ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists

[LuckyDuck]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

The State Department regularly lists areas that are dangerous or at least, risky to Americans when they travel abroad. The State Department needs to include Portland in their listing, citing the reasons. Perhaps it's time to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act, send in federal troops and drag away the Mayor, City Council and Chief of Police, with additional orders to use whatever force is necessary to reign in the leftist-loonies.

That sounds so very Trumpian.

And the leftist loonies are so very much the mob rule and intimidation mentality.

Not true, but Alex Jones will be proud of you for spouting that.

One just has to look at the videos of the leftist-loonies and antifa to see that it is true.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No.....the racists stayed in the democrat party....

So, just to be clear, I cited an academic article published in a flagship economics journal which uses a variety of well-respected empirical data sources to investigate the transition of southern voters out of the Democratic party. You obviously didn't bother to even click the link. Instead, you cited the defunct website of some random guy you found on the internet who isn't even addressing the correct topic, which is not about Nixon, nor even about the "southern strategy" at all.

Here's what the authors of the article I cited say (emphases mine):

As illustrated in Figure 1, at mid-century white Southerners (defined throughout as residents of the 11 states of the former Confederacy) were 25 percentage points more likely to identify as Democrats than were other whites. This advantage has since flipped in sign, with the most dramatic losses occurring during the 1960s. Despite the massive, concurrent enfranchisement of Southern blacks, who overwhelmingly favored the Democrats from 1964 onward, the resulting shifts in aggregate Southern political outcomes have been stark: to take but one example, in 1960, all US senators from the South were Democrats, whereas today all but 4 (of 22) are Republican.

As with the contemporary debate over the underlying causes of the recent rise of anti-establishment political movements, no clear consensus has emerged as to why the Democrats “lost” white Southerners, despite 50 years of scholarship. On one side are researchers who conclude that the party’s advocacy of 1960s Civil Rights legislation was the prime cause. From the Civil War until the middle of the twentieth century, the Democratic Party was based in the South and associated with white supremacy. But as early as the 1940s, the growing Northern wing of the party began to take positions in favor of racial equality. Eventually, Democratic presidents would introduce and sign the sweeping Civil Rights (1964) and Voting Rights (1965) Acts: outlawing, respectively, de jure segregation in public accommodations and racial barriers to voting, both of which, by the 1960s, existed only in the South.

On the other side is a younger, quantitative scholarship, which emphasizes factors other than Civil Rights. These scholars most often argue that economic development in the South made the redistributive policies of the Democrats increasingly unattractive. From 1940 to 1980, per capita income in the South rose from 60 to 89 percent of the US average, which in principle should predict a movement away from the more redistributive party. Beyond economic catch-up, these scholars have argued that demographic change and the polarization of the parties on other domestic issues led to white Southern “dealignment” from the Democratic Party.

That scholars have failed to converge toward consensus on this central question of American political economy may seem surprising, but data limitations have severely hampered research on this question. Until recently, consistently worded survey ques-tions on racial attitudes, from both before and after the major Civil Rights victories of the 1960s, have not been widely available. For example, the standard dataset on political preferences in the US, the American National Election Survey (ANES), does not include a consistently repeated question on racial views until the 1970s, well after the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts (CRA and VRA). Similarly, the General Social Survey (GSS), another commonly used dataset on Americans’ political and social views, begins in 1972.

In this paper, we employ a little used data source that allows us to analyze political identification and racial attitudes back to the 1950s. Beginning in 1958, Gallup asks respondents “Between now and ... [election]... there will be much discussion about the qualifications of presidential candidates. If your party nominated a well-qualified man for president, would you vote for him if he happened to be a Negro?” Fortunately for our purposes, the wording has remained consistent and the question has been asked repeatedly since that date. We refer to those who say they would not vote for such a candidate as having “racially conservative views.”

Having identified our measure of racial attitudes, we then define the pre- and post-periods by determining the moment at which the Democratic Party is first seen as actively pursuing a more liberal Civil Rights agenda than the Republican Party. Conventional wisdom holds that Democratic President Johnson famously “lost the South” with his signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. However, analyzing contemporaneous media and survey data, we identify instead the Spring of 1963, when Democratic President John F. Kennedy first proposed legislation barring discrimination in public accommodations, as the critical moment when Civil Rights is, for the first time, an issue of great salience to the majority of Americans and an issue clearly associated with the Democratic Party.

Our main analysis takes the form of a triple-difference: how much of the pre- versus post-period decrease in Democratic Party identification among Southern versus other whites is explained by the differential decline among those Southerners with conservative racial attitudes? Democratic identification among white Southerners relative to other whites falls 17 percentage points over our preferred sample period of 1958–1980. This decline is entirely explained by the 19 percentage point decline among racially conservative Southern whites. These results are robust to controlling flexibly for the many socioeconomic status measures included in the Gallup data and is highly evident in event-time graphical analysis as well.
​

That's a long quotation, but the point is the authors are connecting the southern realignment with Democratic support for civil rights in the 60s, rather than anything having to do with Nixon.

To be perfectly honest, I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt that they are arguing in good faith, but I find it really difficult to believe that anyone actually believes that the Democratic party in 2018 represents the interests of white nationalists, despite the fact that literally all white nationalist groups oppose the Democratic party and support far right-wing candidates. It seems more likely to be some kind of trolling. In any case, the history is pretty interesting, and it's a well written article that's worth a read, for anyone actually interested.

