't protect.

I didn't say we hold it sacred, I said it was what we were taught. Besides, voting is a right. The 15th Amendment says precisely that. More specifically, it says neither the federal nor state government shall deny or abridge the right to vote based on race or color.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Without delving too deep into the similarities and differences, the most glaring difference is the stance on immigration. The KKK wants to ban immigration from non-white countries whereas the Republican stance is simply to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

Read that and compare to TODAYS Republican rhetoric and policy

Remember “shithole countries”?
US Army on the borders?
Trump asking why we don’t get more immigrants from Norway?

You didn't say "rhetoric" in your original post on the topic. I believe the word you used was "platform". Whatever extreme ideas some individual Republicans may have on the matter, it is not Republican policy or the Republican platform to bar immigration from non-white countries.

As for the troops on the border, I believe that is in response to the migrant caravan supposedly headed to our border.

As for the "shithole" countries remark, that was a stupid thing to say and is indefensible. I will say though that I've worked with former military a lot over the years and a couple of them were deployed to Haiti at one time or another and the general consensus among soldiers deployed there is that it is a shithole country. I don't say that to excuse the remark but when he said it, people conflated it to be racist. If I was to tell you right now that Haiti is a shithole country, it would be because of the poverty and political corruption, not because they're black.

Yes, Republicans do clean up their language better than the KKK. But their premise is the same, their enemies are the same, their policies aren’t that different
Look at the Klan position on the media. Same as Republican rhetoric except they blame the Jews. Republicans know better but their base does not disagree
Look what the klan says about “Special Priveleges” for homosexuals. Same words Republicans say today

I'm afraid I have to somewhat agree on things like the media. Unlike the KKK and what some Republicans may say on the matter, I will only go as far as to say that I think - as a lot of conservatives do - that there is a liberal bias in the media. And Republicans not disagreeing does not mean they agree. People tend to forget that the only ones they hear from are the most vocal and loudest ones. This forum is a perfect example. Most of the people I know are conservatives but none of them are as vocal or share the same ideas you see spouted here. And most of them have neither the time nor the inclination to make the effort to be heard on a forum or otherwise. The loud ones only represent a fraction of the overall group.

As for rights for homosexuals, this is where the Republican party and I diverge. I'm entirely in favor of gay rights, including marriage and adoption. Most people approach social and political issues from a standpoint of should/should not. My standpoint on gay rights is why/why not. While some may have religious reservations about it, I don't. So why not let them marry? There's no practical reason not to. And if allowing gays to adopt gets one kid out of the foster system and into a loving home, why not?

Practical reason to outlaw homosexual marriage?

Let's go back to race. As an employer, it would not be my job to guarantee a job to any specific individual. Yet the government mandates that I "give" jobs to the individuals they approve of. If hire too many whites, it's a problem. If you give a job to someone who doesn't have a Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "Social Security Number," it's a problem. WTH???

Republicans have long held that you should never be taxed on what you make, yet they join the silly chorus that only "legal" Americans should have Rights in this country. Really? Why? If we stand by Republican principles, you run a nation by taxing consumption, not by what the individual produces. But, both sides don't like those who forego paying the income tax.

What does paying an income tax do? It finances that half of America that is dependent upon a government check for a living. So, gays, being unable to repopulate our nation are impractical as citizens with the Rights and privileges of those who must keep reproducing to keep the country going.

If we follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion then we would have to prohibit infertile couples from marrying or staying married. For that matter, it would include lifelong bachelors or couples who simply don't wish to have children.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

So why are the courts calling it voter suppression?

Read the link.

I did and I still don't get it. There were parts I found unnecessary such as nullifying the votes of those who voted at the wrong polling station and barring registration on election day but overall, I don't see the problem.

If they imposed this law only on minorities then I would be right there with them yelling "Discrimination!" But the law applies to everybody so I don't agree with their assessment that it is discriminatory or an attempt at voter suppression. The law was aimed at reducing voter fraud.

