Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It's hard to take someone seriously who wants to condemn a man for something he did 50 years ago, while not having a single word of criticism for those who are still actively engaged in it.
Now your putting words in my mouth, your condeming me, nice. And your not about scoring cheap political points. What you feel bad when the tables get turned on you simply by stating the truth.
The democrat party is the party of hate, there were some good democrats, one gave a speech at the Republican convention, if that is not telling when Democrats have to leave the party and speak on behalf and endorse Bush, thats why Bush won, Democrats left the party to support Bush.
I am surprised anyone listens to Democrats at all, the party hijacked by the liberal/marxists
The fact of that matter is that most racists in the South (Lott, Barbour, Helms, etc) migrated into the Republican Party after 1968. Not all southern Republicans are racist, but almost every Southern racist is Republican. Go visit Vidor, Texas; Lake Charles, Louisiana; right across the South to Acala, Florida; then north through, George, South Carolian, into the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Your racist GOP statements will not go unchallenged and are being competently addressed in high schools and colleges across the land. Your kind is dying philosophically and will be gone forever in another two generations. Good riddance to rubbish.
So you think Senator Byrd the grand dragon of the KKK is not democrat, thats how he runs, thats how he is elected, thats how he votes, at 91 his vote is still very much cherished by the democrat leadership, how do you defend this.
I defend his right as I did Jesse Helms. None of that excuses that nearly every Southern racist migrated into the GOP in the election of 1968 and thereafter. But those voices are growing much older now and are dying off. Good.
Spoken by a member of the party who an active Klansman (Barbour) was party chair and is a frontrunner for their 2012 presidential nomination and had another Klan supporter (Lott) just recently leave the Senate.
Do you have any proof for those assertions?
In 1982, Barbour was the Republican candidate for United States Senate but lost to incumbent Democrat John C. Stennis.[3]
During this failed bid for Senator a controversy arose at a campaigning stump. According to The New York Times, in the presence of the press an aide was complaining to Barbour that "coons" were going to be at a campaign stop at the state fair. Barbour warned the aide, in front of reporters, that if the aide persisted in racist remarks, he would be "reincarnated as a watermelon and placed at the mercy of blacks."[4]
Barbour is an active member of the CCC, a white supremacist organization, and Lott has praised the same group in the past and wrote a column for their newsletter.
Do you have any proof for those assertions?
Barbour is an active member of the CCC, a white supremacist organization, and Lott has praised the same group in the past and wrote a column for their newsletter.
I realize there are zero standards here, but do you have any proof for any of these assertions?
No he is probably lying through his little weasel mouth.Barbour is an active member of the CCC, a white supremacist organization, and Lott has praised the same group in the past and wrote a column for their newsletter.
I realize there are zero standards here, but do you have any proof for any of these assertions?
He probably telling the truth, its pretty hard to get re-elected as a democrat when all the south knows that the democrat politicians where also KKK members, smart thing to do is simply change parties, that did not change who they are. They democrat politicians wore white robes and hoods and than wore republican. That did not make them republicans in values, it was just convienent politically.
I'm not putting words in your mouth. You've had amble opportunity to condemn them, but have refused to do so. The reason you don't is pretty clear. I, on the other hand, have zero tolerance for it. You claim it took me a "long time" to state it. I made the comment in my response to your reply to my initial comment. That's not a long time by any stretch. Even so, it's funny for you to be critical of me for "taking a long time" to do it when you are still yet to do it.
Your the one with 20000 plus posts so you go first.
Further what do you mean by "amble opportunity to condemn them",
64 percent of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80 percent of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, 6 against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.
Do you have any proof for those assertions?
Barbour is an active member of the CCC, a white supremacist organization, and Lott has praised the same group in the past and wrote a column for their newsletter.
I realize there are zero standards here, but do you have any proof for any of these assertions?
