Question about this ongoing race war.

[Asclepias]

Yep, and it was all done by racist Democrats.

'Member what happened yesterday when Frigidweirdo called you out for making shit up you couldn't document? You ran away to Ignore so you wouldn't have to deal with it. That was some fun.

There's never been a race riot, anywhere, where some proctor stood at the gate checking participants for voter registration cards. If they had any at all.

Prove me wrong.

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. We've been through this many times before, it's history and the only people who dispute it are little shit flingers like you on message boards who can't debate an issue without flame baiting and personal attacks. Now you can go back to the grassy knoll and look for evidence to expose George H.W. Bush as Kennedy's assassin. So long, fuckface.

And there it is, running away again. I'm insulted that Frigid got the before I did.

​

So you have nothing.
Stop the presses.

Moreover you seem to think lynching only went on in the South. Even though you were present for, and participating in, this thread -- where you tried desperately to shut it up.

I don't know why you would post a link to an old thread where you got your ass handed to you but I guess when you're that desperate you just throw whatever you can find, hoping something sticks. Kind of like your grassy knoll theory.

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

When SJ has his ass handed to him he resorts to lying because his self value is tied up in what people online think about him.

 

[S.J.]

Yep, and it was all done by racist Democrats.

'Member what happened yesterday when Frigidweirdo called you out for making shit up you couldn't document? You ran away to Ignore so you wouldn't have to deal with it. That was some fun.

There's never been a race riot, anywhere, where some proctor stood at the gate checking participants for voter registration cards. If they had any at all.

Prove me wrong.

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. We've been through this many times before, it's history and the only people who dispute it are little shit flingers like you on message boards who can't debate an issue without flame baiting and personal attacks. Now you can go back to the grassy knoll and look for evidence to expose George H.W. Bush as Kennedy's assassin. So long, fuckface.

And there it is, running away again. I'm insulted that Frigid got the before I did.

​

So you have nothing.
Stop the presses.

Moreover you seem to think lynching only went on in the South. Even though you were present for, and participating in, this thread -- where you tried desperately to shut it up.

I don't know why you would post a link to an old thread where you got your ass handed to you but I guess when you're that desperate you just throw whatever you can find, hoping something sticks. Kind of like your grassy knoll theory.

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

Are you sure you don't want to edit your post again? Posting pictures of butlers and asses doesn't do much to make your point, dick sucker, but that's the way you debate. No substance, no proof, no nothing, just personal attacks, diversions, and claims of winning arguments. Better regroup and try again tomorrow, amateur.

 

[S.J.]

'Member what happened yesterday when Frigidweirdo called you out for making shit up you couldn't document? You ran away to Ignore so you wouldn't have to deal with it. That was some fun.

There's never been a race riot, anywhere, where some proctor stood at the gate checking participants for voter registration cards. If they had any at all.

Prove me wrong.

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. We've been through this many times before, it's history and the only people who dispute it are little shit flingers like you on message boards who can't debate an issue without flame baiting and personal attacks. Now you can go back to the grassy knoll and look for evidence to expose George H.W. Bush as Kennedy's assassin. So long, fuckface.

And there it is, running away again. I'm insulted that Frigid got the before I did.

​

So you have nothing.
Stop the presses.

Moreover you seem to think lynching only went on in the South. Even though you were present for, and participating in, this thread -- where you tried desperately to shut it up.

I don't know why you would post a link to an old thread where you got your ass handed to you but I guess when you're that desperate you just throw whatever you can find, hoping something sticks. Kind of like your grassy knoll theory.

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

When SJ has his ass handed to him he resorts to lying because his self value is tied up in what people online think about him.

Oh look, Monkeyman is coming to Pogo's aid. I'd better go get my tranquilizer gun.

 

[Asclepias]

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. We've been through this many times before, it's history and the only people who dispute it are little shit flingers like you on message boards who can't debate an issue without flame baiting and personal attacks. Now you can go back to the grassy knoll and look for evidence to expose George H.W. Bush as Kennedy's assassin. So long, fuckface.

And there it is, running away again. I'm insulted that Frigid got the before I did.

​

So you have nothing.
Stop the presses.

