what is the alt right?

[Dr.Traveler]

Again, you are wrong. Duke made absolutely no headway as a Democrat in the 80's. He tried to run for the nomination and was stomped. If that's not a repudiation of his beliefs, I don't know what is. Duke prior to that point tried to run as a Democrat and got stomped many many times. He didn't win a state level election until 1989 when he switched parties to the GOP. Duke has continued to run as a Republican ever since.

The rest of your post is the usual bullet pointed garbage that had zero to do with the fact that Strom Thurmond bolted the DNC for the GOP when it became clear a segregationist such as him had no future there.

In all seriousness, your shtick is pretty old. You start with the assumption that all evil must originate from the Democratic party and then make bullet point lists of unrelated facts to try to back that up. Every bad Republican must be a secret Democrat. Now you have Trump who is actively catering to the Alt-Right and you have him despite the fact the GOP field had a long long list of really good candidates to choose from. Your party is broken and has serious problems. It isn't getting better until you acknowledge the fact the party has problems and those bad actors need to be shown the door.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Again, you are wrong. Duke made absolutely no headway as a Democrat in the 80's. He tried to run for the nomination and was stomped. If that's not a repudiation of his beliefs, I don't know what is. Duke prior to that point tried to run as a Democrat and got stomped many many times. He didn't win a state level election until 1989 when he switched parties to the GOP. Duke has continued to run as a Republican ever since.

The rest of your post is the usual bullet pointed garbage that had zero to do with the fact that Strom Thurmond bolted the DNC for the GOP when it became clear a segregationist such as him had no future there.

In all seriousness, your shtick is pretty old. You start with the assumption that all evil must originate from the Democratic party and then make bullet point lists of unrelated facts to try to back that up. Every bad Republican must be a secret Democrat. Now you have Trump who is actively catering to the Alt-Right and you have him despite the fact the GOP field had a long long list of really good candidates to choose from. Your party is broken and has serious problems. It isn't getting better until you acknowledge the fact the party has problems and those bad actors need to be shown the door.

Quit running from the truth.

His success has nothing to do with the facts: as a congenital racist, he aligned with the Democrat Party from his start.

Exactly the same facts apply to Thurmond.
Racist....Democrat.


Find anything....ANYTHING in my post that isn't true, correct and accurate:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

2. In 1948, Strom Thurmond ran as a “Dixiecrat,” not “Dixiecan.” They were segregationists, and an offshoot of the Democrat Party. And they remained Democrats.

1. The so-called “Dixiecrats” remained Democrats and did not migrate to the Republican Party. The Dixiecrats were a group of Southern Democrats who, in the 1948 national election, formed a third party, the State’s Rights Democratic Party with the slogan: “Segregation Forever!” Even so, they continued to be Democrats for all local and state elections, as well as for all future national elections.http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/FrequentlyAskedQuestions#The__Dixiecrats__Remained_Democrats
2. While all Democrats weren’t segregationists, all segregationists were Democrats.
3. Klan members and racists including Democrat FDR's first pick for the Supreme Court, Hugo Black, as well as George Wallace, ‘Bull’ Connor, Orval Faubus, Lester Maddox, etc.
4. And, Hugo Black's anti-Catholic bias, which showed up in his actions on the Supreme Court:

"... Black was head of new members for the largest Klan cell in the South. New members of the KKK had to pledge their allegiance to the “eternal separation of Church and State.”... Separation was a crucial part of the KKK’s jurisprudential agenda. It was included in the Klansman’s Creed..."
Egnorance: Hugo Black and the real history of "the wall of separation between church and state"



3. But the most important segregationists were Democrats in the U.S. Senate, where civil rights bills went to die.

a. "On June 13, 2005, in a resolution sponsored by senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and George Allen of Virginia, together with 78 others, the US Senate formally apologized for its failure to enact this and other anti-lynching bills "when action was most needed."[3] From 1882-1968, "...nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress, and three passed the House. Seven presidents between 1890 and 1952 petitioned Congress to pass a federal law."[3] None was approved by the Senate because of the powerful opposition of the Southern Democratic voting bloc"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159348,00.html

1. Here’s a great opportunity to see the work the media does: challenge anyone to name one segregationist U.S. Senator, and the only one they’ll be able to name is Thurmond….the only one who became a Republican. Get the idea?
2. The media intentionally hides the civil rights records of lifelong, liberal Democrats to make it look as if it was the Republican Party that was the party of segregation and racial discrimination.
3. The most important points: all the segregationists in the Senate were Democrats, and remained same for the rest of their lives…except for one. And they were not conservative.