WLBT found Republican candidate Haley Barbour on a website for the Council of Conservative Citizens, an organization which touts itself as the true voice of the American right. Barbour is on the front page of the national website along with state Senator Bucky Huggins. The picture is taken from the Black Hawk Barbecue and rally held on July 19th, which was sponsored by the Council of Conservative Citizens. This organization says it opposes sponsored race preference programs like affirmative action and forced integration. It also questions whether Martin Luther King deserves a holiday in his honor. The council states that it stands against the "tide of nonwhite, Third World immigrants swamping this country."
Far Right Group Uses Barbour's Picture - WLBT 3 - Jackson, MS:
It's hard to take someone seriously who wants to condemn a man for something he did 50 years ago, while not having a single word of criticism for those who are still actively engaged in it.
Now your putting words in my mouth, your condeming me, nice. And your not about scoring cheap political points. What you feel bad when the tables get turned on you simply by stating the truth.
The democrat party is the party of hate, there were some good democrats, one gave a speech at the Republican convention, if that is not telling when Democrats have to leave the party and speak on behalf and endorse Bush, thats why Bush won, Democrats left the party to support Bush.
I am surprised anyone listens to Democrats at all, the party hijacked by the liberal/marxists
Real Americans voted for the Democratic Party last year because the Dems represented what is good for America. Real America defeated the GOP because of what it did from 2001 to 2006. Real America is in control, and your whining makes no difference at all.
So you think Senator Byrd the grand dragon of the KKK is not democrat, thats how he runs, thats how he is elected, thats how he votes, at 91 his vote is still very much cherished by the democrat leadership, how do you defend this.
I defend his right as I did Jesse Helms. None of that excuses that nearly every Southern racist migrated into the GOP in the election of 1968 and thereafter. But those voices are growing much older now and are dying off. Good.
Blacks founded the Republican party of Texas.
64 percent of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80 percent of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, 6 against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.
Nixon implemented the first federal affirmative action (race-based preference) laws with goals and timetables
If he doesn't use the reconciliation if needed, he will be kicked out of his office.
He not only looks like Mitch McWaddles, but he is just as dynamic.
Now Nancy, there's one hot old chick.She probably has a bigger set than most of the boys in the band.
Nuclear it shall be and a health care plan we shall have. Future generations will wonder what the big stink was all about and won't believe people fell for the socialist shit, death panels, government men in your doctor's office etc.
Go home take an aspirin and see me in a year under the current system.
jake actually believes that stuffNow your putting words in my mouth, your condeming me, nice. And your not about scoring cheap political points. What you feel bad when the tables get turned on you simply by stating the truth.
The democrat party is the party of hate, there were some good democrats, one gave a speech at the Republican convention, if that is not telling when Democrats have to leave the party and speak on behalf and endorse Bush, thats why Bush won, Democrats left the party to support Bush.
I am surprised anyone listens to Democrats at all, the party hijacked by the liberal/marxists
Real Americans voted for the Democratic Party last year because the Dems represented what is good for America. Real America defeated the GOP because of what it did from 2001 to 2006. Real America is in control, and your whining makes no difference at all.
You sound like some unemployed blogger from Wasilla, Alaska when you start claiming your own as the "real Americans."
We don't need that shit.
I'm not putting words in your mouth. You've had amble opportunity to condemn them, but have refused to do so. The reason you don't is pretty clear. I, on the other hand, have zero tolerance for it. You claim it took me a "long time" to state it. I made the comment in my response to your reply to my initial comment. That's not a long time by any stretch. Even so, it's funny for you to be critical of me for "taking a long time" to do it when you are still yet to do it.
Your the one with 20000 plus posts so you go first.
Further what do you mean by "amble opportunity to condemn them",
Since when is 1,100 more than 20,000?
64 percent of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80 percent of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, 6 against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.
A meaningless statistic. By lumping everyone in together, you ignore regional differences in the vote. When you look at the regional breakdown, you'll notice something: no matter where they lived, Republicans were more likely to be hostile to civil rights than Democrats from the same region.
64 percent of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80 percent of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, 6 against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.
A meaningless statistic. By lumping everyone in together, you ignore regional differences in the vote. When you look at the regional breakdown, you'll notice something: no matter where they lived, Republicans were more likely to be hostile to civil rights than Democrats from the same region.