Moreover you seem to think lynching only went on in the South. Even though you were present for, and participating in, this thread -- where you tried desperately to shut it up.

I don't know why you would post a link to an old thread where you got your ass handed to you but I guess when you're that desperate you just throw whatever you can find, hoping something sticks. Kind of like your grassy knoll theory.

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

When SJ has his ass handed to him he resorts to lying because his self value is tied up in what people online think about him.

Oh look, Monkeyman is coming to Pogo's aid. I'd better go get my tranquilizer gun.

Be careful cave monkey. You might shoot yourself.

 

[S.J.]

And there it is, running away again. I'm insulted that Frigid got the before I did.

​

So you have nothing.
Stop the presses.

Moreover you seem to think lynching only went on in the South. Even though you were present for, and participating in, this thread -- where you tried desperately to shut it up.

I don't know why you would post a link to an old thread where you got your ass handed to you but I guess when you're that desperate you just throw whatever you can find, hoping something sticks. Kind of like your grassy knoll theory.

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

When SJ has his ass handed to him he resorts to lying because his self value is tied up in what people online think about him.

Oh look, Monkeyman is coming to Pogo's aid. I'd better go get my tranquilizer gun.

Be careful cave monkey. You might shoot yourself.

Not a chance, Sambo.

 

[Asclepias]

I don't know why you would post a link to an old thread where you got your ass handed to you but I guess when you're that desperate you just throw whatever you can find, hoping something sticks. Kind of like your grassy knoll theory.

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

When SJ has his ass handed to him he resorts to lying because his self value is tied up in what people online think about him.

Oh look, Monkeyman is coming to Pogo's aid. I'd better go get my tranquilizer gun.

Be careful cave monkey. You might shoot yourself.

Not a chance, Sambo.

I'm not your friend monkey. You monkeys never know which is the business end. You might put your eye out Bonzo.

 

[S.J.]

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

When SJ has his ass handed to him he resorts to lying because his self value is tied up in what people online think about him.

Oh look, Monkeyman is coming to Pogo's aid. I'd better go get my tranquilizer gun.

Be careful cave monkey. You might shoot yourself.

Not a chance, Sambo.

I'm not your friend monkey. You monkeys never know which is the business end. You might put your eye out Bonzo.

See post #185.

 

[Asclepias]

When SJ has his ass handed to him he resorts to lying because his self value is tied up in what people online think about him.

Oh look, Monkeyman is coming to Pogo's aid. I'd better go get my tranquilizer gun.

Be careful cave monkey. You might shoot yourself.

Not a chance, Sambo.

I'm not your friend monkey. You monkeys never know which is the business end. You might put your eye out Bonzo.

See post #185.

Go see the vet to get your lice medication.

 

[S.J.]

Oh look, Monkeyman is coming to Pogo's aid. I'd better go get my tranquilizer gun.

Be careful cave monkey. You might shoot yourself.

Not a chance, Sambo.

I'm not your friend monkey. You monkeys never know which is the business end. You might put your eye out Bonzo.

See post #185.

Go see the vet to get your lice medication.

Brilliant response (for a 12 year old).

 

[MarathonMike]

I don't see a Race war. I do see a President that has done everything he can in two terms to divide the country especially along Black/White Racial lines. Look at his mentors. The only difference between Obama, Rev Wright and Rev Sharpton is in the delivery. He believes everything that they do.

 

[Muhammed]

There is no "race war" going on, just a bunch of butthurt white people trying to convince other white people to become as racist as they are.

Could you explain the reasoning that you used to come to that conclusion?

 

[katsteve2012]

That does happen, and what the term "war" has to establish is degree. But when exactly do you think all that started?

Here's a hint: "1865"

Lincoln dies? Lots of things happened in 1865.

Civil War ended and by the end of the year slavery was abolished. In the South the ex-slaves were suddenly free to move about, ask for fair wages, etc, and for this, in an already devastated economy, they were often whipped in public, attacked, beaten, lynched, even burned alive and/or skinned.

You read that correctly -- SKINNED. With the carcass left hanging in public. Another era our standard history books stop short of explaining, and then leave us to uninformed conclusions. Read some of the accounts from that time; it will make your teeth curl. Once that's understood, the practice of public lynchings made into postcards with body parts sold as souvenirs, at least shows a historical connection that begins to explain it didn't just generate from nothing.

