150 Years Ago Today Republicans Freed the Slaves

[JakeStarkey]

Dragonlady, yes, where GOP, like Jroc, suppress the vote, or the Dems, who go after cons to suppress their vote, is wrong.

 

[JakeStarkey]

An average mind understands it perfectly well, meaning that you are somewhat limited mentally, Jroc. After all, remember you are a neo-con.

"Slavers and Segregationist" were tyrants not classic liberals, and many of today's conservatives in the GOP share that sense of the Old South: a disrespect for the decency and dignity of the individual.

Yes, that's right, Jroc, you would happily have been either a slaver or a segregationist.

The Southerners were certainly imperialistic, much like you, for overseas adventures of conquering lesser peoples, at least in their mind.

l

In other words I'm a rep whore.... "Slavers and Segregationist" where tyrants not classic liberals, not conservative in today’s sense at all

Wow...That was barely coherent you’re a funny little man always seeking approval from the left

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. If you did, how many times did it lay the blame, correctly, at the feet of the party that blocked the anti-lynching bills?
Guess?

Zero.

Why does an apology have to lay blame on someone? Why can't you just say "On behalf of the Senate and the people of the United States, we apologize".

Laying blame accomplishes nothing and dilutes the apology. "We're sorry it happened but it wasn't our fault" is not an apology.

Here....let me explain:

1. The claim that modern Democrats make, in order to maintain their huge disparity in terms of the black vote is that they are the saviors of the blacks vis-a-vis the 'nasty, racist
Republicans.'

2. True, there had been actual struggles for civil rights for a century, from the end of the Civil War, but by the end of the 60’s it was over. Segregationist violence was gone, all public places integrated….but not the opportunity for liberals to create an imaginary heroic past. In their minds, liberals manned the barricades, and marched for civil rights…and still do!

3. Contrary to the myth that Democrats told about themselves, that they were the chest-thumping warriors for equal rights, the entire history of civil rights consists of Republicans battling Democrats to guarantee the constitutional rights of black people.

a. Not all Democrats were segregationists, but all segregationists were Democrats! And…there were enough of them to demand compliance from the rest of the party.


4. Do the modern Democrats make sure that absurd resolutions imply that the Republicans were just as bad as the Democrats.


5. Still not clear?
Well, after your next auto accident, when the drunk guy who went through the red light says, 'just sign this paper that says we were both at fault...'
Gonna sign it?
Get it now?

Wise up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

109th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. RES. 39 Apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
February 7, 2005

Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. FRIST, Mr. REID, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BAYH, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. ENSIGN, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. CORZINE, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. DAYTON, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. DODD, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. STEVENS, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. TALENT, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KOHL, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. NELSON of Florida, Mr. PRYOR, and Mr. SCHUMER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION Apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation.
Whereas the crime of lynching succeeded slavery as the ultimate expression of racism in the United States following Reconstruction;
Whereas lynching was a widely acknowledged practice in the United States until the middle of the 20th century;
Whereas lynching was a crime that occurred throughout the United States, with documented incidents in all but 4 States;
Whereas at least 4,742 people, predominantly African-Americans, were reported lynched in the United States between 1882 and 1968;
Whereas 99 percent of all perpetrators of lynching escaped from punishment by State or local officials;
Whereas lynching prompted African-Americans to form the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and prompted members of B'nai B'rith to found the Anti-Defamation League;
Whereas nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress during the first half of the 20th century;
Whereas, between 1890 and 1952, 7 Presidents petitioned Congress to end lynching;
Whereas, between 1920 and 1940, the House of Representatives passed 3 strong anti-lynching measures;
Whereas protection against lynching was the minimum and most basic of Federal responsibilities, and the Senate considered but failed to enact anti-lynching legislation despite repeated requests by civil rights groups, Presidents, and the House of Representatives to do so;
Whereas the recent publication of `Without Sanctuary: Lynching Photography in America' helped bring greater awareness and proper recognition of the victims of lynching;
Whereas only by coming to terms with history can the United States effectively champion human rights abroad; and
Whereas an apology offered in the spirit of true repentance moves the United States toward reconciliation and may become central to a new understanding, on which improved racial relations can be forged: Now, therefore, be it

• Resolved, That the Senate--
  
  • (1) apologizes to the victims of lynching for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation;
    (2) expresses the deepest sympathies and most solemn regrets of the Senate to the descendants of victims of lynching, the ancestors of whom were deprived of life, human dignity, and the constitutional protections accorded all citizens of the United States; and
    (3) remembers the history of lynching, to ensure that these tragedies will be neither forgotten nor repeated.
    