There is a reason there is a party, because over all they are of the same idealogy, they vote together and hold power together.
First and foremost I did not post a statistic, to label it as such shows your ashamed so you got to convince folks that its simply a statistic.
So explain how votes in congress are statistics. I am puzzled, I cant answer or address anything more that you say, if you characterize votes as statistics your either obfuscating or your uneducated and grasping at straws.
so explain or correct yourself.
A little more on the CCC:
* In an essay on the web site, "A Call to White Americans," the author writes, "If we want to live, white Americans must begin today to lay the foundations for our future and our childrens future Start today, fellow white Americans. Look at the faces around you: find the faces like yours, and see them as your brothers and sisters. Find the fair-skinned babies and see them as your children "
* Another commentator on the site writes, "There appears to be a growth of a form of racial bigotry in the world today that is hardly noticed because its victims are white. This bigotry is anti-whitism. It is going largely unnoticed by many whites who some will argue have become so race whipped and aracial after 30 plus years of unending anti-white propaganda from the liberal elites that they dont even think of themselves as a race or as a people."
* In December 1998, the CCCs web site boasted that the groups leadership had met with Jean-Marie Le Pen, the leader of the National Front, a xenophobic, racist, and anti-Semitic political party in France.
* Jared Taylor, editor of the racist publication, American Renaissance (AR) has addressed CCC meetings numerous times in 1998. AR describes itself as a "literate, undeceived journal of race, immigration and the decline of civility." In reality, the publication uses pseudo-science to justify racism and white separatism.
* In April 1998, Edward Butler, a Christian Identity preacher who publishes the vehemently anti-Semitic newsletter, "The New World Today," gave a talk to the Georgia chapter of the CCC. A recent issue of Butlers newsletter reflects his views. He wrote, " the U.S. government officials elected and appointed, are predominantly vassals of the Zionist New World Order. Jews control the wealth of the world and in turn they control the governments Will you go on being a vassal of the Zionist slave state?"
* In December 1998, Michael Collins Piper spoke at the meeting of the National Capital Chapter of the CCC in Washington, D.C. Piper is a correspondent for The Spotlight, a newspaper published by Liberty Lobby, the most active anti-Semitic propaganda organization in the United States. At the meeting, Piper made anti-Semitic comments and accused Israels Mossad and the Anti-Defamation League of being involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
* In July 1995, David Duke addressed the meeting of the South Carolina chapter of the CCC, held at Clemson University. At the meeting, Duke, who has once again openly embraced his early extremist views, urged followers to fight for their "white genes."
* In April 1994, the Arkansas chapter of the CCC invited lawyer Kirk Lyons to speak to the group. Lyons has been a friend to and has represented numerous extremists in court cases, including white supremacist Louis Beam and James Wickstrom, a Christian Identity preacher and head of the Posse Commitatus, an anti-government group. Lyons has described himself as an "active sympathizer" of his clients causes. The spring 1998 newsletter of the CCC mentions that the organization has been working on a case with Southern Legal Resource Center, currently headed by Lyons.
ADL Backgrounder - The Council of Conservative Citizens
A meaningless statistic. By lumping everyone in together, you ignore regional differences in the vote. When you look at the regional breakdown, you'll notice something: no matter where they lived, Republicans were more likely to be hostile to civil rights than Democrats from the same region.
There is a reason there is a party, because over all they are of the same idealogy, they vote together and hold power together.
First and foremost I did not post a statistic, to label it as such shows your ashamed so you got to convince folks that its simply a statistic.
So explain how votes in congress are statistics. I am puzzled, I cant answer or address anything more that you say, if you characterize votes as statistics your either obfuscating or your uneducated and grasping at straws.
so explain or correct yourself.
sta⋅tis⋅tic
/stəˈtɪstɪk/
noun Statistics.
a numerical fact or datum, esp. one computed from a sample.
Origin: 178090; < NL statisticus. See status, -istic
Furthermore, members of a party do share a core ideology. That does not mean they agree on every single issue.