1. Strom Thurmond became a Republican, albeit 16 years later.

4." There's also the curious case of David Duke in Louisiana. If the Democrats were what you claim they were, Duke would running as a Democrat. He's not, and he didn't run as a Democrat when he ran for Governor."
It appears you are ignorant of the facts:

a.. "David Ernest Duke (born July 1, 1950) is an American white nationalist, politician,antisemitic conspiracy theorist and former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.[4][5]
A former one-term Republican Louisiana State Representative, he was a candidate in theDemocratic presidential primaries in 1988."
David Duke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

b. As recently as 2012 he was still supporting Democrats.
"In 2012 a racist, dictator-loving, anti-Semitic, African-American NYC Councilman named Charles Barron ran for the Democratic Party nomination in New York’s 8th Congressional District. While some NYC Democrats such as Ed Koch and Jerrold Nadler condemned Barron and his Bigotry. But outside of NYC Democrats stayed neutral and refused to condemn the racist Charles Barron, even though was supported by white supremacist and anti-semitic David Duke."
David Duke Endorsed This DEMOCRAT, but the Media Didn't Care!

c. "As a Democrat, Duke lost two state Senate campaigns in the 1970s and briefly ran for president in 1979. He tried again for president in 1988, where he didn't make much headway. " Former KKK leader David Duke is running for Senate. How well could he do?



5. "The Democrat Party is and has always been, the party of slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, the KKK, and second class citizenship."
As further proof, the most popular Democrat former President....and one the Democrats wish to put back in the White House is life-time racist, Bill Clinton.
Right up to today.
A racist his entire political life.
Why don't you challenge me to prove it?




....true, accurate, and correct......especially this:
5. "The Democrat Party is and has always been, the party of slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, the KKK, and second class citizenship."
As further proof, the most popular Democrat former President....and one the Democrats wish to put back in the White House is life-time racist, Bill Clinton.
Right up to today.
A racist his entire political life.
Why don't you challenge me to prove it?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Again, you are wrong. Duke made absolutely no headway as a Democrat in the 80's. He tried to run for the nomination and was stomped. If that's not a repudiation of his beliefs, I don't know what is. Duke prior to that point tried to run as a Democrat and got stomped many many times. He didn't win a state level election until 1989 when he switched parties to the GOP. Duke has continued to run as a Republican ever since.

The rest of your post is the usual bullet pointed garbage that had zero to do with the fact that Strom Thurmond bolted the DNC for the GOP when it became clear a segregationist such as him had no future there.

In all seriousness, your shtick is pretty old. You start with the assumption that all evil must originate from the Democratic party and then make bullet point lists of unrelated facts to try to back that up. Every bad Republican must be a secret Democrat. Now you have Trump who is actively catering to the Alt-Right and you have him despite the fact the GOP field had a long long list of really good candidates to choose from. Your party is broken and has serious problems. It isn't getting better until you acknowledge the fact the party has problems and those bad actors need to be shown the door.

"In all seriousness, your shtick is pretty old. You start with the assumption that all evil must originate from the Democratic party and then make bullet point lists of unrelated facts to try to back that up. Every bad Republican must be a secret Democrat."

I've done nothing of the sort.

I've simply documented that the Democrat Party is and has always been, the party of slavery, segregation, and second class citizenship.

Your attempt to deny same is merely one more iteration of 'is not, issss noootttttt!!!"


Admit it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[




....true, accurate, and correct......especially this:
5. "The Democrat Party is and has always been, the party of slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, the KKK, and second class citizenship."
As further proof, the most popular Democrat former President....and one the Democrats wish to put back in the White House is life-time racist, Bill Clinton.
Right up to today.
A racist his entire political life.
Why don't you challenge me to prove it?

Prove that the current Democratic Party supports slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, and the KKK.

 

[Pogo]

Again, you are wrong. Duke made absolutely no headway as a Democrat in the 80's. He tried to run for the nomination and was stomped. If that's not a repudiation of his beliefs, I don't know what is. Duke prior to that point tried to run as a Democrat and got stomped many many times. He didn't win a state level election until 1989 when he switched parties to the GOP. Duke has continued to run as a Republican ever since.

The rest of your post is the usual bullet pointed garbage that had zero to do with the fact that Strom Thurmond bolted the DNC for the GOP when it became clear a segregationist such as him had no future there.

In all seriousness, your shtick is pretty old. You start with the assumption that all evil must originate from the Democratic party and then make bullet point lists of unrelated facts to try to back that up. Every bad Republican must be a secret Democrat. Now you have Trump who is actively catering to the Alt-Right and you have him despite the fact the GOP field had a long long list of really good candidates to choose from. Your party is broken and has serious problems. It isn't getting better until you acknowledge the fact the party has problems and those bad actors need to be shown the door.

Indeed Duke was a Democrat back then for the same reason Thurmond was, and Jesse Helms was, and Trent Lott was, etc etc --- in the South everybody was a Democrat, whether they were personally racist or not, until Thurmond bolted. It was in effect a one-party State, so if you wanted to run for dogcatcher your choice was (a) run as a Democrat or (b) lose the race, because nobody was going to vote for the "party of Lincoln" out of simple tradition. I saw it in my own lifetime. So it's very much a choice of practicality.