The federal appeals COURT made the decision.

I understand the Federal Appeals COURT made the decision, I just don't agree with it.

And based the evidence they saw, the law was not aimed at reducing voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

Of course there's voter fraud. There are documented cases of voter fraud across the country, including 15 cases in North Carolina between 1986 and 2017.

If the measures in the law were implemented then it would have reduced the chances of voter fraud. They just chose to interpret it as voter suppression. Problem is, there's nothing in the law that would suppress minority voting.

Whether or not voter fraud is as pervasive as some claim, one fraudulent vote is one too many. We've been told since grade school that the right to vote is sacrosanct, that each vote is important and each American's patriotic duty. "One man, one vote" has been the rallying cry for those fighting for voting rights here and in South Africa and is a principle upon which the government redistricts areas to make voter representation more fair, i.e., to make each vote count.

If each vote truly does count as we've been told then, as I said, one fraudulent vote is one too many. If we were to compromise that principle for the convenience of a few, we might as well quit lecturing on the importance of exercising that right.

The concern is that you chase away more legitimate voters than you prevent illegal voters

It is a trade off not worth making

The obvious question becomes: Why would it chase away legitimate voters?

 

[hadit]

If blacks want to become Republicans, they might just as well join the KKK and be done with it

Wow, paternalistic contempt and telling black people how to think. Way to go.

LOL! You republicans are telling us to join your patty by talking about the democratic arty of 1860 and you aren't trying tell is how to think. LOL!

Besides RW is right.

I'm talking about RW's obvious contempt for black people.

 

[rightwinger]

Read the link.

I did and I still don't get it. There were parts I found unnecessary such as nullifying the votes of those who voted at the wrong polling station and barring registration on election day but overall, I don't see the problem.

If they imposed this law only on minorities then I would be right there with them yelling "Discrimination!" But the law applies to everybody so I don't agree with their assessment that it is discriminatory or an attempt at voter suppression. The law was aimed at reducing voter fraud.

The federal appeals COURT made the decision.

I understand the Federal Appeals COURT made the decision, I just don't agree with it.

And based the evidence they saw, the law was not aimed at reducing voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

Of course there's voter fraud. There are documented cases of voter fraud across the country, including 15 cases in North Carolina between 1986 and 2017.

If the measures in the law were implemented then it would have reduced the chances of voter fraud. They just chose to interpret it as voter suppression. Problem is, there's nothing in the law that would suppress minority voting.

Whether or not voter fraud is as pervasive as some claim, one fraudulent vote is one too many. We've been told since grade school that the right to vote is sacrosanct, that each vote is important and each American's patriotic duty. "One man, one vote" has been the rallying cry for those fighting for voting rights here and in South Africa and is a principle upon which the government redistricts areas to make voter representation more fair, i.e., to make each vote count.

If each vote truly does count as we've been told then, as I said, one fraudulent vote is one too many. If we were to compromise that principle for the convenience of a few, we might as well quit lecturing on the importance of exercising that right.

The concern is that you chase away more legitimate voters than you prevent illegal voters

It is a trade off not worth making

The obvious question becomes: Why would it chase away legitimate voters?

People who were born in this country and have been voting for years but have problems in their birth records, name changes, clerical errors in their records

 

[hadit]

KKK or Republican platform?

