At CPAC, Extremists On Stage And Off

[Ghost of a Rider]

Some Democrats do want open borders and this is a fact.

That is a boatload of bizarre bovine excrement. Name those democrats .

Farhad Manjoo for one. He's a reporter with the New York Times and has written an article in favor of open borders. See below:

Opinion | There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders

There's also a Jeffery Miron who wrote an article for USA Today in favor of open borders. See below:

Forget the wall already, it's time for the U.S. to have open borders

Then there's a Bryan Caplan - an economist at George Mason University - who is an advocate for open borders.

I'm sure I can find others but I think you get the idea.

Even if what you say is true that Democrats in general don't want open borders, at the very least I think we can say that they are much softer on the issue. To the point that anyone who says we need more secure borders is automatically labeled racist. And if they are in favor of a wall? Forget about it. You might as well call him a child molester.

Ok so here we have a couple of people who identify as democrats who advocate for open borders. However, that hardly justifies the incessant bleating on the part of those on the right that "democrats want open borders. " I do not. Are we softer on the issue? That depends on what you mean by soft. If it means give refugees a fair shot at asylum, or dreamers a path to citizenship, then I suppose so.

That depends on what you mean by "refugees". The migrant caravan are not refugees and did not deserve the status of asylum seekers. As for dreamers, I have no problem with them unless they come here illegally.

If one dreams of a better life then by all means, come to the U.S. if you think you can get that here. Just do it legally through proper channels.

And no, we do not automatically label those who want secure borders as racist.

I've been called racist by more than one person on this very message board for much less than that. Each time it was simply for being conservative. I've been called a nazi and a racist on facebook for equally stupid reasons.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

When the Communist Party USA proudly flies the Hammer and Sickle at the Democratic Party convention will you write several paragraphs in condemnation.

I'd condemn any celebration of extreemism.

Which is what this CPAC is all about

Moving the goal posts

~S~

The CPUSA venerate men like Stain and Mao who make the Nazi's look like a pack of angry boy scouts.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Some Democrats do want open borders and this is a fact.

That is a boatload of bizarre bovine excrement. Name those democrats .

Farhad Manjoo for one. He's a reporter with the New York Times and has written an article in favor of open borders. See below:

Opinion | There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders

There's also a Jeffery Miron who wrote an article for USA Today in favor of open borders. See below:

Forget the wall already, it's time for the U.S. to have open borders

Then there's a Bryan Caplan - an economist at George Mason University - who is an advocate for open borders.

I'm sure I can find others but I think you get the idea.

Even if what you say is true that Democrats in general don't want open borders, at the very least I think we can say that they are much softer on the issue. To the point that anyone who says we need more secure borders is automatically labeled racist. And if they are in favor of a wall? Forget about it. You might as well call him a child molester.

Ok so here we have a couple of people who identify as democrats who advocate for open borders. However, that hardly justifies the incessant bleating on the part of those on the right that "democrats want open borders. " I do not. Are we softer on the issue? That depends on what you mean by soft. If it means give refugees a fair shot at asylum, or dreamers a path to citizenship, then I suppose so.

That depends on what you mean by "refugees". The migrant caravan are not refugees and did not deserve the status of asylum seekers. As for dreamers, I have no problem with them unless they come here illegally.

If one dreams of a better life then by all means, come to the U.S. if you think you can get that here. Just do it legally through proper channels.

And no, we do not automatically label those who want secure borders as racist.

I've been called racist by more than one person on this very message board for much less than that. Each time it was simply for being conservative. I've been called a nazi and a racist on facebook for equally stupid reasons.

The migrants caravans are indeed refugees fleeing violence and famine in their countries. We have a humanitarian obligation to-at minimum hear there case.

Why Are Migrants From Central America Coming To The U.S.? - 1A

Today’s migrant flow is very different. Yes, there are still male heads of household seeking to pursue the “American Dream” in the U.S. so as to send home a couple of hundred dollars each month to their families. But the crux of the recent crisis at the border is that there are fewer male migrants in their 20s or 30s making the crossing, and many more families, newborns, children, and pregnant women escaping life-or-death situations as much as poverty.