    
    Full Text of S.Res. 39 (109th): Lynching Victims Senate Apology resolution - GovTrack.us
    

It's a damn shame - in 2005, 19 republican senators refuse to tack their name onto this Resolution. Damn shame.

As shameful as those conservative democrats in the Senate (and a few republicans) who refused to pass anti-lyching legislation.

The difference is, some of those republicans in the list above are still with us and continue to be voted into office.

I read it...and described it in my post.


So....why are you trying to obfuscate?


'Cause you are dead wrong?

Oh.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Classic revisionism by PC without any solid evidence. Typical of the Mises lackeys and running dogs.

The problem is that our politicians, so many of them, from far right to far left, are hacks, worried only about themselves.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Covered fully and in detail in Coulter's "Mugged"

1. So....did you read the book?

No?

Do you realize that it was a scholarly work, fully documented?

No?

2. Did you find any errors in the post I provided?

No?


3. Are you a dunce?


Yes!



If you were twice as smart, you'd still be stupid.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another thread about how far the Republican Party has fallen in the last 150 years.

...yes, we liberals get it; that's why we're not Republicans.

If you actually got it, you wouldn't be Democrats either.

I happen to be a registered Independent.

 

[Jroc]

109th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. RES. 39 Apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
February 7, 2005

Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. FRIST, Mr. REID, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BAYH, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. ENSIGN, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. CORZINE, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. DAYTON, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. DODD, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. STEVENS, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. TALENT, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KOHL, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. NELSON of Florida, Mr. PRYOR, and Mr. SCHUMER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION Apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation.
Whereas the crime of lynching succeeded slavery as the ultimate expression of racism in the United States following Reconstruction;
Whereas lynching was a widely acknowledged practice in the United States until the middle of the 20th century;
Whereas lynching was a crime that occurred throughout the United States, with documented incidents in all but 4 States;
Whereas at least 4,742 people, predominantly African-Americans, were reported lynched in the United States between 1882 and 1968;
Whereas 99 percent of all perpetrators of lynching escaped from punishment by State or local officials;
Whereas lynching prompted African-Americans to form the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and prompted members of B'nai B'rith to found the Anti-Defamation League;
Whereas nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress during the first half of the 20th century;
Whereas, between 1890 and 1952, 7 Presidents petitioned Congress to end lynching;
Whereas, between 1920 and 1940, the House of Representatives passed 3 strong anti-lynching measures;
Whereas protection against lynching was the minimum and most basic of Federal responsibilities, and the Senate considered but failed to enact anti-lynching legislation despite repeated requests by civil rights groups, Presidents, and the House of Representatives to do so;
Whereas the recent publication of `Without Sanctuary: Lynching Photography in America' helped bring greater awareness and proper recognition of the victims of lynching;
Whereas only by coming to terms with history can the United States effectively champion human rights abroad; and
Whereas an apology offered in the spirit of true repentance moves the United States toward reconciliation and may become central to a new understanding, on which improved racial relations can be forged: Now, therefore, be it

• Resolved, That the Senate--
  
  • (1) apologizes to the victims of lynching for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation;
    (2) expresses the deepest sympathies and most solemn regrets of the Senate to the descendants of victims of lynching, the ancestors of whom were deprived of life, human dignity, and the constitutional protections accorded all citizens of the United States; and
    (3) remembers the history of lynching, to ensure that these tragedies will be neither forgotten nor repeated.
    
    
    Full Text of S.Res. 39 (109th): Lynching Victims Senate Apology resolution - GovTrack.us
    

It's a damn shame - in 2005, 19 republican senators refuse to tack their name onto this Resolution. Damn shame.

As shameful as those conservative democrats in the Senate (and a few republicans) who refused to pass anti-lyching legislation.