Counting from the time black people were legally citizens, i.e. not counting treatment of individual slaves which goes back way before the country was formed, that's where the "race war" started.

All of which makes my sigline all the more dumbfounding.

Yep, and it was all done by racist Democrats.

Yep. Racist SOUTHERN Democrats who evolved into todays Republicans.

'Member what happened yesterday when Frigidweirdo called you out for making shit up you couldn't document? You ran away to Ignore so you wouldn't have to deal with it. That was some fun.

There's never been a race riot, anywhere, where some proctor stood at the gate checking participants for voter registration cards. If they had any at all.

Prove me wrong.

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. .[/Q

Yes. SOUTHERN Democrats.

Whenever the topic of racism gets brought up between Democrats and Republicans, there are two facts you’ll almost always hear conservatives use to counter the belief that their party is full of racism:
President Abraham Lincoln was a Republican
The KKK was largely organized, and populated by, Democrats
And both are facts.
But when someone uses these two items as their defense that the Republican party isn’t loaded with racism, they’re only showing their ignorance about the reality of racism within their party.
It’s true, Southern Democrats were extremely racist. At the same time, Northern “liberal” Democrats and Republicans had already been working together to end discrimination and pushed for ending segregation.
See, in 1948, President Harry Truman made one of the boldest public moves by a Democrat towards Civil Rights for African Americans by creating the President’s Committee on Civil Rights, and ending discrimination in the military. At the Democratic National Convention in 1948 a call was made for civil rights—prompting at least 35 Southern delegates to walk out.


These movements towards civil rights for African Americans spurred a short-lived political party — the States Rights Democratic Party, also known as the “Dixiecrats.” The people who comprised this movement adamantly defended segregation of the races. It was an attempt to keep the “tyrannical Northern liberals” from “destroying the freedom of states’ rights in the South.”
Luckily, this political party only lasted one election. But what this movement really did was recognize the shift of Democrats embracing equality for African Americans and Southern whites strongly opposing any mention of civil rights.
The moves by President Truman sparked the spread of equality in the South and left Southern white Democrats with a feeling that their party was abandoning their racist — and oppressive — system of beliefs.
Over the next decade, more and more Democrats began to embrace equality, passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And while more African Americans began to vote for Democrats, in the late-1960′s a new Republican strategy was put into place—the “Southern strategy.”
This was a plan was that was first popularized by Richard Nixon.
What the “Southern strategy” essentially does is it identified the fact that African Americans were voting for Democrats, therefore Republicans decided they would make white voters more aware of this fact in hopes of driving the “white vote” towards the Republican party.
Doubt me? Let’s look at a comment from a 1970′s interview in the New York Times with Richard Nixon’s political strategist:
“From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
Essentially it was the Republican party saying, “Look, blacks are voting for Democrats so you white people need to vote for Republicans—the party that will represent whites and oppose the blacks.”


With this strategy, you saw the official shift of the Republican party from the “party of Lincoln” to the party which embraced white racism towards African Americans to solidify the white vote in the South.
So, yeah, it’s easy to say Lincoln was a Republican and the KKK was largely built by Democrats, but by doing so you only prove your own ignorance of history. You’re ignoring the fact that as Democrats evolved to embrace equality for African Americans, Southern racists were left looking for a new political party — and they found one that not only embraced their racism and bigotry, it sought it out.
And that party they found was the Republican party.

 

[ThirdTerm]

President Wilson is widely considered as a progressive Democrat who introduced many liberal reforms but on the issue of race his legacy was regressive. Wilson was responsible for reversing the long-standing policy of racial integration in the federal civil service and he reintroduced racial segregation to make his fellow Southerners comfortable in Washington. Wilson also vetoed the racial equality clause proposed at the peace conference in Paris. It's said that Wilson was worried about the Klan which enthusiastically supported his party at the time.

 

[S.J.]

Lincoln dies? Lots of things happened in 1865.

