Standing during the Pledge or National Anthem

[Rskins06]

1 minute ago, The Evil Genius said:

Maybe because the alternative was to vote for a party that has repeatedly been against the civil rights acts and has a 50+ yr history of exclusively courting the poor rural white america by playing up their fears of non-whites. 

 

See, that is exactly what I am talking about.  If you do a little research, you will see that it was the Republican Party who led the fight for the civil rights act.  As a matter of fact, over 80% of the party supported the civil rights act where only 60% of Democrats supported the civil rights act.

Ask Chicago, Baltimore, or any major city which still has a high percentage of AA unemployment, poverty, etc. and has been that way for years.  Then, look at the party which has been in control.  If I am in a City governed by Democrats and has been for years and there isn't a change or improvement, how is that then the fault of the Republican party? 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Systemic discrimination....

I'll just ask this question: Does anyone ever wonder why in major cities a neighborhood can go from Jewish to Irish to Italian to Puerto Rican to Asian over 120 years....but the black neighborhoods in 1920 are still the black neighborhoods today?

[No Excuses]

2 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

See, that is exactly what I am talking about.  If you do a little research, you will see that it was the Republican Party who led the fight for the civil rights act.  As a matter of fact, over 80% of the party supported the civil rights act where only 60% of Democrats supported the civil rights act.

 

You know who should do a little research? You should. The Republicans ran Barry Goldwater in 1964 in direct opposition to LBJ and the Democrats who were pushing the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act.

Some of you pretend to be Americans while knowing zero, ZILCH about its history. Except for whatever bull**** you read that comforts you in your safespaces.

Edited August 30, 2016 by No Excuses

[Rskins06]

2 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

That entire post is a powerful exhibit of what happens when you spend your entire life in the conservative safespace. I'm pretty sure he just got done watching Dinesh D'Souza's latest garbage documentary on how Democrats are the real oppressors of minorities and good ol Republicans who to this day fight against the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act are the real saviors.

Living in the far right wing bubble, you learn to say completely made up bull**** without taking a moment to say "Hmmm let's take a quick moment to fact check the statements I'm making". 

Feel free to fact check anything I typed.  Tell me where I was wrong.   Matter of fact, you could just read some facts if you want.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-rights-act-interesting-facts/

If you have more questions, let me know, I am sure I can find you more. 

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

6 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

That entire post is a powerful exhibit of what happens when you spend your entire life in the conservative safespace. I'm pretty sure he just got done watching Dinesh D'Souza's latest garbage documentary on how Democrats are the real oppressors of minorities and good ol Republicans who to this day fight against the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act are the real saviors.

Living in the far right wing bubble, you learn to say completely made up bull**** without taking a moment to say "Hmmm let's take a quick moment to fact check the statements I'm making". 

 

5 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

See, that is exactly what I am talking about.  If you do a little research, you will see that it was the Republican Party who led the fight for the civil rights act.  As a matter of fact, over 80% of the party supported the civil rights act where only 60% of Democrats supported the civil rights act.

Ask Chicago, Baltimore, or any major city which still has a high percentage of AA unemployment, poverty, etc. and has been that way for years.  Then, look at the party which has been in control.  If I am in a City governed by Democrats and has been for years and there isn't a change or improvement, how is that then the fault of the Republican party? 

At least we cleared up which side is which.  I always just thought both sides were corrupt as hell and didn't really care about the people they said they do.  Who knew? 

[No Excuses]

1 minute ago, Rskins06 said:

Feel free to fact check anything I typed.  Tell me where I was wrong.   Matter of fact, you could just read some facts if you want.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-rights-act-interesting-facts/

If you have more questions, let me know, I am sure I can find you more. 

. All this horse**** racists in the South joined the Republican Party, which ran Goldwater in 1964 who was vehemently opposed to the civil rights movement.

 

Have you ever wondered why the South used to vote Democrat until the Civil Rights Act was passed? The Democrats took a principled stand, rejected the Southern racists who aligned with them and the Republicans shamelessly gave them a home right after. Barry Goldwater, the Republican nominee of 1964, ran openly against civil rights.

Wanna see how the South that always voted Democrat, voted that year?

 

Ever wonder why the Democrats lost the South? Because they kicked the racists out of their party and the Republicans shamelessly accepted them, starting with Goldwater in 1964.

So yes, please read the history of the United States in proper context before you come in here spouting your ignorant nonsense.

[The Evil Genius]

7 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

Feel free to fact check anything I typed.  Tell me where I was wrong.   Matter of fact, you could just read some facts if you want.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-rights-act-interesting-facts/

If you have more questions, let me know, I am sure I can find you more. 