The difference is, some of those republicans in the list above are still with us and continue to be voted into office.

I read it...and described it in my post.


So....why are you trying to obfuscate?


'Cause you are dead wrong?

Oh.

Republicans don't have anything to apologize for since they were some of the victims of the lynchings. The Democratic Party should pay reparations to any still living victims of their actions

 

[NYcarbineer]

FDR was a hero.

He beat Tojo and Hitler.

Something no conservative would ever be able to do.

Can anyone name a conservative President that won a real war? I mean one that was against a power that was really going to destroy this country.

Funny, considering Truman was President when we beat both Tojo and Hitler.

The presidency of Truman was the turning point that began the end of the Democratic Party's alliance with the conservative segregationist Southern Democrats.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yall seem to be stuck to the fact that Conservative means Republican and Liberal means Democrat. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that the Republicans of the Civil War were Liberals and the southern Democrats were the Conservatives. Today the game is still the same only the players have changed.

The only people on this board who don't know that, or pretend not to know that, are the conservatives.

It's a combination of ignorance and/or immaturity.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Classic revisionism by PC without any solid evidence. Typical of the Mises lackeys and running dogs.

The problem is that our politicians, so many of them, from far right to far left, are hacks, worried only about themselves.

Let's see how long it takes....once again, to prove what a jerk you are...

1. Post #69...three links


2. Post #83...sourced, and about a dozen items....any errors?

New Year, Same Jakal.
I wouldn’t say you’re useless…You’re the kind of a man that you would use as a blueprint to build an idiot.

 

[Pheonixops]

by Jim Hoft
January 1, 2013


Another Great moment in Republican Party History. On this day in 1863 Republicans freed the slaves.

Republicans rejoiced. Democrats cursed. Grand Old Partisan reported:


On New Year’s Day in 1863, the Republican Party’s Emancipation Proclamation came into effect. While Republicans rejoiced, Democrat politicians and newspapers denounced President Abraham Lincoln (R-IL) for freeing slaves. Demonstrating their depravity, New York’s Gov. Horatio Seymour, who would be the 1868 Democrat presidential nominee, denounced the Emancipation Proclamation.


Read more:
150 Years Ago Today… Republicans Freed the Slaves | The Gateway Pundit

Today Maobama, the Senate and Congress enslaved all Americans.

That's correct, the Liberal republicans were the ones who saved the day and the conservative democrats were the nemesis of freedom then. My how things have changed..............

 

[Jroc]

Classic revisionism by PC without any solid evidence. Typical of the Mises lackeys and running dogs.

The problem is that our politicians, so many of them, from far right to far left, are hacks, worried only about themselves.

Let's see how long it takes....once again, to prove what a jerk you are...

1. Post #69...three links


2. Post #83...sourced, and about a dozen items....any errors?

New Year, Same Jakal.
I wouldn’t say you’re useless…You’re the kind of a man that you would use as a blueprint to build an idiot.

 

[paperview]

Yall seem to be stuck to the fact that Conservative means Republican and Liberal means Democrat. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that the Republicans of the Civil War were Liberals and the southern Democrats were the Conservatives. Today the game is still the same only the players have changed.

The only people on this board who don't know that, or pretend not to know that, are the conservatives.

It's a combination of ignorance and/or immaturity.

Even this stalwart republican knows it:
"The greatest leaders in fighting for an integrated America in the twentieth century were in the Democratic Party.

The fact is, it was the liberal wing of the Democratic Party that ended segregation.

The fact is that it was Franklin Delano Roosevelt who gave hope to a nation that was in despair and could have slid into dictatorship. And the fact is, every Republican has much to learn from studying what the Democrats did right."
-- Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), 1995

 

[Pheonixops]

We need to do it again.

Democrats quickly managed to get those freed slaves descendants back into slavery.

That's a crock of SHIT. You people need to look up the definition of the word and use it properly.

slave
[sleyv] Show IPA noun, verb, slaved, slav·ing.
noun
1.
a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another; a bond servant.

Having a lot of influence and being a member of that party is NOT "slavery". Thanks for the laugh though!