Civil War ended and by the end of the year slavery was abolished. In the South the ex-slaves were suddenly free to move about, ask for fair wages, etc, and for this, in an already devastated economy, they were often whipped in public, attacked, beaten, lynched, even burned alive and/or skinned.

You read that correctly -- SKINNED. With the carcass left hanging in public. Another era our standard history books stop short of explaining, and then leave us to uninformed conclusions. Read some of the accounts from that time; it will make your teeth curl. Once that's understood, the practice of public lynchings made into postcards with body parts sold as souvenirs, at least shows a historical connection that begins to explain it didn't just generate from nothing.

Counting from the time black people were legally citizens, i.e. not counting treatment of individual slaves which goes back way before the country was formed, that's where the "race war" started.

All of which makes my sigline all the more dumbfounding.

Yep, and it was all done by racist Democrats.

Yep. Racist SOUTHERN Democrats who evolved into todays Republicans.

'Member what happened yesterday when Frigidweirdo called you out for making shit up you couldn't document? You ran away to Ignore so you wouldn't have to deal with it. That was some fun.

There's never been a race riot, anywhere, where some proctor stood at the gate checking participants for voter registration cards. If they had any at all.

Prove me wrong.

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. .[/Q

Yes. SOUTHERN Democrats.

Whenever the topic of racism gets brought up between Democrats and Republicans, there are two facts you’ll almost always hear conservatives use to counter the belief that their party is full of racism:
President Abraham Lincoln was a Republican
The KKK was largely organized, and populated by, Democrats
And both are facts.
But when someone uses these two items as their defense that the Republican party isn’t loaded with racism, they’re only showing their ignorance about the reality of racism within their party.
It’s true, Southern Democrats were extremely racist. At the same time, Northern “liberal” Democrats and Republicans had already been working together to end discrimination and pushed for ending segregation.
See, in 1948, President Harry Truman made one of the boldest public moves by a Democrat towards Civil Rights for African Americans by creating the President’s Committee on Civil Rights, and ending discrimination in the military. At the Democratic National Convention in 1948 a call was made for civil rights—prompting at least 35 Southern delegates to walk out.


These movements towards civil rights for African Americans spurred a short-lived political party — the States Rights Democratic Party, also known as the “Dixiecrats.” The people who comprised this movement adamantly defended segregation of the races. It was an attempt to keep the “tyrannical Northern liberals” from “destroying the freedom of states’ rights in the South.”
Luckily, this political party only lasted one election. But what this movement really did was recognize the shift of Democrats embracing equality for African Americans and Southern whites strongly opposing any mention of civil rights.
The moves by President Truman sparked the spread of equality in the South and left Southern white Democrats with a feeling that their party was abandoning their racist — and oppressive — system of beliefs.
Over the next decade, more and more Democrats began to embrace equality, passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And while more African Americans began to vote for Democrats, in the late-1960′s a new Republican strategy was put into place—the “Southern strategy.”
This was a plan was that was first popularized by Richard Nixon.
What the “Southern strategy” essentially does is it identified the fact that African Americans were voting for Democrats, therefore Republicans decided they would make white voters more aware of this fact in hopes of driving the “white vote” towards the Republican party.
Doubt me? Let’s look at a comment from a 1970′s interview in the New York Times with Richard Nixon’s political strategist:
“From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
Essentially it was the Republican party saying, “Look, blacks are voting for Democrats so you white people need to vote for Republicans—the party that will represent whites and oppose the blacks.”


With this strategy, you saw the official shift of the Republican party from the “party of Lincoln” to the party which embraced white racism towards African Americans to solidify the white vote in the South.
So, yeah, it’s easy to say Lincoln was a Republican and the KKK was largely built by Democrats, but by doing so you only prove your own ignorance of history. You’re ignoring the fact that as Democrats evolved to embrace equality for African Americans, Southern racists were left looking for a new political party — and they found one that not only embraced their racism and bigotry, it sought it out.
And that party they found was the Republican party.

