Another History “Dot” For You To Connect

[PoliticalChic]

Who they were, and who they still are.


1.By now, every sentient guy and gal knows that Democrat lie about everything. In fact, the best way to verify anything is to listen to a Democrat, and believe the opposite.

Jim Crow was bad, huh? Every Jim Crow law as inspired, passed and maintained by Democrats.

Every lynching was by Democrats.

Remember in the last year or so, all the statues ripped down and portraits removed from the Capitol? Yup….all of Democrats, dismantled by Democrats to hide their past…..and present.




2. And if you are ever ordered….”taught”.... the fatuous myth about there being some “flip” of racists to the Republican Party….a party formed to fight slavery…..keep today’s history event in mind: the Democrats started the Civil War to maintain slavery.



3. And during that war…..Nathan Bedford Forrest and The Fort Pillow Massacre.

“The Fort Pillow Massacre in Tennessee on April 12, 1864, in which some 300 African-American soldiers were killed, was one of the most controversial events of the American Civil War (1861-65). Though most of the Union garrison surrendered, and thus should have been taken as prisoners of war, the soldiers were killed. The Confederate refusal to treat these troops as traditional prisoners of war infuriated the North, and led to the Union’s refusal to participate in prisoner exchanges.”
Fort Pillow Massacre

Just Democrats being Democrats.

4. “In March 1864, Confederate Major General Nathan Bedford Forrest (1821-77) launched a cavalry raid in western Tennessee and Kentucky that was aimed at destroying Union supply lines and capturing federal prisoners. In early April, he determined to move on Fort Pillow, located 40 miles north of Memphis. At the time, Fort Pillow was being held by a garrison of around 600 men, approximately half of whom were black soldiers.”
Ibid.

5. Know why the name ‘Nathan Bedford Forrest’ sounds familiar????
He formed the KKK.

“Nathan Bedford Forrest was a prominent Confederate Army general during the American Civil War and the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan from 1867 to 1869. Before the war, Forrest amassed substantial wealth as a cotton plantation owner, horse and cattle trader, real estate broker, and slave trader.
Wikipedia

Not just a Democrat, Nathan Bedford Forrest was a super Democrat:

Liberal historian Eric Foner writes that the Klan was “…a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party…” Foner, “Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877,” p. 425



“And just as the paramilitary and hooded Ku Klux Klan was used as, per Columbia University historian Eric Foner, “a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party” and, according to University of North Carolina historian Allen Trelease, the “terrorist arm of the Democratic Party,” so now the hooded- fascists of Antifa are being used as a paramilitary organization designed to further the Left’s political agenda by force.”
Antifa: The New Ku Klux Klan - The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator | USA News and Politics




Just history they won't teach you in government school.

 

[rightwinger]

Another moron confuses the Southern culture of slavery with the Democratic Party

Explain how slavery in the South existed for 200 years before the Democratic Party was formed

 

[Penelope]

The republican party didn't even exist till after the civil war.

 

[rightwinger]

The republican party didn't even exist till after the civil war.

Republicans in the South supported Jim Crow
Republicans in Indiana, Ohio and western Pennsylvania formed KKK groups

TODAY, KKK and White Supremacy firmly support Republicans

 

[Penelope]

II. Republicans become conservative, and Southerners become Republican​

6) The party against progressivism and the New Deal​

How Republicans went from the party of Lincoln to the party of Trump, in 13 maps

It's been a remarkable transformation over 162 years.

www.vox.com

 

[PoliticalChic]

The republican party didn't even exist till after the civil war.

Amazing.


Being totally ignorant has no bearing on your posting, huh?


Republican Party/Founded
March 20, 1854, Ripon, WI



https://www.google.com/search?q=dat...pkokEHe_KC4oQ_B16BAgREAE#imgrc=SCMbPnooMdAZ5M
https://www.google.com/search?q=dat...pkokEHe_KC4oQ_B16BAgREAE#imgrc=SCMbPnooMdAZ5M
https://www.google.com/search?q=dat...pkokEHe_KC4oQ_B16BAgREAE#imgrc=SCMbPnooMdAZ5M
Pop Quiz: on what date did the Democrats fire on Fort Sumter, starting a war to maintain human slavery????

