Allen West Delivers Epic Speech On GOP's Proud History Fighting For Black Equality...

[daveman]

No, it did not get more GOP votes

The original House version:[13]
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:[14]
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%–34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version:[13]
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[13]
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You're kidding, right? Your own citation proves you wrong.

Each version of the bill got a higher percentage of GOP "yes" votes than Democrat "yes" votes.

what the first person said...
the CRA 1964 bill got more GOP votes than Democrat votes in congress.

what the second person said...
No, it did not get more GOP votes.

what you said...
You're kidding, right? Your own citation proves you wrong. Each version of the bill got a higher percentage of GOP "yes" votes.

It got a higher percentage. More Republicans supported civil rights than Democrats.

 

[daveman]

Instead of saying its been explained, you could've used the same number of keystrokes to explain it. But you didnt...not a coincidence

Speaking of idiot leftists and their idiot programming...

Never teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Run along now, pig.

No one believes that you are posting multiple posts but pretend you dont have the time to enlighten us all about why the repubs are 90% white. Stamping your feet is not an answer Dave, but then, you know that already

I know you've seen the information before. I presented it to you. You threw a hissy fit over the page's background, remember? As if that invalidated the information presented.

 

[daveman]

So true.

The republican party changed and continues to change, consider too their constant criticism of Affirmative action after 300 years of discrimination. If there is any thing that gives you a clear idea of which party supports all people of all colors etc etc, it is the party they vote for. The stats give a lie to West's cherry picking of history.

Affirmative Action is racist I can understand some favoritism based on economic circumstances but based on Race is racists

Jeez...I wish you guys would at least LOOK UP the definition of the word racist. You wouldnt look so stupid

How about bigotry? Democrats treat people differently based on skin color.

 

[daveman]

Yes, he is a racist

Do you even know what it means? It DOESN'T mean "anything leftists don't like".

You're welcome.

I would say that somebody who claims blacks are so dumb that they need a latter day Harriet Tubman if they want to change parties is a racist. Also somebody who holds that blacks don't really know what they're doing when they vote, they only vote that way because somebody told them to. That too is racist

Uh oh -- ClosedCaption is going to admonish you about the meaning of words.

Oh, who am I kidding? No enemies on the left.

 

[daveman]

No, it did not get more GOP votes

The original House version:[13]
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:[14]
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%–34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version:[13]
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[13]
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You're kidding, right? Your own citation proves you wrong.

Each version of the bill got a higher percentage of GOP "yes" votes than Democrat "yes" votes.

No I'm not kidding. Maybe you need to learn some basic math, like the fact that higher percentage doesn't always mean higher number. If you look at the CRA purely from a Democratic Republican perspective, which is silly because it wasn't split on that grounds, then yes the Republicans voted for it at a higher percentage. But if you look at it from a regional perspective, which is logical because the split was regional, then the Democrats voted for it at a higher percentage.

The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)

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%)

Only 7% of southern Democrats in the House and 5% of southern Democrats in the Senate voted yes. On the southern Republican side it was even worse at 0% in both chambers. Not one single yes vote by southern Republicans

On the northern side the numbers are 94% and 98% on the Democratic side and 85% and 84% on the Republican side

One final note on the numbers, because I'm always amazed, shocked even, when cons claim that the 1964 Civil Rights act was divided by party and not by region. I don't know how accurate these numbers are because the House has more members and I got them by adding the four numbers and then dividing by four but it has to be pretty close I would say, plus the difference is so vast that there's lots of room for error.
3% of the south voted yes. 90% of the north voted yes

Yes, I noticed that after I posted. My bad.

But it's funny how you guys are concentrating on Southern Republicans -- as if that excuses the bigotry of Democrats.

 

[daveman]

I'm not going to watch that.

Does he try to claim credit for modern day Republicans for things they had nothing to do with,

or is admonishing the GOP to get back to being the party it used to be?

Of course you're not going to watch it. You enjoy being ignorant & lazy. Ignorance is Bliss.

