"""Democrat History"""

[1stRambo]

Yo, in 6 min. and 12 sec. you can learn "True Facts" about the "Racist Democrat Party!"

"Dinesh D'Souza Obliterates Leftist Professor During Q&A Session"

Enjoy Puppets, you might learn Facts!!!



"GTP"
These Blacks Are Enemies Of The Black Population!

 

[Pogo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course, that eternal conflict as noted) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

 

[Pogo]

These Blacks Are Enemies Of The Black Population!

What in the wide world of fuck does that mean?

 

[1stRambo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, remember this guy, among many "Democrats" who thought his way?
Orval Eugene Faubus (January 7, 1910 – December 14, 1994) was an American politician who served as 36th Governor of Arkansas from 1955 to 1967.

A Democrat, he is best remembered for his 1957 stand against the desegregation of the Little Rock School District during the Little Rock Crisis, in which he defied a unanimous decision of the U.S. Supreme Court by ordering the Arkansas National Guard to prevent black students from attending Little Rock Central High School.

Just a reminder of the Real Democrat Party!

"GTP"
This President had to slap him around, and put him in his place!

 

[Pogo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, remember this guy, among many "Democrats" who thought his way?
Orval Eugene Faubus (January 7, 1910 – December 14, 1994) was an American politician who served as 36th Governor of Arkansas from 1955 to 1967.

A Democrat, he is best remembered for his 1957 stand against the desegregation of the Little Rock School District during the Little Rock Crisis, in which he defied a unanimous decision of the U.S. Supreme Court by ordering the Arkansas National Guard to prevent black students from attending Little Rock Central High School.

Just a reminder of the Real Democrat Party!

"GTP"
This President had to slap him around, and put him in his place!

No Pinkie, that would be a member of the Southern Democratic Party. The one that constantly whined about "liberals". Like George Wallace. The one that walked out of the 1948 party convention and started their own party to run against the DP because they didn't like what they heard about "civil rights", nearly costing the Democrat Truman the election. The one that broke up the 1860 convention and ran TWO of its own candidates because it didn't like what it heard there either, resulting in the Democrat Douglas getting no electoral vote in the South at all. The one that bolted after 99 years and did the unthinkable, jumping to the Republican Party because it didn't like what it heard in the CRA in 1964.

The one I just got done pointing out your speaker, in a tiny sliver of a single Q&A out of a speech that we don't get to see, didn't seem to bother to distinguish from its Liberal wing. That one.

 

[Pogo]

These Blacks Are Enemies Of The Black Population!

What in the wide world of fuck does that mean?

Still no answer.

Dinesh d'Souza is Indian. You know that, right?

 

[1stRambo]

These Blacks Are Enemies Of The Black Population!

What in the wide world of fuck does that mean?

Still no answer.

Dinesh d'Souza is Indian. You know that, right?

Yo, so? Are we going to be Racist now? Dinesh Joseph D'Souza is an "Indian-American" political commentator, a smart one at that! Don`t forget? Republican Party is the diverse Party!

"GTP"

 

[Pogo]

These Blacks Are Enemies Of The Black Population!

What in the wide world of fuck does that mean?

Still no answer.

Dinesh d'Souza is Indian. You know that, right?

Yo, so? Are we going to be Racist now? Dinesh Joseph D'Souza is an "Indian-American" political commentator, a smart one at that! Don`t forget? Republican Party is the diverse Party!

"GTP"

Then why to you refer to him as "these blacks"? Are you an idiot with an IQ of 214?
I kind of have a clue by the way you communicate in grunts and snorting noises....

 

[1stRambo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course, that eternal conflict as noted) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, if you have questions about his brilliance? Look him up on youtube, putting Democrats in their place!

"GTP"

 

[Pogo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course, that eternal conflict as noted) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, if you have questions about his brilliance? Look him up on youtube, putting Democrats in their place!

"GTP"

I did. And I actually articulated what I saw.

You: grunts and snorting noises.

All righty then.

Say, how do you know this guy at the mic is a "leftist professor"? What's his name? Where does he teach? Hm?

 

[1stRambo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course, that eternal conflict as noted) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, if you have questions about his brilliance? Look him up on youtube, putting Democrats in their place!

"GTP"

I did. And I actually articulated what I saw.

You: grunts and snorting noises.

All righty then.

Say, how do you know this guy at the mic is a "leftist professor"? What's his name? Where does he teach? Hm?