​

1. "But as early as the 1940s, the growing Northern wing of the party began to take positions in favor of racial equality. "

Language is important, so in any discussion of who the segregationists were, liberals switch the word “Democrats” to “southerners.” Remember, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 was supported by all the Republicans in the Senate, but only 29 of 47 Democrats…and a number of the ‘segregationist’ Democrats were northern Dems (Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.

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



2. The House version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by only61 percent of that Chamber's Democrats versus 80 percent of the Republicans. More importantly, it was Republicans that ended a Democrat filibuster preventing a vote on this bill in the Senate.

Sharpton Doesn't Know Higher Percentage of Republicans ...
www.newsbusters.org/.../sharpton-doesnt-know-higher-per...

NewsBusters.org



80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bill. Less than 70% of Democrats did. Indeed, Minority Leader Republican Everett Dirksen led the fight to end the filibuster. Meanwhile, Democrats such as Richard Russell of Georgia and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina tried as hard as they could to sustain a filibuster.


House Democrats 153 of 244 (63%)

House Republicans 136 of 171 (80%)

Senate Democrats 46 of 67 (69%)

Senate Republicans 27 of 33 (82%)

Were Republicans really the party of civil rights in the 1960s? | Harry J Enten



3. "Another way Democrats could keep blacks from being elected ... antilynching laws, but Democrats successfully blocked every antilynching bill. ... a federal antilynching bill in Congress, but Democrats in the Senate killed it."
"Stealing the Minds of America: A Must for All Truth Seekers Who Vote,"
By Janice L. Ponds
https://books.google.com/books?id=I...enate blocpked every anti lynching law&f=false



4. Please stop using the term 'scholars' as though it has any significance. These are individuals who are paid by Liberal institutions, whose career advancement depends on Liberals, and are as biased as any other Liberals.
They spin the truth to advance the Democrats....and you buy it like it was on sale.



5. The current Democrat Party is as racist against blacks as it has been historically.
1. In 2005, the Democrats did not name Donna Brazile to head the Democratic National Committee. They chose Howard Dean.


2. “Gov. David A. Paterson defiantly vowed to run for election next year despite the White House‘s urging that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race.” Obama Asks Paterson to Quit New York Governor’s Race

3. President Barack Obama has kept mum on the fate of Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) for days -- but he tells CBS News that it's time for the embattled 80-year-old former Ways and Means Chairman to end his career "with dignity."

"I think Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served-- his constituents very well. But these-- allegations are very troubling," Obama told Harry Smith in an interview to be aired on the "Early Show." and first broadcast on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric. Obama: Time for Rangel to end career "with dignity"

4 Harold Ford told not to run for Senator from New York:

“From the start, Mr. Ford’s potential candidacy angered national Democratic Party leaders by disrupting plans for what was planned as a seamless Gillibrand nomination. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate majority leader, called Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg to discourage him from supporting Mr. Ford, and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York met personally with Mr. Ford to argue against his candidacy.” Harold Ford Jr. Says He Won’t Challenge Senator Gillibrand


5. “As state comptroller, [Carl] McCall earned the distinction of being the first African American ever elected to a statewide office in New York. Four years later voters overwhelmingly supported McCall over Republican Bruce Blakeman 64.75 to 32.1%. McCall's reelection in 1998 may have given him the confidence he needed in order to pursue the governor's mansion….The McCall campaign had the support of the Democratic Party; whether or not McCall had the party's full support has been the subject of much debate….Still one wonders just how committed the party was to McCall's campaign….shunned by some of the state's most respected Democrats…McCall blamed his money woes on the national Democratic Party, claiming that the party had abandoned his campaign….” H. Carl McCall for Governor: a lesson to all black high-profile statewide office seekers. - Free Online Library


6. And, most telling, Bill Clinton’s remarks about the black candidate for the presidency:

“[A]s Hillary bungled Caroline, Bill’s handling of Ted was even worse. The day after Iowa, he phoned Kennedy and pressed for an endorsement, making the case for his wife. But Bill then went on, belittling Obama in a manner that deeply offended Kennedy. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

Teddy's anger


7. Three staffers working for embattled Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) were asked by security officers to leave an event in downtown Washington on Thursday after they tried to display large campaign signs just as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was about to speak. .. Waters told The Hill afterward that the staffers had been displaying the signs at the annual legislative conference for the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, which was held at the Washington convention center a few blocks away. “It ain’t about Nancy. It’s about black people,” Waters said. Waters aides expelled from Pelosi event


8. And what Governor of Arkansas made the Saturday before Easter "Confederate Flag Day"?
The Arkansas Code, Section 1-5-107. Confederate Flag Day.
(a) The Saturday immediately preceding Easter Sunday of each year is designated as "Confederate Flag Day" in this state.
No person, firm, or corporation shall display any Confederate flag or replica thereof in connection with any advertisement of any commercial enterprise, or in any manner for any purpose except to honor the Confederate States of America.
Any person, firm, or corporation violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000).

