Another Attractive Conservative - Christine O'Donnell

[hortysir]

OK, I'm un-subscribing if no one can produce any pictures of hot democrats.....

 

[paperview]

OK, I'm un-subscribing if no one can produce any pictures of hot democrats.....

 

[hortysir]

OK, I'm un-subscribing if no one can produce any pictures of hot democrats.....

Okay, I'm on the hook for another 100 replies

 

[Meister]

Paperview was right, and I was wrong. I have always admitted when I make a mistake, You on the other hand are almost always wrong (think about 'no combat units in Iraq) but can never admit it.

You are also a racist and a pig, who uses racist language.

So I am not worried about you at all: you are a fake.

You are a liar

You are a racist, liar, and a sexist pig. We all know that you have used the n-word and the c-word on the board.

If you had a pair, Jackie....you would produce the posts for all to see, instead of just accusing a person of it.

 

[rightwinger]

You can look at the good side

The Republicans are finally opening up their constituency to groups other than white christian males. By tapping into the wichcraft/satanic demographic they will be able to extend their apeal to goths and biker gangs

Plus look at the benefits of having a witch on your side. O'Donnell obviously used her witchly powers to steal the election from Castle. If she did it in Delaware...she can do it nationwide

Martin Luther King Jr was a Republican

and
National Black Republican Association

Witchcraft is a religion why are you anti First Amendment?

I love witches...

I am just observing the FACT that O'Donnell used Witchcraft to win the nomination

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There is no link to prove something he was not. You claim he was a republican.

YOU should be able to prove it if he was. YOU claimed it.

That's a matter of record, not something you can pull from a biased shitcan org like NBRA.

He was not. He refused to be associated with a party.

The Pulitzer Prize winning biographer of MLK has stated clearly, and years of extensive searching, there is not one shred of proof he was a republican.

His father was. That's about the closest you can come.

I have researched this extensively and made thousands of posts on the subject.

I'm tell you: You won't win this one.

If he was a democrat why would the FBI have him wire taped?

Now there's a nice little nugget of simplistic thought.

Let me guess: you're a tea bagger.

Maybe you should look into it a bit more. Study. Read.

Even Michael Steele did a major face palm when that idiotic NBRA group put up their billboards claiming MLK was a republican. Look it up.

The act of tea bagging takes two. Since the Tea bagger is the give of said bagging who is the recepiant of the bagging. You are correct junior obama and any liberals that attack the tea party. HUMMMM HOW DOES IT TASTE BABY?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There is no link to prove something he was not. You claim he was a republican.

YOU should be able to prove it if he was. YOU claimed it.

That's a matter of record, not something you can pull from a biased shitcan org like NBRA.

He was not. He refused to be associated with a party.

The Pulitzer Prize winning biographer of MLK has stated clearly, and years of extensive searching, there is not one shred of proof he was a republican.

His father was. That's about the closest you can come.

I have researched this extensively and made thousands of posts on the subject.

I'm tell you: You won't win this one.

Well, shoot, I am wrong on this. This is what I get for not researching something that fauxcons have been saying for years. Should have known they were lying, yet again.

Horseshit troll unless you do not read what you are repling to, you knew exactly what you were saying. So how many times must I bust you for lying starkey?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There is no link to prove something he was not. You claim he was a republican.

YOU should be able to prove it if he was. YOU claimed it.

That's a matter of record, not something you can pull from a biased shitcan org like NBRA.

He was not. He refused to be associated with a party.

The Pulitzer Prize winning biographer of MLK has stated clearly, and years of extensive searching, there is not one shred of proof he was a republican.

His father was. That's about the closest you can come.

I have researched this extensively and made thousands of posts on the subject.

I'm tell you: You won't win this one.

You junior may have researched it through others information but I lived it. The democrats were no friends of the black. King would never have supported them. Think about it stupid Would you be a party with the likes of Byrd?

 

[rightwinger]

There is no link to prove something he was not. You claim he was a republican.

YOU should be able to prove it if he was. YOU claimed it.

That's a matter of record, not something you can pull from a biased shitcan org like NBRA.

He was not. He refused to be associated with a party.

The Pulitzer Prize winning biographer of MLK has stated clearly, and years of extensive searching, there is not one shred of proof he was a republican.

His father was. That's about the closest you can come.

I have researched this extensively and made thousands of posts on the subject.

I'm tell you: You won't win this one.

You junior may have researched it through others information but I lived it. The democrats were no friends of the black. King would never have supported them. Think about it stupid Would you be a party with the likes of Byrd?

You are stunningly ignorant of the political structure as it related to Civil Rights. Democrats AND Republicans from the south opposed civil rights. Do you think either party in the south would have helped him?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

MLK biographer and historian Taylor Branch :

“He absolutely deplored the Republican Party of Goldwater and Reagan,”

Pulitzer Prize winning Author Taylor Branch

---> King "never endorsed anybody." He went out of his way to avoid appearing partisan. "The closest King ever came to supporting a candidate openly was (Democratic President Lyndon Baines) Johnson in '64, right after he'd gotten the civil rights bill passed that outlawed segregation. But even then he didn't quite endorsed him," Branch said.

Although King barnstormed for Johnson, he would never allow himself to utter the entirety of a popular chant of the day: "All the way with LBJ."

"He would say 'all the way', but he wouldn't say 'LBJ.'"

Branch also noted that Dr. King, Jr. was indeed friendly with Richard Nixon, who had been a member of the NAACP as vice president in the 1950s.

"He always said that he had a non-partisan, like a prophet's role, not a politician's role, and that he was for justice and it wasn't really black and white and it wasn't Democratic or Republican," said Branch.
"He exasperated a lot of the people around him for that reason."