Nice fantasy, too bad it's all bullshit. I gave facts, you gave fiction.
Southern blacks voted Republican because Republicans were the ones who freed them from slavery. Democrats tried intimidation (KKK), but they still voted Republican, they passed racist laws (Jim Crow), but the Civil Rights Act (filibustered by Democrats and passed by Republicans) put an end to that. The only option the Democrats had was to BUY the black vote by making them dependent on government through welfare. That's when President Johnson (a known racist) started his "Great Society". It worked, why wouldn't it? Tear down their self esteem, destroy their family unit, make them feel like they can't achieve anything on their own, give them welfare and food stamps and an excuse for failure, then call Republicans racist for not going along with it. Heaven forbid those white devils should want blacks to stand on their own two feet like everybody else and participate in the American Dream.
You can hold onto your fantasy and repeat it at every opportunity if you want but you have no historical data to back it up. Everything I just said is verifiable. Face it, you've been used like pawns by the Democratic Party. They've been promising you freedom and prosperity for 50 years now and you're still at the bottom. You're still slaves on a plantation.

 

[JQPublic1]

Does anyone think this latest brouhaha crap is going to push whites to push back by joining KKK and other "racist" organizations? After all, they have the black panthers. They are the ones doing to shoving and rioting and bullshit to keep the hate alive. One can only bend so much before flat out breaking.

Black Miss America
Blackish
NAACP
White Men Can't Jump and other assorted movies
Losing a job for saying the N word
Losing a job for calling someone black
Black Only parties, circles, proms & it not being considered racist
Black Panthers
Announcing to media and world to BURN THIS TOWN DOWN
etc etc etc

If caucasians did HALF of the crap being done now, all hell would be breaking loose. Oh. Wait. It is breaking loose but it's been changed in favor of looting, thuggery, bottle throwing, murders, rioting, etc. and anyone that tries to fight back...well. We all know what happens then. The name calling. The accusations of racism. The MONEY being paid out. Yadda yadda.

White men cant jump was a great movie, nothing wrong with that

Yeah, I liked it too! But....what if there was a movie title Black Men Can't Swim?

Aw that is too weak! You'd like a movie entitled "Black men Can't Vote" even better.

 

[JQPublic1]

Nice fantasy, too bad it's all bullshit. I gave facts, you gave fiction.
Southern blacks voted Republican because Republicans were the ones who freed them from slavery. Democrats tried intimidation (KKK), but they still voted Republican, they passed racist laws (Jim Crow), but the Civil Rights Act (filibustered by Democrats and passed by Republicans) put an end to that

So, the Republicans back then were Liberals? What happened?..Where did all those liberal republicans go?

The only option the Democrats had was to BUY the black vote by making them dependent on government through welfare. That's when President Johnson (a known racist) started his "Great Society". It worked, why wouldn't it? Tear down their self esteem, destroy their family unit, make them feel like they can't achieve anything on their own, give them welfare and food stamps and an excuse for failure, then call Republicans racist for not going along with it

Only 12.01% of Blacks are on welfare today. But I am curious as to why you think that Johnson's Great Society only benefitted Blacks. The GS was a boon to the general public, white and black alike. In 1999 this author exposes the conservative twist:


If there is a prize for the political scam of the 20th century, it should go to the conservatives for propagating as conventional wisdom that the Great Society programs of the 1960s were a misguided and failed social experiment that wasted taxpayers' money.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, from 1963 when Lyndon Johnson took office until 1970 as the impact of his Great Society programs were felt, the portion of Americans living below the poverty line dropped from 22.2 percent to 12.6 percent, the most dramatic decline over such a brief period in this century
What Was Really Great About The Great Society by Joseph A. Califano Jr.

Johnson, the known racist, signed the Civil RIghts Bill into law.

Heaven forbid those white devils should want blacks to stand on their own two feet like everybody else and participate in the American Dream.

The token black spokesman most often cited by conservatives as the expert on Black society, Thomas Sowell, posited that myth. I wonder how much money he made off of that! I guess the 88% of blacks NOT on welfare doesn't mean a thing! Perhaps Medicaid, Medicare and other insurance programs, which were expanded by republicans Ford and Nixon are included in your welfare paradigm.

You can hold onto your fantasy and repeat it at every opportunity if you want but you have no historical data to back it up. Everything I just said is verifiable. Face it, you've been used like pawns by the Democratic Party. They've been promising you freedom and prosperity for 50 years now and you're still at the bottom. You're still slaves on a plantation.