"In April 1985, Governor Bill Clinton signed Act 985 into law...'
Mark R. Levin on Trent Lott & Moral Outrage on National Review Online


9. Do Democrats in Congress support blacks by practicing affirmative action in their hiring…and of course this would be our of moral convictions, as they are legally exempt from affirmative action requirements. More than passing interesting, the ‘National Journal,’ a survey of congressional staffers revealed that Democrats hired black employees at the same rate as Republicans: 2 percent. “The Racial Breakdown of Congressional Staffs,” National Journal, June 21, 2005

a. Schweitzer, “Do As I Say,” p. 9


10. Clinton pushed black candidate to drop out of Florida race:

“Bill Clinton sought to persuade Rep. Kendrick Meek to drop out of the race for Senate during a trip to Florida last week — and nearly succeeded…Clinton did not dangle a job in front of Meek, who gave up a safe House seat to run for the Senate, but instead made the case that the move would advance the congressman’s future prospects, said a third Democrat familiar with the conversations. Clinton campaigned with Meek in Florida on Oct. 19 and 20, and thought he had won Meek over. But as the week wore on, Meek lost his enthusiasm for the arrangement, spurred in part, a third Democratic source said, by his wife’s belief that he could still win the race. Clinton spoke with Meek again at week’s end, three Democrats said, and again Meek said he would drop out.”

Read more: Clinton pushed Meek to quit Fla. race


By some strange coincidence, the Democrats, again, force a black to the back:

11. “Under an arrangement reached two days ago, Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the current majority leader, would get the No. 2 job of minority whip come January. Clyburn, now majority whip, would hold the post of assistant leader, newly created for the purpose of heading off a contest for the whip position.” Bloomberg - Are you a robot?


12. For a peek into the unspoken view that Democrats have of blacks, look at how Biden finds Obama as different from all the rest of blacks:

Feb 9, 2007 - Biden called Obama first "clean" African-American candidate • Biden ... "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean ... He's smart.



And, in light of the action of Democrats/Liberals, as shown above....this is beyond ironic:



Remember Mark Lloyd, who was chosen by President Obama as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)'s Chief Diversity Officer, a.k.a. the Diversity Czar?

"This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem.

We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power." Read more: Audio: FCC's Diversity Czar: 'White People' Need to be Forced to 'Step Down' 'So Someone Else Can Have Power'





6.Even black Democrats like Obama can't be trusted as far as black interests count:

Obama's US Civil Rights Commission, 2010 Report:
"The United States Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) is pleased to transmit this report, The Impact of Illegal Immigration on the Wages and Employment Opportunities of Black Workers. A panel of experts briefed members of the Commission on April 4, 2008 regarding the evidence for economic loss and job opportunity costs to black workers attributable to illegal immigration. The panelists also described non-economic factors contributing to the depression of black wages and employment rates.

Illegal immigration to the United States in recent decades has tended to depress both wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate number of whom are black men."
USCCR: Page Not Found

https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/docs/IllegImmig_10-14-10_430pm.pdf


7. And, most illustrative…..the man who has personified the Democrat Party longer than any other, Bill Clinton has been a racist his entire life.


He told Ted Kennedy, in trying to get him not to endorse a ‘darkie:’

“Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'” Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'




Wise up, you dope.

 

[ColonelAngus]

No.....the racists stayed in the democrat party....

So, just to be clear, I cited an academic article published in a flagship economics journal which uses a variety of well-respected empirical data sources to investigate the transition of southern voters out of the Democratic party. You obviously didn't bother to even click the link. Instead, you cited the defunct website of some random guy you found on the internet who isn't even addressing the correct topic, which is not about Nixon, nor even about the "southern strategy" at all.

Here's what the authors of the article I cited say (emphases mine):

As illustrated in Figure 1, at mid-century white Southerners (defined throughout as residents of the 11 states of the former Confederacy) were 25 percentage points more likely to identify as Democrats than were other whites. This advantage has since flipped in sign, with the most dramatic losses occurring during the 1960s. Despite the massive, concurrent enfranchisement of Southern blacks, who overwhelmingly favored the Democrats from 1964 onward, the resulting shifts in aggregate Southern political outcomes have been stark: to take but one example, in 1960, all US senators from the South were Democrats, whereas today all but 4 (of 22) are Republican.

As with the contemporary debate over the underlying causes of the recent rise of anti-establishment political movements, no clear consensus has emerged as to why the Democrats “lost” white Southerners, despite 50 years of scholarship. On one side are researchers who conclude that the party’s advocacy of 1960s Civil Rights legislation was the prime cause. From the Civil War until the middle of the twentieth century, the Democratic Party was based in the South and associated with white supremacy. But as early as the 1940s, the growing Northern wing of the party began to take positions in favor of racial equality. Eventually, Democratic presidents would introduce and sign the sweeping Civil Rights (1964) and Voting Rights (1965) Acts: outlawing, respectively, de jure segregation in public accommodations and racial barriers to voting, both of which, by the 1960s, existed only in the South.

On the other side is a younger, quantitative scholarship, which emphasizes factors other than Civil Rights. These scholars most often argue that economic development in the South made the redistributive policies of the Democrats increasingly unattractive. From 1940 to 1980, per capita income in the South rose from 60 to 89 percent of the US average, which in principle should predict a movement away from the more redistributive party. Beyond economic catch-up, these scholars have argued that demographic change and the polarization of the parties on other domestic issues led to white Southern “dealignment” from the Democratic Party.