• CRIME: America is the most violent nation on the face of the earth. Major cities like New York, Chicago, Miami, Atlanta and Philadelphia have been all but over run by hordes of savage criminals. The liberal government papers these subhuman and attempts to disarm law-abiding citizens. The American Knights demand that our cities be liberated from these barbarians. We shall remove the killers and rapists from our streets and execute those that deserve it.
• ABORTION: Thousands of innocent children are slaughtered each day at Baby killing centers all over the country. The government has made abortion a convenient form of birth control. The American Knights will outlaw this barbaric, satanic practice and punish the sadistic doctors who are guilty of these crimes against humanity.
• GUN CONTROL: The so-called gun control bills enacted by the government are nothing but anti-self defense laws designed to disarm law abiding White citizens. The Klan will completely restore the right of all law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
• THE MEDIA: All three of our television networks are controlled by jews. Most of our daily newspapers, magazines and book publishing companies are owned by jew tycoons. The Klan will smash this jewish monopoly of our mass media. We will restore the right of free speech and open debate of political issues.
• EDUCATION: America's public schools, colleges and universities have been turned into political indoctrination centers run by deprived liberals, communist and jews in our public. WHITE teachers and students are raped and robbed by ******* and other savages on a daily basis. The Klan will remove the criminals from the classrooms and put them behind bars where they belong. Forced bussing will be outlawed. Prayer will be returned to our schools. All teachers who continue to promote anti-American doctrine will be removed and replaced by decent American patriots.
• HOMOSEXUALITY: The Klan will take away all the special rights and privileges granted to homosexuals by the liberal dictatorship over the last few years. Homosexuals will no longer be permitted to adopt children or marry each other. Gay bars, gay nightclubs, and gay bathhouses will be shut down.
• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

No resemblance to the Republican agenda. You're believing and propagating lies.

You obviously can’t read

Point out major differences between the Trump platform and the KKK platform

You posted stuff from the KKK, thus making a valid comparison impossible. You say they are the same, post from the Republican platform (not stuff Trump mutters, because that's not what you led with) for comparison. Failing that, forget it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I would like a logical explanation from one of you white republicans as to why blacks should join your party. Please do not regurgitate the lame story about the 1860 democratic party. After all, every time we blacks talk about what occurred during that time none of you were there. The history of things were not important to you in this regard, so since you weren't around in 1860 and history is not important you in other situations, it's not important now. So please explain why blacks should join the republican party.

How about letting someone a LOT smarter than you explain it?

Sonnie Johnson, Author at Breitbart

 

[usmcstinger]

During the 8 years of Obama, did the lives of Blacks in the Inner Cities get better?

 

[IM2]

I would like a logical explanation from one of you white republicans as to why blacks should join your party. Please do not regurgitate the lame story about the 1860 democratic party. After all, every time we blacks talk about what occurred during that time none of you were there. The history of things were not important to you in this regard, so since you weren't around in 1860 and history is not important you in other situations, it's not important now. So please explain why blacks should join the republican party.

How about letting someone a LOT smarter than you explain it?

Sonnie Johnson, Author at Breitbart

If he works for breitbart that's not the person to explain anything.

 

[IM2]

During the 8 years of Obama, did the lives of Blacks in the Inner Cities get better?

Actually they did.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I would like a logical explanation from one of you white republicans as to why blacks should join your party. Please do not regurgitate the lame story about the 1860 democratic party. After all, every time we blacks talk about what occurred during that time none of you were there. The history of things were not important to you in this regard, so since you weren't around in 1860 and history is not important you in other situations, it's not important now. So please explain why blacks should join the republican party.

How about letting someone a LOT smarter than you explain it?

Sonnie Johnson, Author at Breitbart

If he works for breitbart that's not the person to explain anything.

She, moron.

You are an ignorant bigot who eschews knowledge.

 

[Uncensored2008]

During the 8 years of Obama, did the lives of Blacks in the Inner Cities get better?

Actually they did.

Especially in Chicago, Orval.

You mind if I call you Orval? You are so damned similar to Orval Faubus....

 

[Humorme]

• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

Read that and compare to TODAYS Republican rhetoric and policy

Remember “shithole countries”?
US Army on the borders?
Trump asking why we don’t get more immigrants from Norway?

You didn't say "rhetoric" in your original post on the topic. I believe the word you used was "platform". Whatever extreme ideas some individual Republicans may have on the matter, it is not Republican policy or the Republican platform to bar immigration from non-white countries.