I think that every Republican should be forced to watch that video so they can be reminded what the party once stood for

It still does. I see you're so stupid you've fallen utterly for the Big Lie.

 

[rightwinger]

Of course you're not going to watch it. You enjoy being ignorant & lazy. Ignorance is Bliss.

I think that every Republican should be forced to watch that video so they can be reminded what the party once stood for

It still does. I see you're so stupid you've fallen utterly for the Big Lie.

How many Repblicans voted to repeal DADT?
How many have supported Gay Marriage?
How many opposed a Mosque near ground zero?
How many support random stops of Hispanics to check immigration?

When it comes to individual civil rights, Republicans, as usual, are on the wrong side of history?

 

[JimBowie1958]

I think that every Republican should be forced to watch that video so they can be reminded what the party once stood for

It still does. I see you're so stupid you've fallen utterly for the Big Lie.

How many Repblicans voted to repeal DADT?

Too many.

How many have supported Gay Marriage?

Again, too many.

How many opposed a Mosque near ground zero?

Not enough.

How many support random stops of Hispanics to check immigration?

No one does in t he GOP that I have ever seen.

Who does that in the GOP?

They got any exKlansmen like the Dems have had so many of lately?

When it comes to individual civil rights, Republicans, as usual, are on the wrong side of history?

Other than the closet homophiles, I think that they are doing pretty damned good all in all.

 

[rightwinger]

It still does. I see you're so stupid you've fallen utterly for the Big Lie.

How many Repblicans voted to repeal DADT?

Too many.



Again, too many.



Not enough.

How many support random stops of Hispanics to check immigration?

No one does in t he GOP that I have ever seen.

Who does that in the GOP?

They got any exKlansmen like the Dems have had so many of lately?

When it comes to individual civil rights, Republicans, as usual, are on the wrong side of history?

Other than the closet homophiles, I think that they are doing pretty damned good all in all.

As usual, Republicans are willing to ignore Civil Rights. The only injustice they are willing to complain about is injustice towards white males or the super wealthy

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

You're kidding, right? Your own citation proves you wrong.

Each version of the bill got a higher percentage of GOP "yes" votes than Democrat "yes" votes.

what the first person said...
the CRA 1964 bill got more GOP votes than Democrat votes in congress.

what the second person said...
No, it did not get more GOP votes.

what you said...
You're kidding, right? Your own citation proves you wrong. Each version of the bill got a higher percentage of GOP "yes" votes.

It got a higher percentage. More Republicans supported civil rights than Democrats.

a higher percentage. yes
more. no

 

[JustSomeGuy]

You werent referring to anyone specifically Because a strawman has no race.

Yes i was. I was referring to dumb White Liberals who think they should be the judges on who's a 'Good' African American and who's a 'Bad' African American. Now, i'm not sure if you're an average racist African American Democrat yet. But keep posting, and i'll give you my assessment on you.

Guess, I should be on my toes..not. Racism means thinking one races is inferior to another. What racist black dems are you referring too?

I don't know about racists, per se, but I can name some race baiting Democrats. Off the top of my head, there's Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Maxine Waters and Andre Carson.

 

[GuyPinestra]

I've had a good friend for the last 30 years, he's black. He voted for Obama, watches MSNBC, calls Republicans Teabaggers, pretty typical Democrat. He's in his early 60's and grew up in the Jim Crow South. I had been away for 4 years and when I got back we went back into business together.

We started talking about politics and I told him I supported Ron Paul. He immediately went through the roof talking about racism, etc., and said to me "I've known you 30 years and I know you ain't no racist, so how can you support those people?" It's taken a lot of patience in the last 6 months, but a gentle education has finally gotten him to see that 'State's Rights', while a horrible thing used in horrible ways 60 years ago, is not that same horrible thing today.

On individual liberty, we had almost the same conversation in person as one of the threads on this board, about some racist guy hanging a "NO ******* ALLOWED" sign on his business. He finally agreed that it would be that man's right, just as it would be OUR right to not patronize that man, to picket that man, to ostracize that man for his racism.