That scholars have failed to converge toward consensus on this central question of American political economy may seem surprising, but data limitations have severely hampered research on this question. Until recently, consistently worded survey ques-tions on racial attitudes, from both before and after the major Civil Rights victories of the 1960s, have not been widely available. For example, the standard dataset on political preferences in the US, the American National Election Survey (ANES), does not include a consistently repeated question on racial views until the 1970s, well after the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts (CRA and VRA). Similarly, the General Social Survey (GSS), another commonly used dataset on Americans’ political and social views, begins in 1972.

In this paper, we employ a little used data source that allows us to analyze political identification and racial attitudes back to the 1950s. Beginning in 1958, Gallup asks respondents “Between now and ... [election]... there will be much discussion about the qualifications of presidential candidates. If your party nominated a well-qualified man for president, would you vote for him if he happened to be a Negro?” Fortunately for our purposes, the wording has remained consistent and the question has been asked repeatedly since that date. We refer to those who say they would not vote for such a candidate as having “racially conservative views.”

Having identified our measure of racial attitudes, we then define the pre- and post-periods by determining the moment at which the Democratic Party is first seen as actively pursuing a more liberal Civil Rights agenda than the Republican Party. Conventional wisdom holds that Democratic President Johnson famously “lost the South” with his signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. However, analyzing contemporaneous media and survey data, we identify instead the Spring of 1963, when Democratic President John F. Kennedy first proposed legislation barring discrimination in public accommodations, as the critical moment when Civil Rights is, for the first time, an issue of great salience to the majority of Americans and an issue clearly associated with the Democratic Party.

Our main analysis takes the form of a triple-difference: how much of the pre- versus post-period decrease in Democratic Party identification among Southern versus other whites is explained by the differential decline among those Southerners with conservative racial attitudes? Democratic identification among white Southerners relative to other whites falls 17 percentage points over our preferred sample period of 1958–1980. This decline is entirely explained by the 19 percentage point decline among racially conservative Southern whites. These results are robust to controlling flexibly for the many socioeconomic status measures included in the Gallup data and is highly evident in event-time graphical analysis as well.
​

That's a long quotation, but the point is the authors are connecting the southern realignment with Democratic support for civil rights in the 60s, rather than anything having to do with Nixon.

To be perfectly honest, I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt that they are arguing in good faith, but I find it really difficult to believe that anyone actually believes that the Democratic party in 2018 represents the interests of white nationalists, despite the fact that literally all white nationalist groups oppose the Democratic party and support far right-wing candidates. It seems more likely to be some kind of trolling. In any case, the history is pretty interesting, and it's a well written article that's worth a read, for anyone actually interested.

​

1. "But as early as the 1940s, the growing Northern wing of the party began to take positions in favor of racial equality. "

Language is important, so in any discussion of who the segregationists were, liberals switch the word “Democrats” to “southerners.” Remember, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 was supported by all the Republicans in the Senate, but only 29 of 47 Democrats…and a number of the ‘segregationist’ Democrats were northern Dems (Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.

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



2. The House version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by only61 percent of that Chamber's Democrats versus 80 percent of the Republicans. More importantly, it was Republicans that ended a Democrat filibuster preventing a vote on this bill in the Senate.

Sharpton Doesn't Know Higher Percentage of Republicans ...
www.newsbusters.org/.../sharpton-doesnt-know-higher-per...

NewsBusters.org



80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bill. Less than 70% of Democrats did. Indeed, Minority Leader Republican Everett Dirksen led the fight to end the filibuster. Meanwhile, Democrats such as Richard Russell of Georgia and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina tried as hard as they could to sustain a filibuster.


House Democrats 153 of 244 (63%)

House Republicans 136 of 171 (80%)

Senate Democrats 46 of 67 (69%)

Senate Republicans 27 of 33 (82%)

Were Republicans really the party of civil rights in the 1960s? | Harry J Enten



3. "Another way Democrats could keep blacks from being elected ... antilynching laws, but Democrats successfully blocked every antilynching bill. ... a federal antilynching bill in Congress, but Democrats in the Senate killed it."
"Stealing the Minds of America: A Must for All Truth Seekers Who Vote,"
By Janice L. Ponds
https://books.google.com/books?id=I...enate blocpked every anti lynching law&f=false



4. Please stop using the term 'scholars' as though it has any significance. These are individuals who are paid by Liberal institutions, whose career advancement depends on Liberals, and are as biased as any other Liberals.
They spin the truth to advance the Democrats....and you buy it like it was on sale.



5. The current Democrat Party is as racist against blacks as it has been historically.
1. In 2005, the Democrats did not name Donna Brazile to head the Democratic National Committee. They chose Howard Dean.


2. “Gov. David A. Paterson defiantly vowed to run for election next year despite the White House‘s urging that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race.” Obama Asks Paterson to Quit New York Governor’s Race

3. President Barack Obama has kept mum on the fate of Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) for days -- but he tells CBS News that it's time for the embattled 80-year-old former Ways and Means Chairman to end his career "with dignity."