As for the troops on the border, I believe that is in response to the migrant caravan supposedly headed to our border.

As for the "shithole" countries remark, that was a stupid thing to say and is indefensible. I will say though that I've worked with former military a lot over the years and a couple of them were deployed to Haiti at one time or another and the general consensus among soldiers deployed there is that it is a shithole country. I don't say that to excuse the remark but when he said it, people conflated it to be racist. If I was to tell you right now that Haiti is a shithole country, it would be because of the poverty and political corruption, not because they're black.

Yes, Republicans do clean up their language better than the KKK. But their premise is the same, their enemies are the same, their policies aren’t that different
Look at the Klan position on the media. Same as Republican rhetoric except they blame the Jews. Republicans know better but their base does not disagree
Look what the klan says about “Special Priveleges” for homosexuals. Same words Republicans say today

I'm afraid I have to somewhat agree on things like the media. Unlike the KKK and what some Republicans may say on the matter, I will only go as far as to say that I think - as a lot of conservatives do - that there is a liberal bias in the media. And Republicans not disagreeing does not mean they agree. People tend to forget that the only ones they hear from are the most vocal and loudest ones. This forum is a perfect example. Most of the people I know are conservatives but none of them are as vocal or share the same ideas you see spouted here. And most of them have neither the time nor the inclination to make the effort to be heard on a forum or otherwise. The loud ones only represent a fraction of the overall group.

As for rights for homosexuals, this is where the Republican party and I diverge. I'm entirely in favor of gay rights, including marriage and adoption. Most people approach social and political issues from a standpoint of should/should not. My standpoint on gay rights is why/why not. While some may have religious reservations about it, I don't. So why not let them marry? There's no practical reason not to. And if allowing gays to adopt gets one kid out of the foster system and into a loving home, why not?

Practical reason to outlaw homosexual marriage?

Let's go back to race. As an employer, it would not be my job to guarantee a job to any specific individual. Yet the government mandates that I "give" jobs to the individuals they approve of. If hire too many whites, it's a problem. If you give a job to someone who doesn't have a Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "Social Security Number," it's a problem. WTH???

Republicans have long held that you should never be taxed on what you make, yet they join the silly chorus that only "legal" Americans should have Rights in this country. Really? Why? If we stand by Republican principles, you run a nation by taxing consumption, not by what the individual produces. But, both sides don't like those who forego paying the income tax.

What does paying an income tax do? It finances that half of America that is dependent upon a government check for a living. So, gays, being unable to repopulate our nation are impractical as citizens with the Rights and privileges of those who must keep reproducing to keep the country going.

The alternative is give this country to the Muslims and let them stone the gays to death. Now, maybe in a Republic, if we follow the law, the gays might not get to marry, adopt kids, etc. but they can practice their behavior at their own expense.

• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

Read that and compare to TODAYS Republican rhetoric and policy

Remember “shithole countries”?
US Army on the borders?
Trump asking why we don’t get more immigrants from Norway?

You didn't say "rhetoric" in your original post on the topic. I believe the word you used was "platform". Whatever extreme ideas some individual Republicans may have on the matter, it is not Republican policy or the Republican platform to bar immigration from non-white countries.

As for the troops on the border, I believe that is in response to the migrant caravan supposedly headed to our border.

As for the "shithole" countries remark, that was a stupid thing to say and is indefensible. I will say though that I've worked with former military a lot over the years and a couple of them were deployed to Haiti at one time or another and the general consensus among soldiers deployed there is that it is a shithole country. I don't say that to excuse the remark but when he said it, people conflated it to be racist. If I was to tell you right now that Haiti is a shithole country, it would be because of the poverty and political corruption, not because they're black.

