What Liberals Did

And you're contention that the republican party has done more for civil rights than the democratic party is pure fantasy.
Pure fantasy, huh? You must have skipped class the day it was covered.

The History of Black Voting Rights [Great read!]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1072053/posts

It's all there... read it and if you want to continue debating we will. But if you toss it aside as FANTASY, we part ways right here and now.
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
Listen, you have no idea what you are talking about. Your above quote proves just that. Do yourself a favor and hit the books, HISTORY BOOKS. And then, come back and let's debate.

You have proven time and time again you're not interested in debate. You run away every time someone slaps down one of your absurd posts. This time won't be any different. I "have no idea" what I'm talking about, is that correct? You're article above agrees with the contention that you quoted. I'll repeat, the south was solidly democratic after the Civil War, because Lincoln, a republican, stole their free labor. It wasn't until the 1960's, when the democratic party took up the mantle of civil rights that all those southern democrats became republicans. When those southern democrats invaded the republican party the liberals in the republican party switched sides, too. You have a serious gap in your understanding, Sam.
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
The History of Black Voting Rights [Great read!]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1072053/posts

Thanks for posting that. It's right in line with what I've been saying- The democratic party was full of conservative civil war left-overs for years, they weren't the majority of the democratic party, but they were a strong faction within it. When these bigoted relics started seeing the changes in the democratic party they defected to the republican party where they were able to wrestle control away from the liberals within the republican party who then defected to the democratic party. When it was obvious that the democratic party had shifted further to the left the racist and bigoted conservatives abandoned ship.

I'll repeat what I said above- That's because Jagger's right and you're wrong. The only faction of the democratic party that's ever been anti-civil rights was the Dixie-crats. They all defected to the republican party in the late sixties and are the reason the south went from democratic to republican.

If you don't want people to attack you, Sam, you should try to make amends for being a troll and stop posting troll threads.

Do you know why the south was solidly democratic after the Civil War, Sam? Because Lincoln, a republican, stole their free labor. It wasn't until the 1960's, when the democratic party took up the mantle of civil rights that all those southern democrats became republicans.
 
Liberal vs Conservative and Democrat vs Republican have changed drastically over the yrs.

Liberals did what O'Donnell said, so leave party affiliation aside.
 

Jagger69

Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
From my thread titled (Most in here can't handle the truth) a few days ago stating the Republicans did more for the Blacks in this country than anyone else. This was Jagger's comment to me...

[/B]

Jagger, actually the Republicans have been involved in the civil rights of blacks for well over 100 years. Not just the last fifty. ;)

It isn't cool to hijack a thread like this. If you want to continue to debate this, either resurrect your thread or take it private, Sam.
 
Pure fantasy, huh? You must have skipped class the day it was covered.

The History of Black Voting Rights [Great read!]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1072053/posts

It's all there... read it and if you want to continue debating we will. But if you toss it aside as FANTASY, we part ways right here and now.

by David Barton? REALLY! This guy is a Republican-Conservative-Revisionist Wet Dream!

David Barton (born 1954) is an American evangelical Christian minister, conservative activist, and author. He founded WallBuilders, a Texas-based organization with a goal of exposing the claimed US constitutional separation of church and state as a myth. Barton is the former co-chair of the Republican Party of Texas.

Barton collects early American documents, and his official biography describes him as "an expert in historical and constitutional issues". Barton holds no formal credentials in history or law, and critics dispute the accuracy and integrity of his assertions about history, accusing him of practicing misleading historical revisionism, "pseudoscholarship" and "outright falsehoods". His research has been described as flawed by many historians, who dismiss his work as that of "a biased amateur who cherry-picks quotes from history and the Bible."

This is from Wiki, I know, but any liberal or Democrat or smart man wouldnt give a penny for his history lesson!

http://www.wallbuilders.com/
 
by David Barton? REALLY! This guy is a Republican-Conservative-Revisionist Wet Dream!

David Barton (born 1954) is an American evangelical Christian minister, conservative activist, and author. He founded WallBuilders, a Texas-based organization with a goal of exposing the claimed US constitutional separation of church and state as a myth.

Actually, he is correct. . The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the 1st Amendment erected a "wall of separation" between the church and the state (James Madison said it "drew a line," but it is Jefferson's term that sticks with us today)
 

PlasmaTwa2

The Second-Hottest Man in my Mother's Basement
Actually, he is correct. . The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the 1st Amendment erected a "wall of separation" between the church and the state (James Madison said it "drew a line," but it is Jefferson's term that sticks with us today)

Doesn't matter if it is physically in the Constitution or not. The general interpretation of the Supreme Court has always been that the first amendment calls for the seperation of church and state, and therefore that is how the U.S. government operates.
 
Doesn't matter if it is physically in the Constitution or not. The general interpretation of the Supreme Court has always been that the first amendment calls for the seperation of church and state, and therefore that is how the U.S. government operates.
You're wrong.
 

StanScratch

My Penis Is Dancing!
There is a huge difference between the liberal/conservative vs. Republican/Democrat argument. Only those who see in black in white would argue that only Republicans or Democrats have helped/hinder blacks.