I'm not sure yet, but I think he might even vote for Dr. Paul come November.

Education, when given in love, is a WONDERFUL thing.

 

[Pheonixops]

I've had a good friend for the last 30 years, he's black. He voted for Obama, watches MSNBC, calls Republicans Teabaggers, pretty typical Democrat. He's in his early 60's and grew up in the Jim Crow South. I had been away for 4 years and when I got back we went back into business together.

We started talking about politics and I told him I supported Ron Paul. He immediately went through the roof talking about racism, etc., and said to me "I've known you 30 years and I know you ain't no racist, so how can you support those people?" It's taken a lot of patience in the last 6 months, but a gentle education has finally gotten him to see that 'State's Rights', while a horrible thing used in horrible ways 60 years ago, is not that same horrible thing today.

On individual liberty, we had almost the same conversation in person as one of the threads on this board, about some racist guy hanging a "NO ******* ALLOWED" sign on his business. He finally agreed that it would be that man's right, just as it would be OUR right to not patronize that man, to picket that man, to ostracize that man for his racism.

I'm not sure yet, but I think he might even vote for Dr. Paul come November.

Education, when given in love, is a WONDERFUL thing.

I know plenty of Black people who like Ron Paul over the rest of the republican candidates. I'm part Black myself and I like Ron Paul.

 

[rightwinger]

I've had a good friend for the last 30 years, he's black. He voted for Obama, watches MSNBC, calls Republicans Teabaggers, pretty typical Democrat. He's in his early 60's and grew up in the Jim Crow South. I had been away for 4 years and when I got back we went back into business together.

We started talking about politics and I told him I supported Ron Paul. He immediately went through the roof talking about racism, etc., and said to me "I've known you 30 years and I know you ain't no racist, so how can you support those people?" It's taken a lot of patience in the last 6 months, but a gentle education has finally gotten him to see that 'State's Rights', while a horrible thing used in horrible ways 60 years ago, is not that same horrible thing today.

On individual liberty, we had almost the same conversation in person as one of the threads on this board, about some racist guy hanging a "NO ******* ALLOWED" sign on his business. He finally agreed that it would be that man's right, just as it would be OUR right to not patronize that man, to picket that man, to ostracize that man for his racism.

I'm not sure yet, but I think he might even vote for Dr. Paul come November.

Education, when given in love, is a WONDERFUL thing.

Historically, it has been the Federal Government who forced states to recognize individual rights

 

[Full-Auto]

I've had a good friend for the last 30 years, he's black. He voted for Obama, watches MSNBC, calls Republicans Teabaggers, pretty typical Democrat. He's in his early 60's and grew up in the Jim Crow South. I had been away for 4 years and when I got back we went back into business together.

We started talking about politics and I told him I supported Ron Paul. He immediately went through the roof talking about racism, etc., and said to me "I've known you 30 years and I know you ain't no racist, so how can you support those people?" It's taken a lot of patience in the last 6 months, but a gentle education has finally gotten him to see that 'State's Rights', while a horrible thing used in horrible ways 60 years ago, is not that same horrible thing today.

On individual liberty, we had almost the same conversation in person as one of the threads on this board, about some racist guy hanging a "NO ******* ALLOWED" sign on his business. He finally agreed that it would be that man's right, just as it would be OUR right to not patronize that man, to picket that man, to ostracize that man for his racism.

I'm not sure yet, but I think he might even vote for Dr. Paul come November.

Education, when given in love, is a WONDERFUL thing.

Historically, it has been the Federal Government who forced states to recognize individual rights

Only when it suits a political agenda. They take them away as quickly if not quicker

 

[Salt Jones]

I've had a good friend for the last 30 years, he's black. He voted for Obama, watches MSNBC, calls Republicans Teabaggers, pretty typical Democrat. He's in his early 60's and grew up in the Jim Crow South. I had been away for 4 years and when I got back we went back into business together.