"I think Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served-- his constituents very well. But these-- allegations are very troubling," Obama told Harry Smith in an interview to be aired on the "Early Show." and first broadcast on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric. Obama: Time for Rangel to end career "with dignity"

4 Harold Ford told not to run for Senator from New York:

“From the start, Mr. Ford’s potential candidacy angered national Democratic Party leaders by disrupting plans for what was planned as a seamless Gillibrand nomination. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate majority leader, called Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg to discourage him from supporting Mr. Ford, and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York met personally with Mr. Ford to argue against his candidacy.” Harold Ford Jr. Says He Won’t Challenge Senator Gillibrand


5. “As state comptroller, [Carl] McCall earned the distinction of being the first African American ever elected to a statewide office in New York. Four years later voters overwhelmingly supported McCall over Republican Bruce Blakeman 64.75 to 32.1%. McCall's reelection in 1998 may have given him the confidence he needed in order to pursue the governor's mansion….The McCall campaign had the support of the Democratic Party; whether or not McCall had the party's full support has been the subject of much debate….Still one wonders just how committed the party was to McCall's campaign….shunned by some of the state's most respected Democrats…McCall blamed his money woes on the national Democratic Party, claiming that the party had abandoned his campaign….” H. Carl McCall for Governor: a lesson to all black high-profile statewide office seekers. - Free Online Library


6. And, most telling, Bill Clinton’s remarks about the black candidate for the presidency:

“[A]s Hillary bungled Caroline, Bill’s handling of Ted was even worse. The day after Iowa, he phoned Kennedy and pressed for an endorsement, making the case for his wife. But Bill then went on, belittling Obama in a manner that deeply offended Kennedy. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

Teddy's anger


7. Three staffers working for embattled Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) were asked by security officers to leave an event in downtown Washington on Thursday after they tried to display large campaign signs just as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was about to speak. .. Waters told The Hill afterward that the staffers had been displaying the signs at the annual legislative conference for the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, which was held at the Washington convention center a few blocks away. “It ain’t about Nancy. It’s about black people,” Waters said. Waters aides expelled from Pelosi event


8. And what Governor of Arkansas made the Saturday before Easter "Confederate Flag Day"?
The Arkansas Code, Section 1-5-107. Confederate Flag Day.
(a) The Saturday immediately preceding Easter Sunday of each year is designated as "Confederate Flag Day" in this state.
No person, firm, or corporation shall display any Confederate flag or replica thereof in connection with any advertisement of any commercial enterprise, or in any manner for any purpose except to honor the Confederate States of America.
Any person, firm, or corporation violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000).

"In April 1985, Governor Bill Clinton signed Act 985 into law...'
Mark R. Levin on Trent Lott & Moral Outrage on National Review Online


9. Do Democrats in Congress support blacks by practicing affirmative action in their hiring…and of course this would be our of moral convictions, as they are legally exempt from affirmative action requirements. More than passing interesting, the ‘National Journal,’ a survey of congressional staffers revealed that Democrats hired black employees at the same rate as Republicans: 2 percent. “The Racial Breakdown of Congressional Staffs,” National Journal, June 21, 2005

a. Schweitzer, “Do As I Say,” p. 9


10. Clinton pushed black candidate to drop out of Florida race:

“Bill Clinton sought to persuade Rep. Kendrick Meek to drop out of the race for Senate during a trip to Florida last week — and nearly succeeded…Clinton did not dangle a job in front of Meek, who gave up a safe House seat to run for the Senate, but instead made the case that the move would advance the congressman’s future prospects, said a third Democrat familiar with the conversations. Clinton campaigned with Meek in Florida on Oct. 19 and 20, and thought he had won Meek over. But as the week wore on, Meek lost his enthusiasm for the arrangement, spurred in part, a third Democratic source said, by his wife’s belief that he could still win the race. Clinton spoke with Meek again at week’s end, three Democrats said, and again Meek said he would drop out.”

Read more: Clinton pushed Meek to quit Fla. race


By some strange coincidence, the Democrats, again, force a black to the back:

11. “Under an arrangement reached two days ago, Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the current majority leader, would get the No. 2 job of minority whip come January. Clyburn, now majority whip, would hold the post of assistant leader, newly created for the purpose of heading off a contest for the whip position.” Bloomberg - Are you a robot?


12. For a peek into the unspoken view that Democrats have of blacks, look at how Biden finds Obama as different from all the rest of blacks:

Feb 9, 2007 - Biden called Obama first "clean" African-American candidate • Biden ... "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean ... He's smart.



And, in light of the action of Democrats/Liberals, as shown above....this is beyond ironic:



Remember Mark Lloyd, who was chosen by President Obama as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)'s Chief Diversity Officer, a.k.a. the Diversity Czar?

"This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem.

We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power." Read more: Audio: FCC's Diversity Czar: 'White People' Need to be Forced to 'Step Down' 'So Someone Else Can Have Power'





6.Even black Democrats like Obama can't be trusted as far as black interests count:

Obama's US Civil Rights Commission, 2010 Report:
"The United States Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) is pleased to transmit this report, The Impact of Illegal Immigration on the Wages and Employment Opportunities of Black Workers. A panel of experts briefed members of the Commission on April 4, 2008 regarding the evidence for economic loss and job opportunity costs to black workers attributable to illegal immigration. The panelists also described non-economic factors contributing to the depression of black wages and employment rates.