 

[Jroc]

The basic foundations of American conservatism can be boiled down to four fundamental concepts. We might call them the four pillars of modern conservatism:

The first pillar of conservatism is liberty, or freedom. Conservatives believe that individuals possess the right to life, liberty, and property, and freedom from the restrictions of arbitrary force. They exercise these rights through the use of their natural free will. That means the ability to follow your own dreams, to do what you want to (so long as you don’t harm others) and reap the rewards (or face the penalties). Above all, it means freedom from oppression by government—and the protection of government against oppression. It means political liberty, the freedom to speak your mind on matters of public policy. It means religious liberty—to worship as you please, or not to worship at all. It also means economic liberty, the freedom to own property and to allocate your own resources in a free market.

Conservatism is based on the idea that the pursuit of virtue is the purpose of our existence and that liberty is an essential component of the pursuit of virtue. Adherence to virtue is also a necessary condition of the pursuit of freedom. In other words, freedom must be pursued for the common good, and when it is abused for the benefit of one group at the expense of others, such abuse must be checked. Still, confronted with a choice of more security or more liberty, conservatives will usually opt for more liberty.

The second pillar of conservative philosophy is tradition and order. Conservatism is also about conserving the values that have been established over centuries and that have led to an orderly society. Conservatives believe in human nature; they believe in the ability of man to build a society that respects rights and that has the capacity to repel the forces of evil. Order means a systematic and harmonious arrangement, both within one’s own character and within the commonwealth. It signifies the performance of certain duties and the enjoyment of certain rights within a community.

Order is perhaps more easily understood by looking at its opposite: disorder. A disordered existence is a confused and miserable existence. If a society falls into general disorder, many of its members will cease to exist at all. And if the members of a society are disordered in spirit, the outward order of society cannot long endure. Disorder describes well everything that conservatism is not.

The third pillar is the rule of law. Conservatism is based on the belief that it is crucial to have a legal system that is predictable, that allows people to know what the rules are and enforce those rules equally for all. This means that both governors and the governed are subject to the law. The rule of law promotes prosperity and protects liberty. Put simply, a government of laws and not of men is the only way to secure justice.

The fourth pillar is belief in God. Belief in God means adherence to the broad concepts of religious faith—such things as justice, virtue, fairness, charity, community, and duty. These are the concepts on which conservatives base their philosophy.

Conservative belief is tethered to the idea that there is an allegiance to God that transcends politics and that sets a standard for politics. For conservatives, there must be an authority greater than man, greater than any ruler, king, or government: no state can demand our absolute obedience or attempt to control every aspect of our lives. There must be a moral order, conservatives believe, that undergirds political order. This pillar of conservatism does not mean mixing up faith and politics, and it certainly does not mean settling religious disputes politically. It also does not mean that conservatives have a monopoly on faith, or even that all conservatives are necessarily believers.

First Principles - The Pillars of Modern American Conservatism

 

[J.E.D]

Conservatives support states' rights over civil rights. That's why Barry Goldwater, the father of modern conservatism, voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

And why sniveling Kentucky rich kid, Rand Paul, opposes it as well.

 

[Jroc]

Conservatives support states' rights over civil rights. That's why Barry Goldwater, the father of modern conservatism, voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

And why sniveling Kentucky rich kid, Rand Paul, opposes it as well.

Goldwater as well as Rand Paul do not support discrimination by the government. Private people shouldn't be forced by the government to not discriminate that’s their view

 

[paperview]

Conservatives support states' rights over civil rights. That's why Barry Goldwater, the father of modern conservatism, voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

And why sniveling Kentucky rich kid, Rand Paul, opposes it as well.

Goldwater as well as Rand Paul do not support discrimination by the government. Private people shouldn't be forced by the government to not discriminate that’s their view

Private people aren't.

When they open their doors to the public, that changes.

Public accommodations.

 

[Jroc]

And why sniveling Kentucky rich kid, Rand Paul, opposes it as well.

Goldwater as well as Rand Paul do not support discrimination by the government. Private people shouldn't be forced by the government to not discriminate that’s their view

Private people aren't.

When they open their doors to the public, that changes.

Public accommodations.

Not if it is a private club…. Anyway a business that is privately owned should be allowed to be run as the owners see fit. Let them sink or swim based on that