Take Ray Nagin. Please. A lifelong Republican businessman who wanted to run for mayor but knew that no Republican was going to get elected mayor in a major city and New Orleans hadn't done it since the 19th century, so he flipped to Democrat ---- in order to get elected. Which is after all the entire purpose of any political party; to consolidate and organize power. Frank Rizzo did the same thing decades ago in Philadelphia. He wasn't going to get into City Hall as a Republican.

These labels are affiliations of convenience; they don't shift the personalities of the affiliators. Clearly there is no vetting process for joining a political party; if Adolf Hitler comes back he's free to join any party he wants. Doesn't mean the nature of the party changes as a result of his presence.

Zell Miller is still a Democrat to this day. Not that he's active any more but it's tradition. He's got no particular reason to switch as long as he's not running for office.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Admit it.

Quit running from the fact that Strom Thurmond, a life long segregationist, switched to the GOP when his position in the DNC became untenable. He ran the rest of his life as a Republican and was popularly re-elected.

Quit running from the fact that David Duke was a failure running for office until he switched to the GOP.

Was the DNC at one point racist? Sure. Fact is, the GOP was too if you looked at things through today's definition of racism. Abraham Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, said some racist stuff. The Founding Fathers said some racist crap. Racism is a part of the American past and it is so throughly entwined with our past that there isn't an institution in this country that escapes it.

The question is what the question always is: When you realize you're wrong, do you double down on it or do you change?

You can not escape the fact that the DNC was not a place where a guy like David Duke or a guy like Strom Thurmond could remain once you get out of the 60's. Yeah, the DNC doesn't have a perfect race record, but the fact that you've got active racists that were popularly elected to office as GOP candidates tells you the GOP isn't perfect either. The existence of the #AltRight and their support for Trump is a troubling sign for the GOP and where they are on racial issues now. The language Limbaugh, Hannity, and others toss around on race has been an issue for a while. You can post all the bullet pointed lists you want, but you don't get to run away from those facts.

 

[Pogo]

Ah, the fountain of Ignorance springeth eternal:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be.

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

The neat thing about history is it's fixed. Doesn't change. And when some internet message board mythologist attempts to revise it, she is easily destroyed by factual evidence. It's like kryptonite.

Why, the question is begged, would a political party's own organization be running candidates against its own people? Why would it be targeting and persecuting interest groups (labor unions, immigrants, Jews, Blacks) that were its own constituents?

But wait -- there's more. NOW how much would you pay....

It's also a fact that the Klan opposed:

• Jack Walton, governor of Oklahoma who tried to drive the Klan out after the Tulsa Race Riots;
• Oscar Underwood, leading voice denouncing the Klan, when he tried to run for President;
• Al Smith, for being a Catholic, when he also ran at the same time as Underwood;
• Huey Long, Governor/Senator from Louisiana for his populist absence of the requisite racism;
  
• Lyndon Johnson, via endorsing Goldwater in 1964

-- all Democrats.

Now why would a political party's own organization be opposing its own people, even working to get them removed from office? (Walton)

When KKK Imperial Wizard Hiram Evans threatened he would go campaign against Huey Long, Long declared -- in the Senate -- “Quote me as saying that that Imperial bastard will never set foot in Louisiana,” and suggested that the man risked receiving a taste of the Klan’s own treatment by leaving the state with “his toes turned up.”

And then there's Stetson Kennedy, Democrat governor candidate from Florida, who infiltrated the Klan and wrote an exposé, also worked with the writers of the wildly popular radio program "Superman" on a series in 1946 that made the image of the Klan into such a laughingstock that its secretive members quit in scores rather than suffer the embarrassment of being found out.

Now why would .... etc etc etc.

Mythologists just don't think things through. The wages of lying.

 

[Pogo]

The so-called “Dixiecrats” remained Democrats and did not migrate to the Republican Party. The Dixiecrats were a group of Southern Democrats who, in the 1948 national election, formed a third party, the State’s Rights Democratic Party with the slogan: “Segregation Forever!” Even so, they continued to be Democrats for all local and state elections, as well as for all future national elections.http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/FrequentlyAskedQuestions#The__Dixiecrats__Remained_Democrats

Again, we've already covered this and here it comes again expecting different results....

There were only two "Dixiecrats", Thurmond and his running mate Fielding Wright, governor of Mississippi. Wright finished out his governor term and was never a candidate for office again, dying in 1956. Thurmond, the next time his Senate election came up, was kicked off the ballot by the Democratic Party and had to run as a write-in, which he did, and won, with no party endorsement at all. And this was after he endorsed Eisenhower in 1952.

This is recorded factual history. You don't get to just make up your own.

 

[Pogo]

Like turds plopping into the bowl..... these are the daze of her lies....

Here’s a great opportunity to see the work the media does: challenge anyone to name one segregationist U.S. Senator, and the only one they’ll be able to name is Thurmond….the only one who became a Republican. Get the idea?

No, actually. Number one, what's this got to do with "the media"? We're talking factual history here, not "media".
Number two, any particular reason you want to limit to "Senators"? Already mentioned was George Wallace (not a Senator) who volunteered to switch to Republican in order to be Barry Goldwater's running mate in the same year, and later ran on his own "American Independent" Party ticket.