 

[Jets]

Who they were, and who they still are.


Really, if that’s the case why did more Democrats in Congress vote FOR the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than against it?

 

[PoliticalChic]

II. Republicans become conservative, and Southerners become Republican​

6) The party against progressivism and the New Deal​

How Republicans went from the party of Lincoln to the party of Trump, in 13 maps

It's been a remarkable transformation over 162 years.

www.vox.com

Democrats lie about everything.....and, you just proved it......again.



1.But, no….not the one advanced by only the truly most insipid and imbecilic acolytes of the Left, the sort of defense of their party, the Democrats, that would be accepted by a pre-adolescent mentality. Like this: "Well...yeah, everyone knows that early Democrats were the party of slavers...but then...around the 1960s the two parties flip-flopped their positions on slavery, segregation and black people....and it is the Republicans who decided to become the racists!!!”

A brief look at the historical facts will show that this is an unsupported leftist theory. Racist Democrats who were in power as the Dixiecrat Party, founded in the 1940s, did not became today’s Republicans. They were Dixicrats…not Dixiecans. And went right back to being Democrats.
No, the Parties Didn't 'Switch'

2. Watch me prove how truly stupid the 'flip' myth is:

What the chances are that, after a lifetime of believing as you do, arguing DNC talking points, reading the NYTimes, and watching MSNBC, being indoctrinated...er, 'taught' in government schools, and watching Comedy Central for your news.....

.....what are the chances would be that you woke up tomorrow praising Donald Trump's election and presidency, and voting Republican......you know....'flipping.'

And that calculation represents the same chance that Republicans and conservatives, who formed a party to fight Democrats and slavery, suddenly decided to become racists.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Who they were, and who they still are.


Really, if that’s the case why did more Democrats in Congress vote FOR the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than against it?

Please use the quote function to indicate exactly who you are eviscerating.
Remember, there are government school grads who have been lied to, and know none of the actual history.

 

[Jets]

Please use the quote function to indicate exactly who you are eviscerating.

That would be you. It’s your quote.

Care to answer?

 

[PoliticalChic]

That would be you. It’s your quote.

Care to answer?

Sure thing.

Post what you claim to be 'eviscerating,' and I will put you in your place.....last seat in the dumb row.

 

[Flash]

Who they were, and who they still are.


1.By now, every sentient guy and gal knows that Democrat lie about everything. In fact, the best way to verify anything is to listen to a Democrat, and believe the opposite.

Jim Crow was bad, huh? Every Jim Crow law as inspired, passed and maintained by Democrats.

Every lynching was by Democrats.

Remember in the last year or so, all the statues ripped down and portraits removed from the Capitol? Yup….all of Democrats, dismantled by Democrats to hide their past…..and present.




2. And if you are ever ordered….”taught”.... the fatuous myth about there being some “flip” of racists to the Republican Party….a party formed to fight slavery…..keep today’s history event in mind: the Democrats started the Civil War to maintain slavery.



3. And during that war…..Nathan Bedford Forrest and The Fort Pillow Massacre.

“The Fort Pillow Massacre in Tennessee on April 12, 1864, in which some 300 African-American soldiers were killed, was one of the most controversial events of the American Civil War (1861-65). Though most of the Union garrison surrendered, and thus should have been taken as prisoners of war, the soldiers were killed. The Confederate refusal to treat these troops as traditional prisoners of war infuriated the North, and led to the Union’s refusal to participate in prisoner exchanges.”
Fort Pillow Massacre

Just Democrats being Democrats.