…

For some families, it is too late to keep their kids away [from gangs]. In El Salvador, where there are around 65,000 thousand active gang members with a social support base of half a million people, boys from 12 years up are prime targets for recruitment. Girls can also be targeted at an early age, either to be sexually abused or to become gang members. The eventual fate of a girl—whether she is left alone, harassed into joining the gang, or forced into becoming a sex slave—depends entirely on the local leaders, or palabreros, who run the local cells or clicas (cliques) of the two largest gangs, MS-13 and Barrio 18.

It appears that you don't understand the dreamer issue. Of course they came here illegally -as children who had nothing to say about it.

 

[skookerasbil]

People on this thread have to remember that the OP frequently correlates spoken words with violence. Kinda ghey

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

People on this thread have to remember that the OP frequently correlates spoken words with violence. Kinda ghey

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[skookerasbil]

Let's see, Demorats: party of the KKK, Jim Crow, segregation, fighting against the civil rights act, resisting giving blacks or women the right to vote, putting Black Panthers at the voting booths to intimidate white voters, need we go on?

Democrats Are No Longer the Racist Party

Few things annoy me more than when people who want to stick a thumb in the eye of Democrats resort to tactics such as pointing out they founded the Ku Klux Klan or pushed through Jim Crow laws following the Civil War. The intent seems to be to draw attention away from the party that harbors the racists of today by shaming the Democrats for the sins of our forefathers.

It’s a sleazy tactic that doesn’t work, and It is time to set the record straight. First of all, Democrats- for the most part- do not deny or try to hide the parties past. Second, I will show how, when and why the racists fled from the Democratic Party and found a new home and lastly, I will present evidence that shows how, during the civil rights era, support for civil right legislation was split, not by party affiliation but by regional loyalty-specifically the old Confederacy and the Union. Let’s begin by talking about the civil war era

https://classroom.synonym.com/civil-warera-political-parties-north-vs-south-8901.html

Democratic Party

The Democratic Party was formed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1792 and held considerable power in the years leading up to the Civil War. The Democratic Party became divided in the 1850s over the issue of slavery, with some factions in the north supporting abolitionist causes, some northern factions supporting accommodation of the South and Southern Democrats supporting the continuation and expansion of slavery. During the elections of 1860, Southern and Northern Democrats nominated separate candidates for president. After the Civil War broke out, former Southern Democrats held considerable clout in the Confederate Congress. Northern Democrats lost much of their political power in the North during the Civil War.

Republican Party

The Republican Party was founded in the 1850s by northerners who wanted to abolish slavery. The demise of the Whig Party and the split in the Democratic Party in the years leading up to the 1860 elections gave the Republicans an opportunity to advance. Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln won the U.S. Presidential election in 1860 and Republicans gained control of Congress, leading to the secession of eleven Southern states. The Republican Party had very little support in the South before the war and virtually none after war broke out. In 1864, the Republican Party joined with Democrats who favored the war effort to form the National Union Party. Other Republicans, who were in favor of pressing the war more forcefully, left the Republican Party to form the Radical Democracy Party. The National Union Party won the 1864 presidential election.

The truth about Republicans and civil rights even then was not as clear cut as some would like us to believe:

https://medium.com/everyvote/how-the-republicans-and-democrats-switched-on-civil-rights-in-5-racist-steps-92c1b41480b

Republicans and Democrats after the Civil War

It’s true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. It’s also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But there’s more to it.

The Civil War-era GOP wasn’t that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding and monopolizing the new black vote.


In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.

As for the democrats

Democrats v Republicans on Jim Crow

Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.

During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies — it wasn’t worth their while.



Democrats dominated Southern politics throughout the Jim Crow Era. It’s fair to say that Democratic governors and legislatures are responsible for creating and upholding white supremacist policies.

Southern Democrats were truly awful.

Then things began to change

President Truman Integrates the Troops: 1948

Fast forward about sixty shitty years. Black people are still living in segregation under Jim Crow. Nonetheless, African Americans agree to serve in World War II. At war’s end, President Harry Truman, a Democrat, used an Executive Order to integrate the troops. (That order was not executed until 1963, however because: racism.)

The Party of Kennedy v the Party of Nixon in the Civil Rights Era

Two things started happening at the same time:

· Racist Democrats were getting antsy

· Neither party could afford to ignore civil rights anymore

In 1960 Kennedy defeated Nixon. At the time of his election, the both parties unevenly supported civil rights. But President Kennedy decided to move forward.