Yes, Republicans do clean up their language better than the KKK. But their premise is the same, their enemies are the same, their policies aren’t that different
Look at the Klan position on the media. Same as Republican rhetoric except they blame the Jews. Republicans know better but their base does not disagree
Look what the klan says about “Special Priveleges” for homosexuals. Same words Republicans say today

I'm afraid I have to somewhat agree on things like the media. Unlike the KKK and what some Republicans may say on the matter, I will only go as far as to say that I think - as a lot of conservatives do - that there is a liberal bias in the media. And Republicans not disagreeing does not mean they agree. People tend to forget that the only ones they hear from are the most vocal and loudest ones. This forum is a perfect example. Most of the people I know are conservatives but none of them are as vocal or share the same ideas you see spouted here. And most of them have neither the time nor the inclination to make the effort to be heard on a forum or otherwise. The loud ones only represent a fraction of the overall group.

As for rights for homosexuals, this is where the Republican party and I diverge. I'm entirely in favor of gay rights, including marriage and adoption. Most people approach social and political issues from a standpoint of should/should not. My standpoint on gay rights is why/why not. While some may have religious reservations about it, I don't. So why not let them marry? There's no practical reason not to. And if allowing gays to adopt gets one kid out of the foster system and into a loving home, why not?

Practical reason to outlaw homosexual marriage?

Let's go back to race. As an employer, it would not be my job to guarantee a job to any specific individual. Yet the government mandates that I "give" jobs to the individuals they approve of. If hire too many whites, it's a problem. If you give a job to someone who doesn't have a Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "Social Security Number," it's a problem. WTH???

Republicans have long held that you should never be taxed on what you make, yet they join the silly chorus that only "legal" Americans should have Rights in this country. Really? Why? If we stand by Republican principles, you run a nation by taxing consumption, not by what the individual produces. But, both sides don't like those who forego paying the income tax.

What does paying an income tax do? It finances that half of America that is dependent upon a government check for a living. So, gays, being unable to repopulate our nation are impractical as citizens with the Rights and privileges of those who must keep reproducing to keep the country going.

The alternative is give this country to the Muslims and let them stone the gays to death. Now, maybe in a Republic, if we follow the law, the gays might not get to marry, adopt kids, etc. but they can practice their behavior at their own expense.

The inability to procreate is the reason you deny gay marriage?

Gays cannot procreate whether they are married or not. Allowing gay marriage will not reduce the number of children. It will increase adoptions and births through artificial inseminations....so there is a net gain for society

Yeah and the adoptions encourage non-Americans which ultimately poses a threat to culture.

 

[Humorme]

Without delving too deep into the similarities and differences, the most glaring difference is the stance on immigration. The KKK wants to ban immigration from non-white countries whereas the Republican stance is simply to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

• IMMIGRATION: Millions of Third World bandits enter our country illegally every year. The Republicans and Democrats do nothing to halt this massive invasion. America is being transformed into a new Mexico. The American Knights call for an end to this madness. We shall halt all immigration from non-White nations and use the U.S. Army to restore integrity to our borders.

Read that and compare to TODAYS Republican rhetoric and policy

Remember “shithole countries”?
US Army on the borders?
Trump asking why we don’t get more immigrants from Norway?

You didn't say "rhetoric" in your original post on the topic. I believe the word you used was "platform". Whatever extreme ideas some individual Republicans may have on the matter, it is not Republican policy or the Republican platform to bar immigration from non-white countries.

As for the troops on the border, I believe that is in response to the migrant caravan supposedly headed to our border.

As for the "shithole" countries remark, that was a stupid thing to say and is indefensible. I will say though that I've worked with former military a lot over the years and a couple of them were deployed to Haiti at one time or another and the general consensus among soldiers deployed there is that it is a shithole country. I don't say that to excuse the remark but when he said it, people conflated it to be racist. If I was to tell you right now that Haiti is a shithole country, it would be because of the poverty and political corruption, not because they're black.