Thurmond's act was one that had been unthinkable for 99 years and he was already in his 60s, representing an old guard fortunately dying away, even though he lived to 100, as Trent Lott, another Democrat-turned-Republican, observed with a certain wistful retroactive wish that came back to bite him
(oopsie -- Lott was a Senator).

The media intentionally hides the civil rights records of lifelong, liberal Democrats to make it look as if it was the Republican Party that was the party of segregation and racial discrimination.

Can't see it. The civil rights records of Liberal Democrats are well known, such as LBJ's push for the CRA in 1964, such as JFK who originally proposed it; such as then-Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey whose impassioned speech on that subject drove the aformentioned Thurmond and his gang to walk out in 1948.

You seem to have trouble discerning "Liberal Democrats" as named above from "Conservative Democrats" as in Thurmond... Wallace... Lott.... Shelby.... I can't help noticing that you have a habit of posting the term "Southern Democrats" and then bolding the wrong of the two words.

See below.

The most important points: all the segregationists in the Senate were Democrats, and remained same for the rest of their lives…except for one. And they were not conservative.

Actually the segregationists were conservative Southerners, regardless of party, and we're going to prove that right now.

For the purpose of this ass-handing "Northerners" means "everybody not in the South".

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
• >>> ALL SOUTHERNERS: 7-97 (6.7%--93.3%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94 – 6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85 – 15%)
• >>> ALL NORTHERNERS: 283-33 (89.6%--11.4%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
• ALL SOUTHERNERS: 1--21 (4.5%--95.5%)
• ALL NORTHERNERS: 72--6 (92.3%--7.7%)

Yes, there is a party pattern in that each line shows more support from the D side than the R side. But again, 94 versus 85 on one side is not significant.

But 96 on one side versus 92 on the other side?? You just hit the motherlode.

The numbers don't lie; your pattern is clearly there but it's regional, not political. And regional, once again for you slow readers who can't think of a point on your own and parrot the Googly Image Bullshit, means cultural.

You take the numbers from the North -- both Dems and Repubs are for it.
You take the numbers from the South -- both Dems and Repubs are agin' it.
It's truly bipartisan in both directions. (!)

Lunch is served.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

​

Jeez. Indiana. Yeah, Indiana is a solid Red State with a long history of racism. I grew up there and as late as the 90's I recall Martinsville losing the privilege of having home basketball games because of the parents of high schoolers shouting racial slurs. That was the 90's. Jeez. The Klan was huge there and stayed huge for years.

It's also worth noting that Louisiana just recently was found to be segregating their schools over in Lincoln Parish (a solidly Red parish) and Georgia (a fairly Red state) was still having segregated proms as late as 2014 or so. If the Democrats really were the party of racists today, they'd be doing a lot better in states like Indiana, Louisiana, and Georgia than they are.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Southern Poverty Law Center has an article on Martinsville. I can understand reluctance of folks to believe it given the source, but I can vouch for a lot of it having grown up down the road. It had a horrible reputation the whole time I was growing up due to it's known racist bent:

Council of Conservative Citizens Undermines Indiana Town’s Efforts to Overcome Legacy of Racism

Indiana as a whole has had issues with racism for a good long time and is a solidly Red State.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Admit it.

Quit running from the fact that Strom Thurmond, a life long segregationist, switched to the GOP when his position in the DNC became untenable. He ran the rest of his life as a Republican and was popularly re-elected.

Quit running from the fact that David Duke was a failure running for office until he switched to the GOP.

Was the DNC at one point racist? Sure. Fact is, the GOP was too if you looked at things through today's definition of racism. Abraham Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, said some racist stuff. The Founding Fathers said some racist crap. Racism is a part of the American past and it is so throughly entwined with our past that there isn't an institution in this country that escapes it.

The question is what the question always is: When you realize you're wrong, do you double down on it or do you change?

You can not escape the fact that the DNC was not a place where a guy like David Duke or a guy like Strom Thurmond could remain once you get out of the 60's. Yeah, the DNC doesn't have a perfect race record, but the fact that you've got active racists that were popularly elected to office as GOP candidates tells you the GOP isn't perfect either. The existence of the #AltRight and their support for Trump is a troubling sign for the GOP and where they are on racial issues now. The language Limbaugh, Hannity, and others toss around on race has been an issue for a while. You can post all the bullet pointed lists you want, but you don't get to run away from those facts.

I fully appreciate how embarrassed you are at supporting the slavery, segregation, and second-class citizenship party.

Reform yourself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ah, the fountain of Ignorance springeth eternal:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be.

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

The neat thing about history is it's fixed. Doesn't change. And when some internet message board mythologist attempts to revise it, she is easily destroyed by factual evidence. It's like kryptonite.

Why, the question is begged, would a political party's own organization be running candidates against its own people? Why would it be targeting and persecuting interest groups (labor unions, immigrants, Jews, Blacks) that were its own constituents?

But wait -- there's more. NOW how much would you pay....