<link>

And of course he will say King was not a republican Branch is a democrat.

Taylor Branch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There is no link to prove something he was not. You claim he was a republican.

YOU should be able to prove it if he was. YOU claimed it.

That's a matter of record, not something you can pull from a biased shitcan org like NBRA.

He was not. He refused to be associated with a party.

The Pulitzer Prize winning biographer of MLK has stated clearly, and years of extensive searching, there is not one shred of proof he was a republican.

His father was. That's about the closest you can come.

I have researched this extensively and made thousands of posts on the subject.

I'm tell you: You won't win this one.

You junior may have researched it through others information but I lived it. The democrats were no friends of the black. King would never have supported them. Think about it stupid Would you be a party with the likes of Byrd?

You lived it?

You mean you were black in 1957?


MLK Jr. was a socialist, not a Republican. His father was a registered Republican, but voted Democratic in every election after JFK helped MLK Jr. get out of prison during the 1960 campaign.

Stop the pathetic attempts to re-write history.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bigreb stumble around like a drunk banging into this and that, claiming the bottle was at fault.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There is no link to prove something he was not. You claim he was a republican.

YOU should be able to prove it if he was. YOU claimed it.

That's a matter of record, not something you can pull from a biased shitcan org like NBRA.

He was not. He refused to be associated with a party.

The Pulitzer Prize winning biographer of MLK has stated clearly, and years of extensive searching, there is not one shred of proof he was a republican.

His father was. That's about the closest you can come.

I have researched this extensively and made thousands of posts on the subject.

I'm tell you: You won't win this one.

You junior may have researched it through others information but I lived it. The democrats were no friends of the black. King would never have supported them. Think about it stupid Would you be a party with the likes of Byrd?

You are stunningly ignorant of the political structure as it related to Civil Rights. Democrats AND Republicans from the south opposed civil rights. Do you think either party in the south would have helped him?

And your ignorance of the 60's is overwhelming democrats were no friends of blacks.

House Debate and Passage
The House of Representatives debated the bill for nine days and rejected nearly one hundred amendments designed to weaken the bill before passing H.R .7152 on February 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11. A bipartisan coalition of Republicans and northern Democrats was the key to the bill's success. This same arrangement would prove crucial later to the Senate's approval of the bill.

The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator participated in the filibuster against the bill. In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes.

The Republican pro-civil rights forces were blessed with gifted leadership. Although Senate minority whip Thomas Kuchel initially managed the party's forces, it increasingly became clear to Democrats, Republicans, the press, civil rights groups, and the White House that Everett McKinley Dirksen was the key man in the entire civil rights legislative effort.

CongressLink: [Congress: The Basics - Lawmaking] Civil Rights: Major Features of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

 

[rightwinger]

It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11.

I notice you left out how many Southern Republicans voted in favor of Civil Rights?

 

[Charles_Main]

There is no link to prove something he was not. You claim he was a republican.

YOU should be able to prove it if he was. YOU claimed it.

That's a matter of record, not something you can pull from a biased shitcan org like NBRA.

He was not. He refused to be associated with a party.

The Pulitzer Prize winning biographer of MLK has stated clearly, and years of extensive searching, there is not one shred of proof he was a republican.

His father was. That's about the closest you can come.

I have researched this extensively and made thousands of posts on the subject.

I'm tell you: You won't win this one.

You junior may have researched it through others information but I lived it. The democrats were no friends of the black. King would never have supported them. Think about it stupid Would you be a party with the likes of Byrd?

You lived it?

You mean you were black in 1957?

Wait so whites who lived through it, and help pass civil Rights didn't live it also? Only blacks lived it eh.

ok.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You junior may have researched it through others information but I lived it. The democrats were no friends of the black. King would never have supported them. Think about it stupid Would you be a party with the likes of Byrd?

You lived it?

You mean you were black in 1957?

Wait so whites who lived through it, and help pass civil Rights didn't live it also? Only blacks lived it eh.

ok.

I like it how you dodged my post entirely by editing out everything but the joke.

Good job!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You junior may have researched it through others information but I lived it. The democrats were no friends of the black. King would never have supported them. Think about it stupid Would you be a party with the likes of Byrd?

You lived it?

You mean you were black in 1957?

Wait so whites who lived through it, and help pass civil Rights didn't live it also? Only blacks lived it eh.

ok.

He's pissed because I busted his ass for lying on another thread.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11.

I notice you left out how many Southern Republicans voted in favor of Civil Rights?

No I did not. If anyone left anything out it would be you you didn't even add the track link to that reply.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You lived it?

You mean you were black in 1957?

Wait so whites who lived through it, and help pass civil Rights didn't live it also? Only blacks lived it eh.

ok.

He's pissed because I busted his ass for lying on another thread.

Of course. I'm "pissed".

What thread did you "busted my ass" in?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Wait so whites who lived through it, and help pass civil Rights didn't live it also? Only blacks lived it eh.

ok.

He's pissed because I busted his ass for lying on another thread.

Of course. I'm "pissed".

What thread did you "busted my ass" in?

This thread

Eh?


English, please?

Playing dumb will not work with me. You know what you posted was Bullshit.
Or do we have a new definition of the meaning of Bullshit?

What are you claiming is "bullshit"?

Everything in this post you wrote

They're a liberal watchdog group. All they care about is fact-checking Republican speeches.

Unlikely.

This is the thing - everyone (particularly on this board) loves to throw the word "lying" around all the time. But 90% of what people claim is "lying" is lying by omission, or just not telling the whole truth (which is standard practice of rhetoric). I don't think Media Matters lies. But there's no question they don't tell the whole truth.
BTW, I didn't "admit" that Media Matters is a liberal watchdog group - they've never claimed otherwise.