Yes, Republicans do clean up their language better than the KKK. But their premise is the same, their enemies are the same, their policies aren’t that different
Look at the Klan position on the media. Same as Republican rhetoric except they blame the Jews. Republicans know better but their base does not disagree
Look what the klan says about “Special Priveleges” for homosexuals. Same words Republicans say today

Under Trump the true racist has learned how to say "illegal alien" (ignoring the concept of a presumption of innocence) instead of mud people, spics, sand N word, beaner, etc.

An immigrant who is here illegally is by definition, an illegal immigrant. It's basic immigration law that every country on this planet shares.

You cannot presume a person to be illegal. You have to prove it. Social Civics 101

 

[katsteve2012]

What is different from today’s GOP platform on immigration, education, abortion, gun control, America first, the media, homosexuality

Platform of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan
http://www.tep-online.info/laku/usa/mino/kkk/kkk.htm

Without delving too deep into the similarities and differences, the most glaring difference is the stance on immigration. The KKK wants to ban immigration from non-white countries whereas the Republican stance is simply to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

January 11th 2018:
"President Trump on Thursday balked at an immigration deal that would include protections for people from Haiti and some nations in Africa, demanding to know at a White House meeting why he should accept immigrants from “shithole countries” rather than from places like Norway, according to people with direct knowledge of the conversation."

The above sounds VERY similar to the Klans stance on immigration, in fact, it is even more emphatic than how the Klan phrased it.

What Trump said is irrelevant. These ideas do not conform to the Republican platform on immigration.

Trump is A REPUBLICAN and he is POTUS.His ideas absolutely do "conform" to those of his party, and are totally relevant

No, they do not and they are not. As a Republican who has conversed with may other Republicans on the matter of immigration, I can tell you most assuredly that the conservative position on immigration is merely to stop illegal immigration. I personally will not be held responsible for any stupid comments made by Trump or the KKK or any racists.

I don't know you, so therefore, how could I hold you responsible for anything?

I think that judging from the captive audience that Trump seems to mesmerize, there are more of those than not who agree with his "shithole country" position on immigration.

 

[Humorme]

Read the link.

I did and I still don't get it. There were parts I found unnecessary such as nullifying the votes of those who voted at the wrong polling station and barring registration on election day but overall, I don't see the problem.

If they imposed this law only on minorities then I would be right there with them yelling "Discrimination!" But the law applies to everybody so I don't agree with their assessment that it is discriminatory or an attempt at voter suppression. The law was aimed at reducing voter fraud.

The federal appeals COURT made the decision.

I understand the Federal Appeals COURT made the decision, I just don't agree with it.

And based the evidence they saw, the law was not aimed at reducing voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

Of course there's voter fraud. There are documented cases of voter fraud across the country, including 15 cases in North Carolina between 1986 and 2017.

If the measures in the law were implemented then it would have reduced the chances of voter fraud. They just chose to interpret it as voter suppression. Problem is, there's nothing in the law that would suppress minority voting.

Whether or not voter fraud is as pervasive as some claim, one fraudulent vote is one too many. We've been told since grade school that the right to vote is sacrosanct, that each vote is important and each American's patriotic duty. "One man, one vote" has been the rallying cry for those fighting for voting rights here and in South Africa and is a principle upon which the government redistricts areas to make voter representation more fair, i.e., to make each vote count.

If each vote truly does count as we've been told then, as I said, one fraudulent vote is one too many. If we were to compromise that principle for the convenience of a few, we might as well quit lecturing on the importance of exercising that right.

Voting is more of a privilege than a Right. What we claim to hold so sacred, we don't protect.

I didn't say we hold it sacred, I said it was what we were taught. Besides, voting is a right. The 15th Amendment says precisely that. More specifically, it says neither the federal nor state government shall deny or abridge the right to vote based on race or color.

The 15th Amendment presumes a Right; it does not and cannot (under a dejure interpretation of our Constitution) grant one.

U.S. Constitution is not explicit on the right to vote, Wisconsin Rep. Mark Pocan says