It's also a fact that the Klan opposed:

• Jack Walton, governor of Oklahoma who tried to drive the Klan out after the Tulsa Race Riots;
• Oscar Underwood, leading voice denouncing the Klan, when he tried to run for President;
• Al Smith, for being a Catholic, when he also ran at the same time as Underwood;
• Huey Long, Governor/Senator from Louisiana for his populist absence of the requisite racism;
  
• Lyndon Johnson, via endorsing Goldwater in 1964

-- all Democrats.

Now why would a political party's own organization be opposing its own people, even working to get them removed from office? (Walton)

When KKK Imperial Wizard Hiram Evans threatened he would go campaign against Huey Long, Long declared -- in the Senate -- “Quote me as saying that that Imperial bastard will never set foot in Louisiana,” and suggested that the man risked receiving a taste of the Klan’s own treatment by leaving the state with “his toes turned up.”

And then there's Stetson Kennedy, Democrat governor candidate from Florida, who infiltrated the Klan and wrote an exposé, also worked with the writers of the wildly popular radio program "Superman" on a series in 1946 that made the image of the Klan into such a laughingstock that its secretive members quit in scores rather than suffer the embarrassment of being found out.

Now why would .... etc etc etc.

Mythologists just don't think things through. The wages of lying.

"There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be."

Gee.....I notice you didn't include Bill Clinton.


Did you vote for this rapist and racist?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Like turds plopping into the bowl..... these are the daze of her lies....

Here’s a great opportunity to see the work the media does: challenge anyone to name one segregationist U.S. Senator, and the only one they’ll be able to name is Thurmond….the only one who became a Republican. Get the idea?

No, actually. Number one, what's this got to do with "the media"? We're talking factual history here, not "media".
Number two, any particular reason you want to limit to "Senators"? Already mentioned was George Wallace (not a Senator) who volunteered to switch to Republican in order to be Barry Goldwater's running mate in the same year, and later ran on his own "American Independent" Party ticket.

Thurmond's act was one that had been unthinkable for 99 years and he was already in his 60s, representing an old guard fortunately dying away, even though he lived to 100, as Trent Lott, another Democrat-turned-Republican, observed with a certain wistful retroactive wish that came back to bite him
(oopsie -- Lott was a Senator).

The media intentionally hides the civil rights records of lifelong, liberal Democrats to make it look as if it was the Republican Party that was the party of segregation and racial discrimination.

Can't see it. The civil rights records of Liberal Democrats are well known, such as LBJ's push for the CRA in 1964, such as JFK who originally proposed it; such as then-Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey whose impassioned speech on that subject drove the aformentioned Thurmond and his gang to walk out in 1948.

You seem to have trouble discerning "Liberal Democrats" as named above from "Conservative Democrats" as in Thurmond... Wallace... Lott.... Shelby.... I can't help noticing that you have a habit of posting the term "Southern Democrats" and then bolding the wrong of the two words.

See below.

The most important points: all the segregationists in the Senate were Democrats, and remained same for the rest of their lives…except for one. And they were not conservative.

Actually the segregationists were conservative Southerners, regardless of party, and we're going to prove that right now.

For the purpose of this ass-handing "Northerners" means "everybody not in the South".

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
• >>> ALL SOUTHERNERS: 7-97 (6.7%--93.3%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94 – 6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85 – 15%)
• >>> ALL NORTHERNERS: 283-33 (89.6%--11.4%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
• ALL SOUTHERNERS: 1--21 (4.5%--95.5%)
• ALL NORTHERNERS: 72--6 (92.3%--7.7%)

Yes, there is a party pattern in that each line shows more support from the D side than the R side. But again, 94 versus 85 on one side is not significant.

But 96 on one side versus 92 on the other side?? You just hit the motherlode.

The numbers don't lie; your pattern is clearly there but it's regional, not political. And regional, once again for you slow readers who can't think of a point on your own and parrot the Googly Image Bullshit, means cultural.

You take the numbers from the North -- both Dems and Repubs are for it.
You take the numbers from the South -- both Dems and Repubs are agin' it.
It's truly bipartisan in both directions. (!)

Lunch is served.

"The numbers don't lie; your pattern is clearly there but it's regional, not political. And regional, once again for you slow readers who can't think of a point on your own and parrot the Googly Image Bullshit, means cultural."

Caught you lying again.

A number of the ‘segregationist’ Democrats were northern Dems (Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.

1. There were plenty of southern integrationists. They were Republicans.

 

[Pogo]

Ah, the fountain of Ignorance springeth eternal:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be.

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

The neat thing about history is it's fixed. Doesn't change. And when some internet message board mythologist attempts to revise it, she is easily destroyed by factual evidence. It's like kryptonite.

Why, the question is begged, would a political party's own organization be running candidates against its own people? Why would it be targeting and persecuting interest groups (labor unions, immigrants, Jews, Blacks) that were its own constituents?

But wait -- there's more. NOW how much would you pay....