Huh? Democrats haven't been in power for 50 years straight. Ex-democrat Reagan and the two Shrubs took up a lot of that 50 years.
What did they do to get blacks off that illusive "democratic plantation?"
The GOP had 20 years to do it and they failed because there were too many white people taking advantage of those social safety nets, food stamps and other federal programs like medicaid and medicare. Here is a hint for ya. Get the message out to White people to get off that democrat plantation and the blacks won't matter. There wouldn't be a plantation for anyone to be on!

 

[featherlite]

I think there is still injustice and areas of frustration, but anything labeled race war is all hype.
That would be like going backwards ...not many people want that.

 

[Pogo]

'Member what happened yesterday when Frigidweirdo called you out for making shit up you couldn't document? You ran away to Ignore so you wouldn't have to deal with it. That was some fun.

There's never been a race riot, anywhere, where some proctor stood at the gate checking participants for voter registration cards. If they had any at all.

Prove me wrong.

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. We've been through this many times before, it's history and the only people who dispute it are little shit flingers like you on message boards who can't debate an issue without flame baiting and personal attacks. Now you can go back to the grassy knoll and look for evidence to expose George H.W. Bush as Kennedy's assassin. So long, fuckface.

And there it is, running away again. I'm insulted that Frigid got the before I did.

​

So you have nothing.
Stop the presses.

Moreover you seem to think lynching only went on in the South. Even though you were present for, and participating in, this thread -- where you tried desperately to shut it up.

I don't know why you would post a link to an old thread where you got your ass handed to you but I guess when you're that desperate you just throw whatever you can find, hoping something sticks. Kind of like your grassy knoll theory.

Hmm... actually I don't know any such thread. Looks to me like that one drew a bunch of thanks and agrees. Oh yeah and you, whining for it to go away and trying to float the same political party hackitude you tried to float here. And you failed back then too. Just imagine -- if you hadn't painted yourself into a corner back then, you'd have something to use now.

Matter o' fact, when I asked you the exact same question in post 7 of that thread, all you could come up with (post 10) was a Wiki page on what "lynching" means. Poor hack.

Which reminds me ..... Jeeves, see to our troll guest.

​

And while you're chewing on that, I don't have a "grassy knoll theory". If I did you could quote it. But again ...... morass.

Are you sure you don't want to edit your post again? Posting pictures of butlers and asses doesn't do much to make your point, dick sucker, but that's the way you debate. No substance, no proof, no nothing, just personal attacks, diversions, and claims of winning arguments. Better regroup and try again tomorrow, amateur.

Don't wanna see Jeeves with Ass under Glass? Then don't bring it up.
Your ipse dixit fallacy failed then, and it still fails now. And while you probably don't see the pattern, it's gonna fail tomorrow too.

Then there's that grassy knoll....

 

[Pogo]

Lincoln dies? Lots of things happened in 1865.

Civil War ended and by the end of the year slavery was abolished. In the South the ex-slaves were suddenly free to move about, ask for fair wages, etc, and for this, in an already devastated economy, they were often whipped in public, attacked, beaten, lynched, even burned alive and/or skinned.

You read that correctly -- SKINNED. With the carcass left hanging in public. Another era our standard history books stop short of explaining, and then leave us to uninformed conclusions. Read some of the accounts from that time; it will make your teeth curl. Once that's understood, the practice of public lynchings made into postcards with body parts sold as souvenirs, at least shows a historical connection that begins to explain it didn't just generate from nothing.

Counting from the time black people were legally citizens, i.e. not counting treatment of individual slaves which goes back way before the country was formed, that's where the "race war" started.

All of which makes my sigline all the more dumbfounding.

Yep, and it was all done by racist Democrats.

Yep. Racist SOUTHERN Democrats who evolved into todays Republicans.

'Member what happened yesterday when Frigidweirdo called you out for making shit up you couldn't document? You ran away to Ignore so you wouldn't have to deal with it. That was some fun.

There's never been a race riot, anywhere, where some proctor stood at the gate checking participants for voter registration cards. If they had any at all.

Prove me wrong.