Yo, do you need a box of tissue?

"GTP"

 

[Pogo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course, that eternal conflict as noted) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, if you have questions about his brilliance? Look him up on youtube, putting Democrats in their place!

"GTP"

I did. And I actually articulated what I saw.

You: grunts and snorting noises.

All righty then.

Say, how do you know this guy at the mic is a "leftist professor"? What's his name? Where does he teach? Hm?

Yo, do you need a box of tissue?

"GTP"

No, I need a box of Answer. Do you need another can of Whup-Ass?

 

[1stRambo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course, that eternal conflict as noted) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, if you have questions about his brilliance? Look him up on youtube, putting Democrats in their place!

"GTP"

I did. And I actually articulated what I saw.

You: grunts and snorting noises.

All righty then.

Say, how do you know this guy at the mic is a "leftist professor"? What's his name? Where does he teach? Hm?

Yo, do you need a box of tissue?

"GTP"

No, I need a box of Answer. Do you need another can of Whup-Ass?

Yo, your answer was a made up piece done by a liar, who makes shit up, another words, a Mini Puppet wannabe Socialist Democrat!!! It`s funny you didn`t name your source? I wonder why?

"GTP"

 

[Pogo]

He's right about the black migration to the Democratic Party in the 1930s (as early as 1924 there were mutterings of black dissatisfaction with Coolidge's perceived inattention to civil rights and threatening to leave their then-traditional Republican base), and he's right that the white migration to the RP is unrelated and happened decades later on the heels of the CRA, but he's conflating "Southern Democrats" with "The Democratic Party" in general, ignoring the fact that those two factions were philosophical opposites in mortal combat with each other for a century, right back to 1860. That dynamic seems to be inconvenient.

He's also wrong about the KKK, which had no political affiliation as a unit but supported, or opposed, whichever party served its purposes to support or oppose. Democrats in the South, being a one-party State, and Republicans in the midwest and west. He seems to engage in some blanket Composition fallacies here. But without a context of the main speech it's hard to tell.

There's also no mention --- here anyway --- of the philosophical pole shift of the turn of the (19th/20th) century, where the DP took on Populist movement and moved away from the "states rights" position (except in the South of course, that eternal conflict as noted) and where the RP took on the interests of the wealthy and corporations and moved away from the Liberalism that founded it. But hey, there's nothing like joining a seminar in the Q&A session when all those points and context have already been laid out and we're left with no foundation at all.

What is it we were supposed to "learn" here, Pinkie? That context is crucial?

Yo, if you have questions about his brilliance? Look him up on youtube, putting Democrats in their place!

"GTP"

I did. And I actually articulated what I saw.

You: grunts and snorting noises.

All righty then.

Say, how do you know this guy at the mic is a "leftist professor"? What's his name? Where does he teach? Hm?

Yo, do you need a box of tissue?

"GTP"

No, I need a box of Answer. Do you need another can of Whup-Ass?

Yo, your answer was a made up piece done by a liar, who makes shit up, another words, a Mini Puppet wannabe Socialist Democrat!!! It`s funny you didn`t name your source? I wonder why?

"GTP"

Horshak thinks for a minute..... and fires back,
"Oh yeah? Well up your hole with a Mello Roll".

I *AM* my own source, Pinkie. I asked you a question. You have no answer.

 

[1stRambo]

Yo, if you have questions about his brilliance? Look him up on youtube, putting Democrats in their place!

"GTP"

I did. And I actually articulated what I saw.

You: grunts and snorting noises.

All righty then.

Say, how do you know this guy at the mic is a "leftist professor"? What's his name? Where does he teach? Hm?

Yo, do you need a box of tissue?

"GTP"

No, I need a box of Answer. Do you need another can of Whup-Ass?

Yo, your answer was a made up piece done by a liar, who makes shit up, another words, a Mini Puppet wannabe Socialist Democrat!!! It`s funny you didn`t name your source? I wonder why?

"GTP"

Horshak thinks for a minute..... and fires back,
"Oh yeah? Well up your hole with a Mello Roll".

I *AM* my own source, Pinkie. I asked you a question. You have no answer.

Yo, Pogo, you are a regular dumb-ass here, I know better, and anybody who sees your Posts, know better, so give it up, your source, I`m waiting?

"GTP"

 

[Pogo]

tick tock tick tock

 

[1stRambo]

tick tock tick tock

Yo
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

"GTP"