It's also a fact that the Klan opposed:

• Jack Walton, governor of Oklahoma who tried to drive the Klan out after the Tulsa Race Riots;
• Oscar Underwood, leading voice denouncing the Klan, when he tried to run for President;
• Al Smith, for being a Catholic, when he also ran at the same time as Underwood;
• Huey Long, Governor/Senator from Louisiana for his populist absence of the requisite racism;
  
• Lyndon Johnson, via endorsing Goldwater in 1964

-- all Democrats.

Now why would a political party's own organization be opposing its own people, even working to get them removed from office? (Walton)

When KKK Imperial Wizard Hiram Evans threatened he would go campaign against Huey Long, Long declared -- in the Senate -- “Quote me as saying that that Imperial bastard will never set foot in Louisiana,” and suggested that the man risked receiving a taste of the Klan’s own treatment by leaving the state with “his toes turned up.”

And then there's Stetson Kennedy, Democrat governor candidate from Florida, who infiltrated the Klan and wrote an exposé, also worked with the writers of the wildly popular radio program "Superman" on a series in 1946 that made the image of the Klan into such a laughingstock that its secretive members quit in scores rather than suffer the embarrassment of being found out.

Now why would .... etc etc etc.

Mythologists just don't think things through. The wages of lying.

"There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be."

Gee.....I notice you didn't include Bill Clinton.


Did you vote for this rapist and racist?

Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't.

Strangely you also didn't mention Evel Knievel, Aimee Semple McPherson or Ringo Starr. I didn't include them either.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ah, the fountain of Ignorance springeth eternal:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be.

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

The neat thing about history is it's fixed. Doesn't change. And when some internet message board mythologist attempts to revise it, she is easily destroyed by factual evidence. It's like kryptonite.

Why, the question is begged, would a political party's own organization be running candidates against its own people? Why would it be targeting and persecuting interest groups (labor unions, immigrants, Jews, Blacks) that were its own constituents?

But wait -- there's more. NOW how much would you pay....

It's also a fact that the Klan opposed:

• Jack Walton, governor of Oklahoma who tried to drive the Klan out after the Tulsa Race Riots;
• Oscar Underwood, leading voice denouncing the Klan, when he tried to run for President;
• Al Smith, for being a Catholic, when he also ran at the same time as Underwood;
• Huey Long, Governor/Senator from Louisiana for his populist absence of the requisite racism;
  
• Lyndon Johnson, via endorsing Goldwater in 1964

-- all Democrats.

Now why would a political party's own organization be opposing its own people, even working to get them removed from office? (Walton)

When KKK Imperial Wizard Hiram Evans threatened he would go campaign against Huey Long, Long declared -- in the Senate -- “Quote me as saying that that Imperial bastard will never set foot in Louisiana,” and suggested that the man risked receiving a taste of the Klan’s own treatment by leaving the state with “his toes turned up.”

And then there's Stetson Kennedy, Democrat governor candidate from Florida, who infiltrated the Klan and wrote an exposé, also worked with the writers of the wildly popular radio program "Superman" on a series in 1946 that made the image of the Klan into such a laughingstock that its secretive members quit in scores rather than suffer the embarrassment of being found out.

Now why would .... etc etc etc.

Mythologists just don't think things through. The wages of lying.

"There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be."

Gee.....I notice you didn't include Bill Clinton.


Did you vote for this rapist and racist?

Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't.

Strangely you also didn't mention Evel Knievel, Aimee Semple McPherson or Ringo Starr. I didn't include them either.

The lies never stop, do they.
"Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't."

Only a half dozen times.


Post #271
"This is what I just said --- a racist asshole. That makes "Liberal" impossible. You can't be a racist and Liberal at the same time. They're mutually exclusive."

"You can't be a racist and Liberal at the same time."
Actually, it's a requirement.

Proof?

Sure....Bill 'the rapist' Clinton.

Your recitation of political truth reeks of the same skills that ended the career of Milli Vanilli.



I love proving you to be a fool and a liar.......i.e., a Liberal.



Post #277
BTW, you dunce.....how come you don't ask me to prove that Bill 'the rapist' Clinton is and has always been a racist....consistent with his position in the party of racism???


What are you afraid of?



Post #259
The Democrat/Liberal Party is and has always been the party of slavery, segregation, and second class citizenship.

Proof....I gave you several opportunities to deny that the icon of said party is and has always been a racist.
Bill 'the rapist' Clinton....inveterate racist and personification of the Democrat Party.


Love it.

I can't decide which is more on display....your ignorance or your embarrassment.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The floor must be sparkling clean, as I have mopped it up with you so frequently.

 

[Pogo]

Ah, the fountain of Ignorance springeth eternal:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be.

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

The neat thing about history is it's fixed. Doesn't change. And when some internet message board mythologist attempts to revise it, she is easily destroyed by factual evidence. It's like kryptonite.

Why, the question is begged, would a political party's own organization be running candidates against its own people? Why would it be targeting and persecuting interest groups (labor unions, immigrants, Jews, Blacks) that were its own constituents?

But wait -- there's more. NOW how much would you pay....