Abolitionists were Republicans, slave owners were Democrats, KKK was created to intimidate Republicans and blacks, Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats. .[/Q

Yes. SOUTHERN Democrats.

Whenever the topic of racism gets brought up between Democrats and Republicans, there are two facts you’ll almost always hear conservatives use to counter the belief that their party is full of racism:
President Abraham Lincoln was a Republican
The KKK was largely organized, and populated by, Democrats
And both are facts.

Actually the Klan was organized by some young Confederate war vets who were bored, as a goof. They had no known political affiliation. But it soon got taken over by vigilantes who had already been forming in the South to (as they saw it) continue the war, basically insurgents resisting what they saw as interlopers from without (the North and the Union League) and within (the freed slaves). This is where the lynching atmosphere described above started, and organized into regional groups called the White League and the Red Caps and the Men of Justice and the Knights of the White Camellia. The Klan's organization and hooded garb were quickly pounced on by this same element. Some of this was also resistance to the Union League, which was known to be using similar terrorist tactics against the insurgents, hence the Klan's persistent claims of itself as a "protection" force.

Whether they were as individuals "Democrats" or had any political affiliation would be guesswork on an individual basis; their alleged motives were as a social force, not a political one. The Republican Party hadn't established itself in the South at all (Lincoln's name was never even on ballots there), so in effect if you were registered as a voter or ran for office, you were most likely a Democrat by the law of averages, though it doesn't make one follow the other.

These lines of demarcation have always followed a pattern of region (meaning, local culture) rather than politics. I've posted a dozen times on this board the illustration of the Civil Rights Act (1964) vote clearly showing that while there's very little division on the vote by party (slightly more Democrats voted for it than Republicans, but not significantly), there IS a dramatic division by region (Democrats and Republicans in the South united against it, Ds and Rs everywhere else united for it.

Some wags here try to add up the Ds and Rs independent of where they live and then pretend to see a pattern, which completely ignores regional cultures and the deep divisions caused by the Civil War and its attendant dynamics, including the forming of a political party that at the same time (a) had no presence in the South at all, and (b) controlled the government that won the war, leading to the establishment of the South as effectively a one-party state.

That of course led to deep divisions within the party itself, as you note shortly:

But when someone uses these two items as their defense that the Republican party isn’t loaded with racism, they’re only showing their ignorance about the reality of racism within their party.

It’s true, Southern Democrats were extremely racist. At the same time, Northern “liberal” Democrats and Republicans had already been working together to end discrimination and pushed for ending segregation.
See, in 1948, President Harry Truman made one of the boldest public moves by a Democrat towards Civil Rights for African Americans by creating the President’s Committee on Civil Rights, and ending discrimination in the military. At the Democratic National Convention in 1948 a call was made for civil rights—prompting at least 35 Southern delegates to walk out.


These movements towards civil rights for African Americans spurred a short-lived political party — the States Rights Democratic Party, also known as the “Dixiecrats.” The people who comprised this movement adamantly defended segregation of the races. It was an attempt to keep the “tyrannical Northern liberals” from “destroying the freedom of states’ rights in the South.”
Luckily, this political party only lasted one election. But what this movement really did was recognize the shift of Democrats embracing equality for African Americans and Southern whites strongly opposing any mention of civil rights.

The moves by President Truman sparked the spread of equality in the South and left Southern white Democrats with a feeling that their party was abandoning their racist — and oppressive — system of beliefs.

And that wasn't the first time. The schism within the party had led to disruptions and infighting in several previous election years including 1924 when the Klan agitated the Democratic convention to derail the nomination of Oscar Underwood (D-AL) the leading voice denouncing the Klan; and again in 1928 when the Klan again disrupted the convention to oppose the nomination of Al Smith (because he was a Catholic). As long ago as 1860 the Southern faction bolted from the convention and ran their own candidates, much like 1948 except in 1860 they won the entire South.

It's crucial to understand this regional division -- in 1860 neither the Democratic nor the Republican Presidential candidate won a single electoral vote in the South. With that kind of split going on it would be surprising if it were not followed by civil war. And it points to the roots of the same deep cultural-regional division.