 

 

Will you at least acknowledge that the Dem South, which was still mostly Dem in 1964 - is now entirely a stronghold of the GOP? And that the progressive California and parts of New England are now Dems (but used to be solid GOP back then)?

 

88th Congress (1963-1965)

 

Edited August 30, 2016 by The Evil Genius

[No Excuses]

1 minute ago, The Evil Genius said:

Will you at least acknowledge that the Dem South, which was still mostly Dem in 1964 - is now entirely a stronghold of the GOP? And that the progressive California and parts of New England are now Dems (but used to be solid GOP back then)?

 

He doesn't care facts. They are not aligned with the bull**** version of America he has been fed through conservative blogs. 

[The Evil Genius]

Not to mention this factoid from that article.

 

 

and this one,

 

Quote

That's why Strom Thurmond left the Democratic party soon after the Civil Right Act passed. He recognized that of the two parties, it was the Republican party that was more hospitable to his message. The Republican candidate for president in 1964, Barry Goldwater, was one of the few non-Confederate state senators to vote against the bill. He carried his home state of Arizona and swept the deep southern states – a first for a Republican ever.

 

Now, it wasn't that the Civil Rights Act was what turned the South against the Democrats or minorities against Republicans. Those patterns, as Trende showed, had been developing for a while. It was, however, a manifestation of these growing coalitions. The South gradually became home to the conservative party, while the north became home to the liberal party.

 

Edited August 30, 2016 by The Evil Genius

[boobiemiles]

27 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I get where you're coming from.  I think the creating new sources of Federal investment in poor black communities could be a good idea.  It's probably necessary to help uplift them.  And everyone ultimately benefits from a healthier society where we solve a lot of the problems of some of our most distressed communities.

But you can't call that investment reparations and it can't be limited strictly to black people.  You'll lose the support of a big majority of non-black people if you do, and you'd single out black people as needing handouts to become functional members of society.  That racist notion is a fringe belief that would become mainstream as a result of paying out reparations.

No just for people that were effected by slavery.  If there are Asians, and Native Americans that fall into this category, then so be it. America has paid for it's transgressions in the  past.  It gave Japanese Americans and Native American monetary reparation for the way it treated them in the past.  Why not African Americans, whose labor was a sacrifice help create this nation.  Triangle trade was very good for this country, and the people picking cotton got the short end of the stick.  Stand for what!? 

[twa]

1 hour ago, boobiemiles said:

Where?  I live in CT.  Where do you live?  I want to go there.  There is a black business in your neighborhood?

 

Pasadena,Texas...c'mon down, seems like everybody else is 

Yes,right next to mine is one.....and some others around me (I'm assuming you mean black owner/operator)

shoulda known you were in the great white North 

[The Evil Genius]

So Rodney Harrison just said that Kapernick isn't black.

Wait. What?

Does he have some other definition of black? Or does he not really know???

[boobiemiles]

7 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Pasadena,Texas...c'mon down, seems like everybody else is 

Yes,right next to mine is one.....and some others around me (I'm assuming you mean black owner/operator)

shoulda known you were in the great white North 

Yeah I know. Since there is all this financial prosperity why do African American only own 50% of 1% of the nations wealth?  

  

[twa]

1 minute ago, boobiemiles said:

Yeah I know. Since there is all this financial prosperity why do African American only own 50% of 1% of the nations wealth?  

  

cause many are poor?

I think the barriers to starting/owning a business have a lot to do with it.

but then I'm odd

[Predicto]

26 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

Feel free to fact check anything I typed.  Tell me where I was wrong.   Matter of fact, you could just read some facts if you want.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/politics/civil-rights-act-interesting-facts/

If you have more questions, let me know, I am sure I can find you more. 

 

 

You really have absolutely no idea what happened, do you?  You know nothing of Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and political realignment.   You have never heard of Lee A****er, or noticed that Southern politicians that opposed civil rights switched from Democrat to Republican.   Look up the anti-civil rights guys like Strom Thurmond, or Lester Maddux, or Jesse Helms, and see what happened - they switched from Democrat to Republican.     

You really don't understand that the conservative Southern Democrats of 1964 are now the conservative Southern Republicans of 2016.   

How could you possibly not know this?

[twa]

4 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

So Rodney Harrison just said that Kapernick isn't black.

Wait. What?

Does he have some other definition of black? Or does he not really know???

he is more mocha, just from looks I'd say middle eastern rather than African.

we need shade charts or a one drop rule or something.