It's also a fact that the Klan opposed:

• Jack Walton, governor of Oklahoma who tried to drive the Klan out after the Tulsa Race Riots;
• Oscar Underwood, leading voice denouncing the Klan, when he tried to run for President;
• Al Smith, for being a Catholic, when he also ran at the same time as Underwood;
• Huey Long, Governor/Senator from Louisiana for his populist absence of the requisite racism;
  
• Lyndon Johnson, via endorsing Goldwater in 1964

-- all Democrats.

Now why would a political party's own organization be opposing its own people, even working to get them removed from office? (Walton)

When KKK Imperial Wizard Hiram Evans threatened he would go campaign against Huey Long, Long declared -- in the Senate -- “Quote me as saying that that Imperial bastard will never set foot in Louisiana,” and suggested that the man risked receiving a taste of the Klan’s own treatment by leaving the state with “his toes turned up.”

And then there's Stetson Kennedy, Democrat governor candidate from Florida, who infiltrated the Klan and wrote an exposé, also worked with the writers of the wildly popular radio program "Superman" on a series in 1946 that made the image of the Klan into such a laughingstock that its secretive members quit in scores rather than suffer the embarrassment of being found out.

Now why would .... etc etc etc.

Mythologists just don't think things through. The wages of lying.

"There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be."

Gee.....I notice you didn't include Bill Clinton.


Did you vote for this rapist and racist?

Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't.

Strangely you also didn't mention Evel Knievel, Aimee Semple McPherson or Ringo Starr. I didn't include them either.

The lies never stop, do they.
"Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't."

Only a half dozen times.


Post #271
"This is what I just said --- a racist asshole. That makes "Liberal" impossible. You can't be a racist and Liberal at the same time. They're mutually exclusive."

"You can't be a racist and Liberal at the same time."
Actually, it's a requirement.

Proof?

Sure....Bill 'the rapist' Clinton.

Your recitation of political truth reeks of the same skills that ended the career of Milli Vanilli.



I love proving you to be a fool and a liar.......i.e., a Liberal.



Post #277
BTW, you dunce.....how come you don't ask me to prove that Bill 'the rapist' Clinton is and has always been a racist....consistent with his position in the party of racism???


What are you afraid of?



Post #259
The Democrat/Liberal Party is and has always been the party of slavery, segregation, and second class citizenship.

Proof....I gave you several opportunities to deny that the icon of said party is and has always been a racist.
Bill 'the rapist' Clinton....inveterate racist and personification of the Democrat Party.

I *DID* challenge you to prove it. Yesterday if memory serves. And you bailed the fuck out. Ran away and hid under the proverbial table making low moaning noises until you thought it was safe to come out.

And once again there is no such thing as a "Democrat Party". Nothing by that name has ever existed. If it had, you would have had to show how it institutionally took on the personal/cultural mantle of "racism".

Time to go run and hide again.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ah, the fountain of Ignorance springeth eternal:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be.

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

The neat thing about history is it's fixed. Doesn't change. And when some internet message board mythologist attempts to revise it, she is easily destroyed by factual evidence. It's like kryptonite.

Why, the question is begged, would a political party's own organization be running candidates against its own people? Why would it be targeting and persecuting interest groups (labor unions, immigrants, Jews, Blacks) that were its own constituents?

But wait -- there's more. NOW how much would you pay....

It's also a fact that the Klan opposed:

• Jack Walton, governor of Oklahoma who tried to drive the Klan out after the Tulsa Race Riots;
• Oscar Underwood, leading voice denouncing the Klan, when he tried to run for President;
• Al Smith, for being a Catholic, when he also ran at the same time as Underwood;
• Huey Long, Governor/Senator from Louisiana for his populist absence of the requisite racism;
  
• Lyndon Johnson, via endorsing Goldwater in 1964

-- all Democrats.

Now why would a political party's own organization be opposing its own people, even working to get them removed from office? (Walton)

When KKK Imperial Wizard Hiram Evans threatened he would go campaign against Huey Long, Long declared -- in the Senate -- “Quote me as saying that that Imperial bastard will never set foot in Louisiana,” and suggested that the man risked receiving a taste of the Klan’s own treatment by leaving the state with “his toes turned up.”

And then there's Stetson Kennedy, Democrat governor candidate from Florida, who infiltrated the Klan and wrote an exposé, also worked with the writers of the wildly popular radio program "Superman" on a series in 1946 that made the image of the Klan into such a laughingstock that its secretive members quit in scores rather than suffer the embarrassment of being found out.

Now why would .... etc etc etc.

Mythologists just don't think things through. The wages of lying.

"There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be."

Gee.....I notice you didn't include Bill Clinton.


Did you vote for this rapist and racist?

Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't.

Strangely you also didn't mention Evel Knievel, Aimee Semple McPherson or Ringo Starr. I didn't include them either.

"Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't."

Post #244
The Democrats have always been the party of slavery, segregation, and second class citizenship.

This is clear and evident, as the most popular Democrat is the rapist and former President Bill Clinton.

