The GOP's New Fake Racial History

[NYcarbineer]

Which really doesn't address why you think blacks are in need of mental health?

Since I never made that claim, it's just a strawman manufactured by someone who refuses to admit that people who run around claiming that Obama is a Muslim and was born in Kenya would benefit from mental health care. Thank Obama for giving them the opportunity, and I hope they take our President up on it. That is about the best thing we can do to ease racial tension in this country. Unless of course you believe that racism is a good thing. Plenty of right wingers seem to believe so. Hell, the GOP even developed a strategy to co opt racists into their ranks.

Is this the act of a rational mind?

Isn't it nice that the backwards 'B' didn't leave a scar.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The DEMS were arrogant enough to imagine that they could change the social dynamic of this nation in a LOT of areas that were bound to lose them support.

You're right. Lots of right wingers miss those days of racial/ethnic/religious aparthied. Lucky for them it's not quite as impolitic to slam Muslims and Mexicans, or their heads might explode.

....And, White-Wingers are big-fans o' trashing Welfare Queens....but, manage to overlook the Kings....the "conservative"-ones.....

Why's this dude (even) DRAWING a Federal-check??!!!! ​

February 14, 2011​

"Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas peppered an attorney with a question during oral arguments on a South Carolina death penalty case. The questioning of an attorney by a Supreme Court Justice would normally not make news but Thomas’s question did, not because it was penetrating, involved a complex point of law, elicited important data, or because he asked it out of just plain curiosity, but because he even asked it at all. It was a rarity. He asked it five years ago, and hasn’t asked another question since then.

His well-documented silence on the court for the past five years has been the butt of jokes, ridicule, and just plain wonderment. How could a high court justice sit Sphinx like while his colleagues routinely rage and bombard attorneys with every conceivable question during oral arguments? In the two decades up to 2008, justices asked on average 133 questions. Thomas’s ultra-conservative ideological court soul mate Antonin Scalia is the most verbose. He’s peppered, badgered and hectored attorneys with more than a one-fifth of the questions asked from the high bench. All the while Thomas has sat silent, inscrutable, distant and even appeared bored.

Thomas has given several different reasons why he’s kept his mouth shut. He claims that he does not see any need to speak up or out since it doesn’t really serve to help him understand, clarify or amplify on a legal point in a case. This is ludicrous. Studies have shown that oral arguments are not just an exercise in verbal theater that serve no real purpose in helping judges make up their minds about cases. They are vital to gathering information, raising and clarifying crucial legal and policy issues and they help build consensus among the justices about opinions they will have to render in a case."

FAUX-Supremo!!!!​

 

[bodecea]

It's interesting to compare the party platforms over the years. The GOP has been consistently pro-civil rights since 1858.

From the Democratic Party platform:

1840, 1844, 1848
All efforts by abolitionists . . . to interfere
with questions of slavery . . . are
calculated to lead to the most alarming
and dangerous consequences and . . . have
an inevitable tendency to diminish the
happiness of the people and endanger the
stability and permanency of the union.​

I wonder how many Democrats from the 1840s are still in Congress.

 

[Avatar4321]

Considering the amount of racists who remained in the Democrat party, especially in prominent positions, you really need a much more persuasive argument than "LIAR!"

But then that would actually make you argue on behalf of your claims, which requires work on your part. And we all know how much you love that.