After Kennedy’s assassination in 1963, Johnson continued Kennedy’s civil rights focus.

As you can imagine, that did not sit particularly well with most Southern Democrats. This is when Strom Thurmond flew the coop for good.

In fact, a greater percentage of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats. Support for the Act followed geographic, not party, lines. ( More on that later)

Get that? Support for civil rights was along geographic, not party lines. Now we get to the meat of the matter:

S

oon after, the Republicans came up with their Southern Strategy — a plan to woo white Southern voters to the party for the 1968 election.

The Kennedy and Johnson administrations had advanced civil rights, largely through national legislation and direct executive actions. So, the Southern Strategy was the opposite — states’ rights and no integration.

As in the Civil War, the concepts of “states’ rights” and “tradition,” were codes for “maintaining white supremacy.”

The divide between the north and the south vs the Democrats and the Republicans can be easily illustrated:


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/28/republicans-party-of-civil-rights


As we saw earlier more Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act, but that is not the whole story
View attachment 248748

You don't need to know too much history to understand that the South from the civil war to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 tended to be opposed to minority rights. This factor was separate from party identification or ideology. We can easily control for this variable by breaking up the voting by those states that were part of the confederacy and those that were not.

View attachment 248749

But what happens when we control for both party affiliation and region? As Sean Trende noted earlier this year, "sometimes relationships become apparent only after you control for other factors".

View attachment 248750

In conclusion, maligning the entire Democratic Party as the historical racist party without regard to regional loyalties or the fact that the racists fled from the Democrats ranks in the 60’s is just dumbed down revisionist history, and patently dishonest. I have to wonder, which party will be remembered as the party of racists in another 150 years or so. Any guesses?

Actually, Democrats are now known politically as the party of perpetual outrage. At least by folks who vote!

s0n.......you get hysterical about just about everything. If the President stopped off at a Mr Softee truck and ordered a vanilla cone a couple of times in a row, you'd be shouting about racism. Kinda ghey.

 

[skookerasbil]

By the way Progressive......just want to be clear. Guys like you being out there = a boondoggle for people on my side. We want your waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over the top angst and outrage on display at all times! Makes regular folks in America think ie: "Who the fuck is this radical fuck?". We want people like AOC in the spotlight.......like every day!! Ensures electoral nut sack kick for the DUMS in 2020! Go.......go..........

 

[skookerasbil]

People on this thread have to remember that the OP frequently correlates spoken words with violence. Kinda ghey

What the hell are you talking about?

Been called a 'snowflake'? The 'it' new insult

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

By the way Progressive......just want to be clear. Guys like you being out there = a boondoggle for people on my side. We want your waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over the top angst and outrage on display at all times! Makes regular folks in America think ie: "Who the fuck is this radical fuck?". We want people like AOC in the spotlight.......like every day!! Ensures electoral nut sack kick for the DUMS in 2020! Go.......go..........

Oh wipe the spit off your chin and take a chill pill. Your inane rants are not getting you anywhere

 

[August West]

Let's see, Demorats: party of the KKK, Jim Crow, segregation, fighting against the civil rights act, resisting giving blacks or women the right to vote, putting Black Panthers at the voting booths to intimidate white voters, need we go on?

No need to go on. Most of us are well aware of what the Democrats were several decades ago but where are you NOW? Were you here?
tiki torch charlottesville - Bing images

 

[skookerasbil]

Let's see, Demorats: party of the KKK, Jim Crow, segregation, fighting against the civil rights act, resisting giving blacks or women the right to vote, putting Black Panthers at the voting booths to intimidate white voters, need we go on?

No need to go on. Most of us are well aware of what the Democrats were several decades ago but where are you NOW? Were you here?
tiki torch charlottesville - Bing images

lol.......a huge reason Trump is in office is because of what people saw happening in Charlotte that summer! People said, "WTF.......they are letting the savages take over a city! Fuck this!". The rest of course, is history with progressives taking an almost daily dose of the bumpy cucumber.

 

[skookerasbil]

By the way Progressive......just want to be clear. Guys like you being out there = a boondoggle for people on my side. We want your waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over the top angst and outrage on display at all times! Makes regular folks in America think ie: "Who the fuck is this radical fuck?". We want people like AOC in the spotlight.......like every day!! Ensures electoral nut sack kick for the DUMS in 2020! Go.......go..........