 

[Predicto]

9 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

So Rodney Harrison just said that Kapernick isn't black.

Wait. What?

Does he have some other definition of black? Or does he not really know???

 

Well, if I was trying to find someone dumber than Colin Kaepernick, Rodney Harrison might be the first place I would look.   

[The Evil Genius]

Uh, ok. I guess being not black means you can't speak out about racism. But god bless..that takes care of it.

 

Sure you did Rodney. But nice try. 

 Ouch.

Besides..if anything, Kapernick is 1/2 Squidward. Duh.

 

Edited August 30, 2016 by The Evil Genius

[boobiemiles]

16 minutes ago, twa said:

cause many are poor?

I think the barriers to starting/owning a business have a lot to do with it.

but then I'm odd

We have always owned businesses.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Honestly, if I saw Kap in the street or something, I would probably assume he is some form of middle eastern.  I didn't know he was half-black (or whatever we are calling him) until this all became a story.

[Rskins06]

32 minutes ago, Predicto said:

 

You really have absolutely no idea what happened, do you?  You know nothing of Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and political realignment.   You have never heard of Lee A****er, or noticed that Southern politicians that opposed civil rights switched from Democrat to Republican.   Look up the anti-civil rights guys like Strom Thurmond, or Lester Maddux, or Jesse Helms, and see what happened - they switched from Democrat to Republican.     

You really don't understand that the conservative Southern Democrats of 1964 are now the conservative Southern Republicans of 2016.   

How could you possibly not know this?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386257/myth-republican-racism-mona-charen

Again, I believe the Democratic party has done a masterful job shifting blame and trying to separate themselves from their past and convince people they are not  the party of oppression or past racism. 

 

I believe Barry Goldwater was referenced as being against the Civil Rights act as well: 

The Republican presidential candidate in 1964 also opposed the Civil Rights Act. Barry Goldwater had been an enthusiastic backer of the 1957 and 1960 civil rights acts (both overwhelmingly opposed by Democrats). He was a founding member of the Arizona chapter of the NAACP. He hired many blacks in his family business and pushed to desegregate the Arizona National Guard. He had a good-faith objection to some features of the 1964 act, which he regarded as unconstitutional. Goldwater was no racist.

The same cannot be said of Fulbright, on whom Bill Clinton bestowed the Medal of Freedom. Fulbright was one of the 19 senators who signed the “Southern manifesto” defending segregation. 

Okay, but didn’t all the old segregationist senators leave the Democratic party and become Republicans after 1964? No, just one did: Strom Thurmond. The rest remained in the Democratic party — including former Klansman Robert Byrd, who became president pro tempore of the Senate.

Oh yeah, Strom Thurmond later returned to the Democratic Party.

Edited August 30, 2016 by Rskins06

[DogofWar1]

One of the unfortunate things that has happened with regard to race relations in the past few decades is that many of reforms that came about post-WWII have been challenged and chipped away at.  Race-based civil rights have been on the defensive quite often, indeed many of the recent battles haven't been about advancing minorities, but rather about preventing backsliding.

When you look at what position each party, nationally, has staked out on whether to keep or toss many of the race-based reforms that occured in the civil rights era, it's not surprising how votes break.

[Rskins06]

http://blackquillandink.com/?p=6082

If you tell a lie long enough, people will believe you. 

Now, that being said, there have been plenty of racists in both parties, one has just done a better job selling it about the other. 

[tshile]

One party is extraordinarily good at using the "oh you don't support this idea? that's because you hate <group of people>"

It works rather well. It's almost impossible to oppose anything on the grounds of thinking it's not a good solution, but that the problem it's trying to solve is real. Once you oppose it you're painted as hating/not liking/wanting to keep down whatever group of people the bill is about.

Don't want to extend unemployment benefits to 99 weeks? obviously you just hate people who lost their jobs

Criticize a person for protesting during the national anthem? obviously you're just worried your country's whiteness is under attack. you certainly don't care about the issues minorities deal with.

Want to require a photo ID to vote? obviously you just think minorities are too poor/stupid/unable to get a photo id and this will tilt the votes your way.

It's the instant hot take on pretty much everything these days. Another reason to get away from the two party system. It allows people to get away with that sort of thing too easily.

[Spearfeather]

1 hour ago, No Excuses said:

 The Republicans ran Barry Goldwater in 1964 in direct opposition to LBJ and the Democrats who were pushing the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act.

 

 

After Democrat Lyndon Johnson opposed every civil rights bill, and lynching law for over 20 years.