In the other calendar direction, the next election after the Dixiecrat walkout (1952), Strom Thurmond, the Dixiecrat Presidential nominee, publicly endorsed the Republican Dwight Eisenhower, and was dumped by the state Democratic Party in his next Senate run (he ran a write-in and won -- that's how personal/regional this division was; it was more important to elect a known ideologue than to elect a Democrat. Since that was effectively the only party, lines of distinction had to be drawn somewhere else.

These lines were always drawn regionally and rooted in the division of, and occupation following, the Civil War. Those "northern liberals" were always despised in the South for that reason, regardless of political parties. Then there were 1968 and 1972 with George Wallace running against both parties against those "northern liberals interfering". Wallace had wanted to be Goldwater's running mate in 1964, and when that was declined, had to be talked out of running his own campaign that year too.

Obviously when we describe someone as "Democrat" or "Republican" the definition thereof is highly volatile depending on region and time period.

Over the next decade, more and more Democrats began to embrace equality, passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And while more African Americans began to vote for Democrats...

Actually although LBJ won a record portion of the black vote in 1964, that vote had shifted to the Democratic side back in the first FDR term. There was a thread asking that question recently which degenerated into other stuff but the pattern was laid out in detail here.

.... in the late-1960′s a new Republican strategy was put into place—the “Southern strategy.”
This was a plan was that was first popularized by Richard Nixon.

What the “Southern strategy” essentially does is it identified the fact that African Americans were voting for Democrats, therefore Republicans decided they would make white voters more aware of this fact in hopes of driving the “white vote” towards the Republican party.

Doubt me? Let’s look at a comment from a 1970′s interview in the New York Times with Richard Nixon’s political strategist:

“From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”

Essentially it was the Republican party saying, “Look, blacks are voting for Democrats so you white people need to vote for Republicans—the party that will represent whites and oppose the blacks.”


With this strategy, you saw the official shift of the Republican party from the “party of Lincoln” to the party which embraced white racism towards African Americans to solidify the white vote in the South.
So, yeah, it’s easy to say Lincoln was a Republican and the KKK was largely built by Democrats, but by doing so you only prove your own ignorance of history. You’re ignoring the fact that as Democrats evolved to embrace equality for African Americans, Southern racists were left looking for a new political party — and they found one that not only embraced their racism and bigotry, it sought it out.
And that party they found was the Republican party.

..... and part of that shift in the two parties' population is driven by the shift of the parties themselves; in the time coming out of the Civil War the Republican Party was the purveyor of Liberal ideas (abolition) and the Democratic Party the champion of "states rights", smaller government and decentralization in favor of local power. Newly freed slaves gravitated to the new Republican Party, electing the first black officials of the South and some of its members forming the NAACP at the turn of the century. But by then the Great Magnetic Reversal of the Parties was also taking place as the RP focused increasingly on the interests of big business, corporations and the rich, while the DP took on the Populist and Progressive movements of the late 19th century, finally culminating in Roosevelt. For most practical ideological purposes, over a few decades the two parties swapped places, which means they would eventually swap constituencies.

Southernness is a stubborn thing though, and for all the ideological schisms, it was still unthinkable to outwardly associate with the "party of Lincoln" until Strom Thurmond broke ranks in 1964. This was of course reaction to his losing the CRA battle, which LBJ upon signing it remarked "we have lost the South for a generation" ("we" meaning his party). The CRA along with Thurmond's defection created a vacuum in which the "party of Lincoln" would get a second look.

Subsequent to the Nixon story above, the next influential Republican began his campaign significantly in Philadelphia, Mississippi, historically noted as a racial battleground, and talked in terms of "states rights" --- the Democratic Party position of a century earlier. This was not exactly the Republican Party directly coming out and saying "hey racists, vote for us, we'll represent your interests" --- it was more like a prostitute dressing up lewdly, standing on the corner waiting for an offer. The Democrats knew that corner well -- they had historically been hanging out on the same corner targeting the same marks before circumstances forced them to give up the double life.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There is no "race war" going on, just a bunch of butthurt white people trying to convince other white people to become as racist as they are.

Could you explain the reasoning that you used to come to that conclusion?

The answer to your question can be found in the fact that the notion that there is a 'race war' is devoid of any 'reasoning' altogether.