Oh wipe the spit off your chin and take a chill pill. Your inane rants are not getting you anywhere

Well I guess we are going to find out s0n! Maybe identity politics wins out in 2020! But that's ok by me because if it does, it simply amps up the level of division another few notches = a win for America. For myself and tens of millions of other Americans, the level of division isn't nearly what it needs to be.

 

[basquebromance]

I don't keep up with the news anymore because I think the country is over

 

[skookerasbil]

oh btw......progressives never get the correct perception of the lay of the land because they spend their lives tuned into communist networks all the time! But they'll sure as shit be finding out on YouTube!!

Watch......within two years!

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Some Democrats do want open borders and this is a fact.

That is a boatload of bizarre bovine excrement. Name those democrats .

Farhad Manjoo for one. He's a reporter with the New York Times and has written an article in favor of open borders. See below:

Opinion | There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders

There's also a Jeffery Miron who wrote an article for USA Today in favor of open borders. See below:

Forget the wall already, it's time for the U.S. to have open borders

Then there's a Bryan Caplan - an economist at George Mason University - who is an advocate for open borders.

I'm sure I can find others but I think you get the idea.

Even if what you say is true that Democrats in general don't want open borders, at the very least I think we can say that they are much softer on the issue. To the point that anyone who says we need more secure borders is automatically labeled racist. And if they are in favor of a wall? Forget about it. You might as well call him a child molester.

Ok so here we have a couple of people who identify as democrats who advocate for open borders. However, that hardly justifies the incessant bleating on the part of those on the right that "democrats want open borders. " I do not. Are we softer on the issue? That depends on what you mean by soft. If it means give refugees a fair shot at asylum, or dreamers a path to citizenship, then I suppose so.

That depends on what you mean by "refugees". The migrant caravan are not refugees and did not deserve the status of asylum seekers. As for dreamers, I have no problem with them unless they come here illegally.

If one dreams of a better life then by all means, come to the U.S. if you think you can get that here. Just do it legally through proper channels.

And no, we do not automatically label those who want secure borders as racist.

I've been called racist by more than one person on this very message board for much less than that. Each time it was simply for being conservative. I've been called a nazi and a racist on facebook for equally stupid reasons.

The migrants caravans are indeed refugees fleeing violence and famine in their countries. We have a humanitarian obligation to-at minimum hear there case.

Why Are Migrants From Central America Coming To The U.S.? - 1A

Violence? Yes, in the form of high crime. Famine? Uh, no.

We have our own violence and drug epidemic happening right now. Heroin use is through the roof and deaths from its use are getting worse every day. At what point will it get bad enough that Americans start migrating to the Canadian border asking for asylum?

We need to focus more on our own problems before we become Mommy to the rest of the world.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

By the way Progressive......just want to be clear. Guys like you being out there = a boondoggle for people on my side. We want your waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over the top angst and outrage on display at all times! Makes regular folks in America think ie: "Who the fuck is this radical fuck?". We want people like AOC in the spotlight.......like every day!! Ensures electoral nut sack kick for the DUMS in 2020! Go.......go..........

Oh wipe the spit off your chin and take a chill pill. Your inane rants are not getting you anywhere

Well I guess we are going to find out s0n! Maybe identity politics wins out in 2020! But that's ok by me because if it does, it simply amps up the level of division another few notches = a win for America. For myself and tens of millions of other Americans, the level of division isn't nearly what it needs to be.

Thank you for admitting that you want to see America in turmoil. You must hate it very much.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

That is a boatload of bizarre bovine excrement. Name those democrats .

Farhad Manjoo for one. He's a reporter with the New York Times and has written an article in favor of open borders. See below:

Opinion | There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders

There's also a Jeffery Miron who wrote an article for USA Today in favor of open borders. See below:

Forget the wall already, it's time for the U.S. to have open borders

Then there's a Bryan Caplan - an economist at George Mason University - who is an advocate for open borders.

I'm sure I can find others but I think you get the idea.

Even if what you say is true that Democrats in general don't want open borders, at the very least I think we can say that they are much softer on the issue. To the point that anyone who says we need more secure borders is automatically labeled racist. And if they are in favor of a wall? Forget about it. You might as well call him a child molester.