4. “In March 1864, Confederate Major General Nathan Bedford Forrest (1821-77) launched a cavalry raid in western Tennessee and Kentucky that was aimed at destroying Union supply lines and capturing federal prisoners. In early April, he determined to move on Fort Pillow, located 40 miles north of Memphis. At the time, Fort Pillow was being held by a garrison of around 600 men, approximately half of whom were black soldiers.”
Ibid.

View attachment 629476





5. Know why the name ‘Nathan Bedford Forrest’ sounds familiar????
He formed the KKK.

“Nathan Bedford Forrest was a prominent Confederate Army general during the American Civil War and the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan from 1867 to 1869. Before the war, Forrest amassed substantial wealth as a cotton plantation owner, horse and cattle trader, real estate broker, and slave trader.
Wikipedia

Not just a Democrat, Nathan Bedford Forrest was a super Democrat:

Liberal historian Eric Foner writes that the Klan was “…a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party…” Foner, “Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877,” p. 425



“And just as the paramilitary and hooded Ku Klux Klan was used as, per Columbia University historian Eric Foner, “a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party” and, according to University of North Carolina historian Allen Trelease, the “terrorist arm of the Democratic Party,” so now the hooded- fascists of Antifa are being used as a paramilitary organization designed to further the Left’s political agenda by force.”
Antifa: The New Ku Klux Klan - The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator | USA News and Politics




Just history they won't teach you in government school.

My Great, great, great Grandfather was a Confederate soldier from Florida. He participated in the Battle of Olustee.

In that battle Union troops tried to invade North Florida. There were several regiments of Union troops, one being the 54th Mass Colored Regiment. The same one depicted in the movie Glory.

The Confederates won that battle. In fact it was a slaughter. Just like at Ft Pillow the Black troops that tried to surrender were killed.

It was a brutal war.

 

[Jets]

Sure thing.

Post what you claim to be 'eviscerating,' and I will put you in your place.....last seat in the dumb row.

I accept your concession.

Thanks for playing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sure thing.

Post what you claim to be 'eviscerating,' and I will put you in your place.....last seat in the dumb row.

BTW, dunce.....it is the percentage that is significant.



The Senate version: Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%) Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
Long title: An act to enforce the constitutional ri...
Enacted by: the 88th United States Congress

Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia​

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964



I've seen your posts, so I'd best explain that 82% is greater than 69%.



Now....scoot back to the dumb row.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I accept your concession.

Thanks for playing.

.....proving you to be the imbecile that everyone knew you were.



Here's more of the education you forwent:


Once the Democrats got involved, civil rights became just another racket with another mob. Unlike previous civil rights laws, the 1964 Civil Rights Act included provisions aimed at purely private actors, raising the hackles of some constitutional purists, notably Barry Goldwater, the Republicans’ 1964 presidential nominee. Goldwater, like the rest of his party, had supported every single civil rights bill until the 1964 act. But he broke with the vast majority of his fellow Republicans to oppose the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Like many other conservatives opposed to a living, growing, breathing Constitution, Goldwater actually opposed only two of the seven major provisions of the bill, those regulating privately owned housing and public accommodations. But there were other provisions he would have made tougher. For example, Goldwater wanted to make it mandatory that federal funds be withheld from programs practicing discrimination, rather than discretionary, as President Kennedy had requested.

Goldwater was a vehement foe of segregation. He was a founder of the NAACP in Arizona, donating the equivalent of several thousand dollars to the organization’s efforts to integrate the public schools. When he was head of the Arizona National Guard, he had integrated the state Guard before Harry Truman announced he was integrating the U.S. military. As the Washington Post said, Goldwater “ended racial segregation in his family department stores, and he was instrumental in ending it in Phoenix schools and restaurants and in the Arizona National Guard.”

But he was also a believer in limited government. It was, after all, racist Democratic politicians in the South using the force of the government to violate private property rights by enforcing the Jim Crow laws in the first place. As Sowell points out, it wasn’t the private bus companies demanding that blacks sit in the back of the bus, it was the government.