We started talking about politics and I told him I supported Ron Paul. He immediately went through the roof talking about racism, etc., and said to me "I've known you 30 years and I know you ain't no racist, so how can you support those people?" It's taken a lot of patience in the last 6 months, but a gentle education has finally gotten him to see that 'State's Rights', while a horrible thing used in horrible ways 60 years ago, is not that same horrible thing today.

On individual liberty, we had almost the same conversation in person as one of the threads on this board, about some racist guy hanging a "NO ******* ALLOWED" sign on his business. He finally agreed that it would be that man's right, just as it would be OUR right to not patronize that man, to picket that man, to ostracize that man for his racism.

I'm not sure yet, but I think he might even vote for Dr. Paul come November.

Education, when given in love, is a WONDERFUL thing.

What's that old racist ron paul going to be running for come November, grand cyclops?

 

[logical4u]

I'm also a big Allen West fan.

You do indeed seem unusually taken with personalities and party labels.

The interesting point to note is that "African Americans’ long battle for equality" is a key part of a larger historical struggle to define American federalism. You're right to denounce the Democratic party's history of racism and oppression, and yet I doubt you'd denounce the ideological mantle they used to advance that agenda: states' rights. It was the Republican party that, for the first several decades of its existence, fought to use federal power to protect the rights of minorities, while the Democrats were the party of states' rights. Abhorrent as it has been in practice historically, the latter philosophy is the one whose mantle Paul has assumed today.

Indeed, after the Southern delegation walked out of the 1948 Democratic convention following Hubert Humphrey's famous speech pushing for a minority plank in the party platform ("To those who say that this civil-rights program is an infringement on states’ rights, I say this: The time has arrived in America for the Democratic party to get out of the shadow of states' rights and to walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights," Mayor Humphrey declared), what splinter faction did those holdovers of the Democrats' racist history form? Why, the States' Rights Party, of course. The Dixiecrats' standard bearer that year, Strom Thurmond, of course ended up joining the Republican party to help complete the realignment that saw the two parties' perspectives on federalism flip.

The irony here is that in your blind hatred of the Democratic party, you're denouncing its shameful past without realizing that Ron Paul's regressive vision entails molding the modern Republican party into the Democratic party of old. Thereby betraying everything you're touting in this thread.

You did that by linking "one" name?

 

[logical4u]

I think that every Republican should be forced to watch that video so they can be reminded what the party once stood for

It still does. I see you're so stupid you've fallen utterly for the Big Lie.

How many Repblicans voted to repeal DADT?
How many have supported Gay Marriage?
How many opposed a Mosque near ground zero?
How many support random stops of Hispanics to check immigration?

When it comes to individual civil rights, Republicans, as usual, are on the wrong side of history?

DADT? How is that racial?
Gay Marriage? How is the re-definition of a word used for eons, racial (or beneficial to anyone)?
Mosque near ground zero? How is that racial? (Why aren't you demanding the Catholic church that was damaged near ground zero be repaired, the city, run by, guess which party, won't allow the permits?)
Random stops????? How about when someone is breaking the law, they have the required paperwork on them?

 

[daveman]

So true.

The republican party changed and continues to change, consider too their constant criticism of Affirmative action after 300 years of discrimination. If there is any thing that gives you a clear idea of which party supports all people of all colors etc etc, it is the party they vote for. The stats give a lie to West's cherry picking of history.

Affirmative Action is racist I can understand some favoritism based on economic circumstances but based on Race is racists

It's an interesting thing about modern day Republicans. It seems like the only time they really see racism is when they think white people are the victims of it.

It seems like that to you, but only because you're stupid.

For instance, I see racism among liberals who claim that blacks can't succeed without the help of white liberals.

You don't see it as racism because you think it's the natural order.

 

[daveman]

Affirmative Action is racist I can understand some favoritism based on economic circumstances but based on Race is racists

It's an interesting thing about modern day Republicans. It seems like the only time they really see racism is when they think white people are the victims of it.

And there you have it, the only other time they see racism is when a black conservative is questioned. Like Ann Coulter said, I guess their blacks are more worthy than other blacks

/end thread

Did you know you look stupid when you make such grand pronouncements?