Ok so here we have a couple of people who identify as democrats who advocate for open borders. However, that hardly justifies the incessant bleating on the part of those on the right that "democrats want open borders. " I do not. Are we softer on the issue? That depends on what you mean by soft. If it means give refugees a fair shot at asylum, or dreamers a path to citizenship, then I suppose so.

That depends on what you mean by "refugees". The migrant caravan are not refugees and did not deserve the status of asylum seekers. As for dreamers, I have no problem with them unless they come here illegally.

If one dreams of a better life then by all means, come to the U.S. if you think you can get that here. Just do it legally through proper channels.

And no, we do not automatically label those who want secure borders as racist.

I've been called racist by more than one person on this very message board for much less than that. Each time it was simply for being conservative. I've been called a nazi and a racist on facebook for equally stupid reasons.

The migrants caravans are indeed refugees fleeing violence and famine in their countries. We have a humanitarian obligation to-at minimum hear there case.

Why Are Migrants From Central America Coming To The U.S.? - 1A

Violence? Yes, in the form of high crime. Famine? Uh, no.

We have our own violence and drug epidemic happening right now. Heroin use is through the roof and deaths from its use are getting worse every day. At what point will it get bad enough that Americans start migrating to the Canadian border asking for asylum?

We need to focus more on our own problems before we become Mommy to the rest of the world.

You should try to think for yourself instead of just parroting right wing talking points that you heard from Hannity as to who the migrants are and how the drugs are getting in. Sealing the border will not solve our problems with crime and drugs.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Farhad Manjoo for one. He's a reporter with the New York Times and has written an article in favor of open borders. See below:

Opinion | There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders

There's also a Jeffery Miron who wrote an article for USA Today in favor of open borders. See below:

Forget the wall already, it's time for the U.S. to have open borders

Then there's a Bryan Caplan - an economist at George Mason University - who is an advocate for open borders.

I'm sure I can find others but I think you get the idea.

Even if what you say is true that Democrats in general don't want open borders, at the very least I think we can say that they are much softer on the issue. To the point that anyone who says we need more secure borders is automatically labeled racist. And if they are in favor of a wall? Forget about it. You might as well call him a child molester.

Ok so here we have a couple of people who identify as democrats who advocate for open borders. However, that hardly justifies the incessant bleating on the part of those on the right that "democrats want open borders. " I do not. Are we softer on the issue? That depends on what you mean by soft. If it means give refugees a fair shot at asylum, or dreamers a path to citizenship, then I suppose so.

That depends on what you mean by "refugees". The migrant caravan are not refugees and did not deserve the status of asylum seekers. As for dreamers, I have no problem with them unless they come here illegally.

If one dreams of a better life then by all means, come to the U.S. if you think you can get that here. Just do it legally through proper channels.

And no, we do not automatically label those who want secure borders as racist.

I've been called racist by more than one person on this very message board for much less than that. Each time it was simply for being conservative. I've been called a nazi and a racist on facebook for equally stupid reasons.

The migrants caravans are indeed refugees fleeing violence and famine in their countries. We have a humanitarian obligation to-at minimum hear there case.

Why Are Migrants From Central America Coming To The U.S.? - 1A

Violence? Yes, in the form of high crime. Famine? Uh, no.

We have our own violence and drug epidemic happening right now. Heroin use is through the roof and deaths from its use are getting worse every day. At what point will it get bad enough that Americans start migrating to the Canadian border asking for asylum?

We need to focus more on our own problems before we become Mommy to the rest of the world.

You should try to think for yourself instead of just parroting right wing talking points that you heard from Hannity as to who the migrants are and how the drugs are getting in. Sealing the border will not solve our problems with crime and drugs.

First of all, I don't watch Hannity. Secondly, I didn't say sealing the border would solve our problems. But we can't solve our own problems while trying to solve everybody else's. Understand?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Trump is merely trying to enforce the immigration laws we already have.

Haha...no. Trump is merely trying to garner praise and applause from a bunch of gullible marks.

Yay, yay, so you say...

If you are sitting there looking around and can't figure out who the mark is....

...it's you. That's some free advice for ya.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Trump is merely trying to enforce the immigration laws we already have.

Haha...no. Trump is merely trying to garner praise and applause from a bunch of gullible marks.

Yay, yay, so you say...

If you are sitting there looking around and can't figure out who the mark is....

...it's you. That's some free advice for ya.

I'm not looking for a mark. Are you?