Goldwater not only had personally promoted desegregation, he belonged to a party that had been fighting for civil rights for the previous century against Democratic obstructionism. Lyndon Johnson voted against every civil rights bill during his tenure in the Senate. But by the time he became president, he had flipped 180 degrees. Appealing to regional mobs wouldn’t work with a national electorate.

Unlike mob-appeasing Democrats, Goldwater based his objections to certain parts of the 1964 Civil Rights Act on purely constitutional principles. Along with other constitutional purists in the Republican Party, Goldwater opposed federal initiatives in a lot of areas, not just those involving race. By contrast, segregationist Democrats routinely criticized the exercise of federal power and expenditure of federal funds when it involved ending discrimination against blacks, but gladly accepted federal pork projects for their states.

Demonic, chapter 10



Conservative utility is immediate, ineluctable, and applicable across aisles and ages. For proof, consider that even John F. Kennedy, Jr., and his family, staunch political opponents of Barry Goldwater, recognize the value of his conservative assertions. Robert F, Kennedy, Jr., in his afterward to Goldwater’s book, writes: “for Goldwater, the purpose of government was to foster societies where human potential could flourish. Conservatism, he explains in [his] book, is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for the individual that is consistent with the maintenance of the social order.” [See “The Conscience of a Conservative,” Goldwater, p. 123-124.] Christian Camerota, “Reinventing the Right,” p. 28.

 

[Moonglow]

Please use the quote function to indicate exactly who you are eviscerating.
Remember, there are government school grads who have been lied to, and know none of the actual history.

Homeschool Einstein can't even spell Democratic Party correctly, derpa.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Who they were, and who they still are.


Really, if that’s the case why did more Democrats in Congress vote FOR the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than against it?

Because at that time there was a Democrat President who said "With this, we will have the N*****er's voting for us for the next 50 years. Thanks LBJ for that.


In 1957 when the Civil Rights Act came out with President Dwight D. in charge, most of the Democrat voted against it. Bet you werent taught that in school.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

On this date, the House of Representatives passed the initial version of what eventually became the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Propelled by advocacy groups like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, as well as the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration, Congress took up the...

history.house.gov

 

[Jets]

BTW, dunce.....it is the percentage that is significant.



The Senate version: Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%) Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
Long title: An act to enforce the constitutional ri...
Enacted by: the 88th United States Congress

Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia​

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964



I've seen your posts, so I'd best explain that 82% is greater than 69%.



Now....scoot back to the dumb row.

So more Democrats voted FOR the CVA of 1964, than AGAINST it.

Thank you again for conceding my point.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Because at that time there was a Democrat President who said "With this, we will have the N*****er's voting for us for the next 50 years. Thanks LBJ for that.


In 1957 when the Civil Rights Act came out with President Dwight D. in charge, most of the Democrat voted against it. Bet you werent taught that in school.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

On this date, the House of Representatives passed the initial version of what eventually became the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Propelled by advocacy groups like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, as well as the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration, Congress took up the...

history.house.gov

There is something wrong with that poster......he works so hard to be relevant, yet he can't even be correct in his assertions.

At first glance, he appears to be on the correct side......but, then, manages to put both feet in his mouth.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So more Democrats voted FOR the CVA of 1964, than AGAINST it.

Thank you again for conceding my point.

BTW, dunce.....it is the percentage that is significant.



The Senate version: Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%) Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
Long title: An act to enforce the constitutional ri...
Enacted by: the 88th United States Congress

Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia​

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964




I've seen your posts, so I'd best explain that 82% is greater than 69%.



Now....scoot back to the dumb row.



You tried to defeat the idea that the Republicans were far more proponents of civil rights than Democrats.....and you failed miserably.

As, I supsect, you have failed in every endeavor in your life.

All of us have run into your sort before, sadly, and in your next conversation with real pepole.....turn around quickly and yoiu will catch the eye-rolls.