William McCulloch was a Republican member of the House from Ohio. He was a financial conservative. He was also one of the key authors of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, with both Kennedy and Johnson saying that, without him, the act would not have been nearly as powerful.
Of course, the entire act was very unpopular with House Dixicrats, who tried every action they could to water down the act, or destroy it. For instance, one Judge Smith attempted to defeat the bill in a round about way by adding "sex" to the equation, thinking that the provision to bar discrimination of women would prove unpopular and lead to the defeat of the bill. Of course, the provision was not only added, but HELPED the cause for the act, much to Smith's chagrin. And, yes, the act did lead to a mass migration of Dixicrats from the Democrat to the Republican side.
And, honestly, that was one of the very early things which have led to the downfall of the Republican Party. Instead of being a part of fiscal conservatives, of intellects, of useful reform, the Republican party has evolved into The Part of No, a party which sometimes not-so-quietly embraces racism, reactionary, greed, wealth for a very small percent - and want by an extremely large percent, social conservative bible thumpers who are quite interested in controlling lives and attempting to ensure the dominance of their perception of the white race. After all, it is easy to scare the ignorant to believe anything as long as it is repeated enough - that the person they already think is a black muslim tree-hugging peace-loving socialist who is building towards a gunless violent police state, and whose leanings have been taught by a white hating christian preacher is out to destroy their poor white trashy world by spreading their wealth to the poor.
This party is absolutely nothing like the party of Lincoln nor McCollough nor the real Reagan. It is barely even the part of the first Bush. It is the party of Newt, Sarah, Mitt (or, at least, one of them), Michelle, Rush, Glenn, the Koch Brothers and other very rich white people. They are a very loud minority who are quickly becoming obsolete - yet would have the potential to create a danger to this country - but fortunately, there are enough people in this country to see through their little ploys, and hopefully, they will be dispensed of soon enough in a nice, quiet, electoral way.
 
This party is absolutely nothing like the party of Lincoln nor McCollough nor the real Reagan. It is barely even the part of the first Bush. It is the party of Newt, Sarah, Mitt (or, at least, one of them), Michelle, Rush, Glenn, the Koch Brothers and other very rich white people. They are a very loud minority who are quickly becoming obsolete - yet would have the potential to create a danger to this country - but fortunately, there are enough people in this country to see through their little ploys, and hopefully, they will be dispensed of soon enough in a nice, quiet, electoral way.

And it would be fair to say, the Party on the left is absolutely nothing like the party of years past. It is the party of George Soros, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton, Bill Clinton, Bill Ayers, Air America Radio, Dusty Rhoades, Keith Olberman, Bill Maher, ad nauseum... and they TRULY are a very loud minority who will quickly die out. Yet, they have the potential to create a danger to this country - but fortunately enough people in this country see through their lies and socialist ploys, and they will be dispensed of soon enough come November 2, 2012.
 

StanScratch

My Penis Is Dancing!
And it would be fair to say, the Party on the left is absolutely nothing like the party of years past. It is the party of George Soros, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton, Bill Clinton, Bill Ayers, Air America Radio, Dusty Rhoades, Keith Olberman, Bill Maher, ad nauseum... and they TRULY are a very loud minority who will quickly die out. Yet, they have the potential to create a danger to this country - but fortunately enough people in this country see through their lies and socialist ploys, and they will be dispensed of soon enough come November 2, 2012.

Thank you for continually making my point on the declining intelligence of the far right. I do appreciate it.
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
Sam has jumped the shark. It's not even fun to pick on him anymore, it's really just sad. He's got other conservatives cringing every time he posts. smh
 

PlasmaTwa2

The Second-Hottest Man in my Mother's Basement
And it would be fair to say, the Party on the left is absolutely nothing like the party of years past. It is the party of George Soros, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton, Bill Clinton, Bill Ayers, Air America Radio, Dusty Rhoades, Keith Olberman, Bill Maher, ad nauseum... and they TRULY are a very loud minority who will quickly die out. Yet, they have the potential to create a danger to this country - but fortunately enough people in this country see through their lies and socialist ploys, and they will be dispensed of soon enough come November 2, 2012.

HE DIDN'T MENTION OBAMA! HE DIDN'T MENTION OBAMA!

Obama 2012!
 
And it would be fair to say, the Party on the left is absolutely nothing like the party of years past. It is the party of George Soros, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Al Sharpton, Bill Clinton, Bill Ayers, Air America Radio, Dusty Rhoades, Keith Olberman, Bill Maher, ad nauseum... and they TRULY are a very loud minority who will quickly die out. Yet, they have the potential to create a danger to this country - but fortunately enough people in this country see through their lies and socialist ploys, and they will be dispensed of soon enough come November 2, 2012.

Yes, if there were actually credible candidates on the GOP side. Everybody just assumes that because the economy is bad that everyone is going to vote for the Republicans. However they fail to realize that there are no viable candidates for the Republicans, it's a fucking clown show. I mean Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, this is the best they could do? Hell the Republicans don't like either of these guys. I would agree with you Sam if say someone like Jeb Bush, Mitch Daniels or Christie were running, then I would say that Obama is in trouble.
 
Top