Isn't Obama now an "Armchair, Weekend Warrior"?

[mal]

No. YOU were arguing (as so many of your mindless liberal-talking-pointless dishonest fellow Democrat Parody propagandists are prone to arguing) that the GOP is racist. I countered by noting that YOU and your libtarded bretheren are in no position to be casting stones.

You took umbrage at the truth.

And here we have the favorite tactic of the right-wingers. Blame your opponents for doing what you yourself are guilty of.

In this case we have this post that started this entire argument:

"And behind Closed Doors, Barry and Reid both talk about what they don't like about the "Negros"..."

Oh no, you di'nt just go there!

So, no, it was your buddy "the malcontent" that started this, and you personally who egged him on.

Only in the lunatic mind of an uber-liberoidal (which is to say, a person steeped in dishonesty and irrationality, like Vastly Ignorant) would the satirical comment made by tha mal -- about Reid and President Obama and their embracing of racism -- be conceived as "starting" anything.

Vastly Ingorant has not the first damn clue.

And they say us Conservatives don't have a Sense of Humor...



peace...

 

[Vast LWC]

Your "fully institutional" argument is demonstrably false by the fact it was Republicans who voted in the Civil Rights Act. If it was up to Dems it wouldn't have had a chance.

And here's a bit of Ann Coulterite revisionist history that we often hear.

The Democrats held a 258 to 177 majority in the House in 1964, and the bill passed 290 to 130. The bill almost never got to the floor, do to the efforts of a single southern Democrat, but Lyndon Johnson (also a Democrat) used the power of the bully pulpit to force the bill through.

In the Senate, the Democrats held a majority of 66 to 34. The final vote in the Senate was 73 to 37.

While it is true that the bill was filibustered by a couple of Democratic Congressmen from the South, it is also true that all those seats, representing racist districts (with the exception of Robert Byrd's seat) are now held by Republicans.

In fact, the passage Civil Rights Act, and the fact that Lyndon Johnson personally forced the House to vote on it, caused the South to go Republican.

Which means that almost all those racist folks who were against the Civil Rights act in the first place are now Republican.

Coulter is a **** but it seems par for you to be guilty of the same shit you accuse others of. Let's look at some basics:


"Republicans were able to modify voting registration procedures, the status of the Civil Rights Commission, and enforcement procedures. The resulting compromise received the Judiciary Committee's endorsement, 23 to 11, on October 29, 1963, after the original subcommittee proposal was defeated, 19 to 15. The Judiciary Committee formally reported H. R. 7152 on November 20."


"Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96."


"In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes."
CongressLink: [Congress: The Basics - Lawmaking] Civil Rights: Major Features of the Civil Rights Act of 1964


So like I said, your institutional argument is bullshit.

That post I was refuting was this:

"If it was up to Dems it wouldn't have had a chance." Obviously it would have, since a majority of the Dems in question voted for the bill.

And of the districts that were against the bill, almost all of them are now REPUBLICAN districts, meaning that the racists who voted against it, mostly in the South, are now REPUBLICANS.

And it was mainly due to the fact that Johnson forced the Civil Rights act through that those districts changed allegiance.

Just because there were more Southern racists in the Democratic party 50 years ago, does not prove anything, as all those districts are now Republican.

From your own article on the subject:

It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11.

Those southern states are now almost all Red States, and the districts involved are Red Districts. Senator Byrd, who you folks like to crow about often, is probably the last remaining "Dixiecrat" left of that generation.

And since the article only talks about the history of the civil rights act prior to 1964, I'm assuming that your percentage numbers are also from that period.

 

[Vast LWC]

Only in the lunatic mind of an uber-liberoidal (which is to say, a person steeped in dishonesty and irrationality, like Vastly Ignorant) would the satirical comment made by tha mal -- about Reid and President Obama and their embracing of racism -- be conceived as "starting" anything.

Vastly Ingorant has not the first damn clue.

You get all pissy at me for starting it, and then when I correctly point out that you actually started it, you blow it off.

Whatever.

You still lose.