He has an unbroken record of racism throughout his entire political life.


Why are you unable to dispute that?




Have you considered changing your avi to "FishInABarrel"???

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ah, the fountain of Ignorance springeth eternal:

1. The Democrat party historically was always actively promoting laws that supported racial segregation and had several Ku Klux Klansmen such as: Democrat Senators Robert Byrd, Senator Al Gore Sr., Democrat President Harry S. Truman, Democrat Governors Strom Thurmond filibustered against civil rights in 1957 and George Wallace blocked black students entry into segregated schools in 1957. As a side note, as a Democrat Senator, JFK himself voted against the 1957 civil rights act too.
President Lyndon B. Johnson 1964 Legacy to Obama - History Matters - Rovalocity

There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be.

There is however plenty of evidence for:

• Edward Jackson -- governor of Indiana;
• Rice Means -- governor of Colorado;
• Owen Brewster -- governor of Maine, later Congressman, fellow traveller/sychophant of Joe McCarthy;
• Clarence Moreley -- Senator from Colorado;
• George Baker -- Mayor of Portland Oregon

---- all Republicans, all Klan-backed... not to mention virtually the entire state of Indiana:

​

The neat thing about history is it's fixed. Doesn't change. And when some internet message board mythologist attempts to revise it, she is easily destroyed by factual evidence. It's like kryptonite.

Why, the question is begged, would a political party's own organization be running candidates against its own people? Why would it be targeting and persecuting interest groups (labor unions, immigrants, Jews, Blacks) that were its own constituents?

But wait -- there's more. NOW how much would you pay....

It's also a fact that the Klan opposed:

• Jack Walton, governor of Oklahoma who tried to drive the Klan out after the Tulsa Race Riots;
• Oscar Underwood, leading voice denouncing the Klan, when he tried to run for President;
• Al Smith, for being a Catholic, when he also ran at the same time as Underwood;
• Huey Long, Governor/Senator from Louisiana for his populist absence of the requisite racism;
  
• Lyndon Johnson, via endorsing Goldwater in 1964

-- all Democrats.

Now why would a political party's own organization be opposing its own people, even working to get them removed from office? (Walton)

When KKK Imperial Wizard Hiram Evans threatened he would go campaign against Huey Long, Long declared -- in the Senate -- “Quote me as saying that that Imperial bastard will never set foot in Louisiana,” and suggested that the man risked receiving a taste of the Klan’s own treatment by leaving the state with “his toes turned up.”

And then there's Stetson Kennedy, Democrat governor candidate from Florida, who infiltrated the Klan and wrote an exposé, also worked with the writers of the wildly popular radio program "Superman" on a series in 1946 that made the image of the Klan into such a laughingstock that its secretive members quit in scores rather than suffer the embarrassment of being found out.

Now why would .... etc etc etc.

Mythologists just don't think things through. The wages of lying.

"There's no evidence for Gore or Truman, nor for Wallace if that's what the implication is supposed to be."

Gee.....I notice you didn't include Bill Clinton.


Did you vote for this rapist and racist?

Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't.

Strangely you also didn't mention Evel Knievel, Aimee Semple McPherson or Ringo Starr. I didn't include them either.

The lies never stop, do they.
"Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't."

Only a half dozen times.


Post #271
"This is what I just said --- a racist asshole. That makes "Liberal" impossible. You can't be a racist and Liberal at the same time. They're mutually exclusive."

"You can't be a racist and Liberal at the same time."
Actually, it's a requirement.

Proof?

Sure....Bill 'the rapist' Clinton.

Your recitation of political truth reeks of the same skills that ended the career of Milli Vanilli.



I love proving you to be a fool and a liar.......i.e., a Liberal.



Post #277
BTW, you dunce.....how come you don't ask me to prove that Bill 'the rapist' Clinton is and has always been a racist....consistent with his position in the party of racism???


What are you afraid of?



Post #259
The Democrat/Liberal Party is and has always been the party of slavery, segregation, and second class citizenship.

Proof....I gave you several opportunities to deny that the icon of said party is and has always been a racist.
Bill 'the rapist' Clinton....inveterate racist and personification of the Democrat Party.

I *DID* challenge you to prove it. Yesterday if memory serves. And you bailed the fuck out. Ran away and hid under the proverbial table making low moaning noises until you thought it was safe to come out.

And once again there is no such thing as a "Democrat Party". Nothing by that name has ever existed. If it had, you would have had to show how it institutionally took on the personal/cultural mantle of "racism".

Time to go run and hide again.

Did you just claim the following?
""Did you even MENTION Bill Clinton? No you didn't."


Now you're trying to regain the face you never had?????

I *DID* challenge you to prove it. Yesterday if memory serves.




This destruction of a third-grade mentality has become a guilty pleasure.
I know I should refrain....but it's just too darn delicious.

You lie, and you're just sooooooo stupid.....can't even remember what you just lied about!!!!




Clearly, you're best equipped to sit in front of a thatched hut, poking a stick into the dirt.....

...,or as the feeble defender of the racist party.