Illegal immigration to the United States in recent decades has tended to depress both wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate number of whom are black men."
USCCR: Page Not Found

https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/docs/IllegImmig_10-14-10_430pm.pdf


7. And, most illustrative…..the man who has personified the Democrat Party longer than any other, Bill Clinton has been a racist his entire life.


He told Ted Kennedy, in trying to get him not to endorse a ‘darkie:’

“Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'” Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'




Wise up, you dope.

They are useful idiots being happily exploited. It’s a shame.

 

[Flash]

Young Nazi thugs.

 

[Doc7505]

Did you hear the screeching "you're a Jew. Get the filthy Jew".

Sorry it wasn't Jew

It was "You're black. Get that black bastard out of here."

Or maybe it was something else.

Could you picture something like this is 1940 or 1950?

~~~~~~
Of course it would have been a Democrat like Maddox, Connor's or Wallace including the famous Senator from West Virginia Robert Byrd and former President LBJ.

 

[well named]

Sorry.....a left wing trio of professors just demonstrated that papers like this are crap....

They did not demonstrate any such thing. They demonstrated a problem (that I agree is a real problem) that exists within some parts of the humanities, by getting hoax articles published in a handful of humanities journals. All their attempts to get their hoaxes published in actual social science journals were rejected, and they didn't even attempt to hoax any economics journals. You can find the full list of hoax papers here (from the authors' essay about the project). If you think the authors believe that their work invalidates scientific research published in scientific journals than you just haven't understood the arguments they actually made.

 

[well named]

Considering that the Republicans were the party of Civil Rights, and remained so, this paper falls apart right there.....the democrats jumped on board at the last minute, when all the heavy lifting was done...

And as Dinesh D'souza points out, the majority of blacks jumped onto the democrat party because of FDR, ...

You are still not responding to the actual argument. The paper I cited provides evidence used to evaluate various theories about how the Democrats lost the south, and it finds that the evidence supports the claim that it happened as a result of "racially conservative" white voters leaving the party, and also that the evidence doesn't support some of the competing hypotheses. D'souza's claims about black voters are irrelevant to the argument, and the fact that the realignment didn't happen all at once is a subject discussed in the article, which again you still haven't read. The section I quoted previously notes that the realignment of these racially conservative white voters occurred between 1958 and 1980.

Finally, I'll point out that the hypothesis which D'souza advances to explain the realignment of the south is one that is investigated and refuted by the article I cited. D'souza writes:

"Shafer and Johnston, like Kevin Phillips, contend that after the postwar economic boom of the late 1940s and 1950s, the increasingly industrial “new South” was very receptive to the free market philosophy of the Republican Party. Thus Shafer and Johnston introduce class as a rival explanation to race for why the South became Republican."
​

The article I cited directly discusses this particular research, as again you will find in the section I already quoted. I think it's clear that beyond not reading my citations, you're not even reading your own. You're just googling and pasting whatever you can find that might justify your pre-determined conclusion, without bothering to try to understand it. Another point for you to consider is that Shafer and Johnston use the same kind of evidence (surveys like ANES) to try to construct their argument as the authors I've cited, so your refusal to accept that kind of evidence when I present it is undermined by your reliance on it in suggesting an alternative hypothesis (cf. footnote 11 in Kuziemo 2018).

The difference between the article I cited and the one you cited is that Shafer and Johnston rely exclusively on ANES data while Kuziemo and Washington incorporate similar survey data from Gallup and GSS, as well a lot of other documentary evidence from contemporary news sources. In short, their methodology is more robust and they have more data. Here is how they address the hypothesis which D'souza favors:

"As already noted, a key competing hypothesis is that robust economic development (the movement from an agrarian to a manufacturing- and service-based economy) in the South during the Civil Rights period and the decades that followed pushed Southern voters, now richer, away from the more redistributive Democratic Party. We recognize that it is impossible to cleanly separate individuals’ perceived economic self-interest and their views on racial equality (see, e.g., Edsall and Edsall 1992 and Gilens 1996 on how whites often view redistribution in racialized terms). We can show, however, that in regression analysis, individual markers of class, state-year level measures of economic development, or annual measures of the parties’ changing positions on economic policy have relatively little ability to explain white Southern dealignment. Indeed, even if we take the most generous estimate of how Democratic identification declines with household income, the effect of Civil Rights on racially conservative Southern whites’ party identification is akin to a 600 percent household income increase over the course of two years" (2833-4)
​

In other words, the effect of racial attitudes on the voting preferences of racially conservative white voters is far more predictive of the changes in partisan affiliation than the economic factors D'souza favors.

​

 

[well named]

Language is important, so in any discussion of who the segregationists were, liberals switch the word “Democrats” to “southerners.” Remember, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 was supported by all the Republicans in the Senate, but only 29 of 47 Democrats…and a number of the ‘segregationist’ Democrats were northern Dems (Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.

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

The section of the article I quoted refers to the northern wing of the Democratic party. It's not being euphemistic about the fact that southern Democrats in the pre-civil rights era were racist. If it were not the case that the Dixiecrats were racist then the party realignment following the Civil Rights era wouldn't even make sense, that's the entire point. Racist democrats are the reason the New Deal was pretty racist, or the GI bill, or housing policy throughout the post-war period up even until the mid-70s. Clinton's welfare reform and triangulation strategy in general traded in racist tropes. It's easy to go on.

For the sake of clarity, let me say that I think of racism as an American social problem, not as a purely partisan issue. The Democratic party was not in the past, and is not even now, devoid of blame for its role in creating and maintaining racial inequality. Democrats shouldn't look at graphs like this (from the General Social Survey) and feel vindicated:

We should all as Americans recognize that racial prejudices like the ones surveyed by GSS are still a very large problem that transcends the two parties.

If there's a point to the rest of your gish gallop that isn't addressed by the above, it's not clear to me, but feel free to clarify if you wish.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Language is important, so in any discussion of who the segregationists were, liberals switch the word “Democrats” to “southerners.” Remember, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 was supported by all the Republicans in the Senate, but only 29 of 47 Democrats…and a number of the ‘segregationist’ Democrats were northern Dems (Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.

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

The section of the article I quoted refers to the northern wing of the Democratic party. It's not being euphemistic about the fact that southern Democrats in the pre-civil rights era were racist. If it were not the case that the Dixiecrats were racist then the party realignment following the Civil Rights era wouldn't even make sense, that's the entire point. Racist democrats are the reason the New Deal was pretty racist, or the GI bill, or housing policy throughout the post-war period up even until the mid-70s. Clinton's welfare reform and triangulation strategy in general traded in racist tropes. It's easy to go on.

For the sake of clarity, let me say that I think of racism as an American social problem, not as a purely partisan issue. The Democratic party was not in the past, and is not even now, devoid of blame for its role in creating and maintaining racial inequality. Democrats shouldn't look at graphs like this (from the General Social Survey) and feel vindicated:

We should all as Americans recognize that racial prejudices like the ones surveyed by GSS are still a very large problem that transcends the two parties.

If there's a point to the rest of your gish gallop that isn't addressed by the above, it's not clear to me, but feel free to clarify if you wish.

(Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.




The Democrat Party is and has always been the party of slavery, segregation, and second class citizenship.

 

[BULLDOG]

Language is important, so in any discussion of who the segregationists were, liberals switch the word “Democrats” to “southerners.” Remember, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 was supported by all the Republicans in the Senate, but only 29 of 47 Democrats…and a number of the ‘segregationist’ Democrats were northern Dems (Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.

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

The section of the article I quoted refers to the northern wing of the Democratic party. It's not being euphemistic about the fact that southern Democrats in the pre-civil rights era were racist. If it were not the case that the Dixiecrats were racist then the party realignment following the Civil Rights era wouldn't even make sense, that's the entire point. Racist democrats are the reason the New Deal was pretty racist, or the GI bill, or housing policy throughout the post-war period up even until the mid-70s. Clinton's welfare reform and triangulation strategy in general traded in racist tropes. It's easy to go on.

For the sake of clarity, let me say that I think of racism as an American social problem, not as a purely partisan issue. The Democratic party was not in the past, and is not even now, devoid of blame for its role in creating and maintaining racial inequality. Democrats shouldn't look at graphs like this (from the General Social Survey) and feel vindicated:

We should all as Americans recognize that racial prejudices like the ones surveyed by GSS are still a very large problem that transcends the two parties.

If there's a point to the rest of your gish gallop that isn't addressed by the above, it's not clear to me, but feel free to clarify if you wish.

(Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.




The Democrat Party is and has always been the party of slavery, segregation, and second class citizenship.

You are having a hard time understanding that political parties change over time. The republican party once had integrity but gave that up long ago. See how that works?

 

[iceberg]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

 

[BULLDOG]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

 

[iceberg]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

so is maxine. so is hillary now. if you only see one side doing it you're being willfully blind.

 

[BULLDOG]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

so is maxine. so is hillary now. if you only see one side doing it you're being willfully blind.

Maxine will get in there and mix it up with them. Obviously, that kind of thing works. As for Hillary, after almost 30 years of hateful unearned crazy accusations against her, I'm gonna cut her a little slack. If she is less than gracious, she earned the right. She is still no comparison to the main stream republican rhetoric that has been common for quite a while. Don't be surprised that a few of your parties standard tactics are finally being returned.

 

[Votto]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

Good.

Maybe Oregon will have half a brain and kick Progs out of their state.

Then again, that would require critical thinking..................never mind, just go smoke some more joints. It's really all Putin's fault,

 

[iceberg]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

so is maxine. so is hillary now. if you only see one side doing it you're being willfully blind.

Maxine will get in there and mix it up with them. Obviously, that kind of thing works. As for Hillary, after almost 30 years of hateful unearned crazy accusations against her, I'm gonna cut her a little slack. If she is less than gracious, she earned the right. She is still no comparison to the main stream republican rhetoric that has been common for quite a while. Don't be surprised that a few of your parties standard tactics are finally being returned.

heh "being returned" funny. the right feels like THEY are returning the favor.

biden rule
nuke option

and so on and so on.

as for hillary - all i'll say is if trump deleted 33k mails you'd squirt out a dozen humpback whales in anger but since hillary did it, hey - yoga and wedding shit.

revenge politics sucks.

 

[2aguy]

Anarchy In Portland: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)​

ANARCHY IN PORTLAND: City Allows Antifa to Direct Traffic, Pound on Cars, Harass Elderly Motorists (VIDEO)
There was pure anarchy in the streets of Portland over the weekend, as Antifa took over directing traffic and harassed elderly motorists.
Portland has one of the largest and most active populations of Antifa members in the United States.
On Saturday, a group of the violent far-left extremists took over directing traffic in the city without the city stepping in to keep the peace and protect drivers.
“You’re a whitey, aren’t ya! Get the f*** down the road!” the leftists scream at a motorist.
The vulgar and violent group noticed North Carolina plates on a vehicle and began shouting at the couple in the car saying that they are white supremacists. They shouted at multiple drivers threatening to “beat their ass.”



~~~~~~
Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats aka DSA are proud of their shows of Anarchy and violence in the streets. This is what they want for America. I guess it takes longer for the PPD to get back from their weed break so they let #Antifa take over routine duties like traffic control.
We now have what is DEFINED AS TERRORISM.... Portland is now under Antifa terrorist control just like Beirut, parts of Iraq, Syria and West Africa. WHERE IN THE HELL IS SESSIONS AND THE DOJ...????
At this point, if the mayor isn't going to order the police to protect civilians from Antifa, I think at the very least, Portland ought to send out an emergency alert warning people away from an Antifa gathering. Antifa acts like they own downtown, Pioneer Square and the Transit Centers. Normal people are scared for their lives. Business owners are scared too. The damn mayor consistently tells the police to "stand down." He should be tarred and feathered...
This is the America, that Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats want for YOU. Harassment, Intimidation and Violence.

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

so is maxine. so is hillary now. if you only see one side doing it you're being willfully blind.

Maxine will get in there and mix it up with them. Obviously, that kind of thing works. As for Hillary, after almost 30 years of hateful unearned crazy accusations against her, I'm gonna cut her a little slack. If she is less than gracious, she earned the right. She is still no comparison to the main stream republican rhetoric that has been common for quite a while. Don't be surprised that a few of your parties standard tactics are finally being returned.

They were true....the only reason she isn't in prison now is back in the 90s they always made sure to control the law enforcement arm of the government they controlled, from Arkansas to the White House, and now, with the felonies of an illegal, unsecured server and the destruction of 30,000 subpoenaed emails, she continues to avoid prison...

 

[BULLDOG]

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

so is maxine. so is hillary now. if you only see one side doing it you're being willfully blind.

Maxine will get in there and mix it up with them. Obviously, that kind of thing works. As for Hillary, after almost 30 years of hateful unearned crazy accusations against her, I'm gonna cut her a little slack. If she is less than gracious, she earned the right. She is still no comparison to the main stream republican rhetoric that has been common for quite a while. Don't be surprised that a few of your parties standard tactics are finally being returned.

heh "being returned" funny. the right feels like THEY are returning the favor.

biden rule
nuke option

and so on and so on.

as for hillary - all i'll say is if trump deleted 33k mails you'd squirt out a dozen humpback whales in anger but since hillary did it, hey - yoga and wedding shit.

revenge politics sucks.

I'm sure a meeting on the tarmac between the head of a federal investigation and the subject of that investigation would upset you terribly too, wouldn't it?

 

[BULLDOG]

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

so is maxine. so is hillary now. if you only see one side doing it you're being willfully blind.

Maxine will get in there and mix it up with them. Obviously, that kind of thing works. As for Hillary, after almost 30 years of hateful unearned crazy accusations against her, I'm gonna cut her a little slack. If she is less than gracious, she earned the right. She is still no comparison to the main stream republican rhetoric that has been common for quite a while. Don't be surprised that a few of your parties standard tactics are finally being returned.

heh "being returned" funny. the right feels like THEY are returning the favor.

biden rule
nuke option

and so on and so on.

as for hillary - all i'll say is if trump deleted 33k mails you'd squirt out a dozen humpback whales in anger but since hillary did it, hey - yoga and wedding shit.

revenge politics sucks.

Biden rule? There has never been a Biden rule, and the words of the statement you are referring to certainly didn't imply withholding any hearing for a year, but if you insist on using the term, perhaps you could point to a single time such a pretend rule might have been observed other than when Turtle Boy stole Garland's Supreme Court seat.

 

[BULLDOG]

Are you sure you aren't exaggerating just a tiny bit?

glad i saw you call out those saying kavanaugh was a rapist for the same thing.

to your point - yes. a group of dickheads assuming a traffic cop role while stupid and annoying isn't really anarchy in the U.S.A either.

for some reason far too many people can only think / act in extremes.

Yet that orange clown is encouraging his supporters to take the most extreme stance. He is bad for the country in lots of ways, but that might be the worst.

so is maxine. so is hillary now. if you only see one side doing it you're being willfully blind.

Maxine will get in there and mix it up with them. Obviously, that kind of thing works. As for Hillary, after almost 30 years of hateful unearned crazy accusations against her, I'm gonna cut her a little slack. If she is less than gracious, she earned the right. She is still no comparison to the main stream republican rhetoric that has been common for quite a while. Don't be surprised that a few of your parties standard tactics are finally being returned.

They were true....the only reason she isn't in prison now is back in the 90s they always made sure to control the law enforcement arm of the government they controlled, from Arkansas to the White House, and now, with the felonies of an illegal, unsecured server and the destruction of 30,000 subpoenaed emails, she continues to avoid prison...

You bet bubba. Any new Big Foot sightings or Chemtrail reports lately?