For 8 years the right has been called racist.

[rightwinger]

Interesting observation from 50 years ago

But it is TODAYS Republicans fighting for the display of the Confederate Flag
TODAYS Republicans opposing affirmative action and voting rights
TODAYS Republicans fighting for States Rights

At least, you admit you lost 1964. Ha ha. Revisionist history again. It's not the GOP who wants to display the Confederate Flag but white Southerners who are Democrat. His name was Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, well-known Democrat -- senator from South Carolina -- is responsible for the Confederate flag flying over South Carolina.

The rest has nothing to do with racism.

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

the whole "states' rights" thing is a scam that they think would allow them to have jim crow laws again.

States rights is just a cop out to show you lack the backbone to stand up for what is right

I don't believe in slavery....But I think each state should decide whether they want to own other human beings
I oppose segregation ...but think the states should decide whether blacks and whites can use the same facilities
I support same sex marriage......but I think the states should decide whether gays should have rights

Not any State in this country.

Not any more

 

[bendog]

Hah. Do you know what you are talking about? What it means is we need to get rid of Al Gore Jr, Bill Clinton and his beotch as well as the rest of the KKK in the Democrat Party. Get rid of the liberal Southern Poverty Law Center that is all white. Talk about revisionist history on the part of the Dems here!

"In 1832, the phrase “Jim Crow” was born. By 1900, every former Confederate state (including Wyoming, Missouri, Ohio, Utah, Kentucky, Kansas and Oklahoma) had enacted “Jim Crow” laws prohibiting everything from interracial marriage to racially integrated public school systems. These state laws served to place blacks back on a virtual plantation. Similar to the “Black Codes” that came before them, Jim Crow laws were numerous. However, one denominator codified their sound support in Southern states: They all resulted from Democratic legislators of the “Solid South.”

When Bill Clinton was 18, his future vice president’s father, Sen. Al Gore Sr., was locked arm-in-arm with other segregationist Democrats to kill the Civil Rights act of 1964. Clinton’s “mentor” and “friend,” klansman J. William Fulbright, joined the Dixiecrats, an ultra-segregationist wing of Democratic lawmakers, in filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and in killing the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Clinton, now 64, in his dotage, probably forgot (or was too embarrassed) to mention to the far-Left crowd of youngsters that his party is the party of segregation. Or as Congressman Jessie Jackson Jr. (D.-Ill.) explained in an interview with Fox News contributor Angela McGlowan in her book Bamboozled:

“There is no doubt that the Democratic Party is the party of the Confederacy, historically, that the Democratic Party’s flag is the Confederate flag. It was our party’s flag. That Jefferson Davis was a Democrat, that Stonewall Jackson strongly identified with the Democratic Party, that secessionists in the South saw themselves as Democrats and were Democrats. That so much of the Democratic Party’s history, since it is our nation’s oldest political party, has its roots in slavery.”

How did the same Jim Crow Democrats who fought tooth-and-nail with segregationists to keep blacks on a virtual plantation become the party that now wins 95% of the black vote? Republicans passed Civil Rights laws, Democrats wrote revisionist history.

Nevertheless, deception—what all warfare is based on, according to ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu, won’t work with independents. Obama’s reelection strategy of slander and defaming all conservatives and Republicans as racists won’t win him that all-important center.

With a “recovery” missing 8.5 million jobs, unemployment going in the wrong direction and no perceived end to our economic misery in sight, Obama obviously doesn’t see winning a second term without getting down in the gutter to inspire his bulwark leftists.

This latest attempt to stir up Obama’s base by former President Clinton is just the beginning. Digging up the ghost of Jim Crow Past may have worked before, but the political landscape has changed. And Americans are seemingly ready to vote their wallets in 2012.

This contest will be a battle between the Democrat Party of higher taxes, more spending and backbiting, and the Republican Party of lower taxes, job creation and solving America’s problems."

Democrats Should Know Jim Crow, They Created Him | Human Events

Interesting observation from 50 years ago

But it is TODAYS Republicans fighting for the display of the Confederate Flag
TODAYS Republicans opposing affirmative action and voting rights
TODAYS Republicans fighting for States Rights

At least, you admit you lost 1964. Ha ha. Revisionist history again. It's not the GOP who wants to display the Confederate Flag but white Southerners who are Democrat. His name was Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, well-known Democrat -- senator from South Carolina -- is responsible for the Confederate flag flying over South Carolina.

The rest has nothing to do with racism.

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

the whole "states' rights" thing is a scam that they think would allow them to have jim crow laws again.

State's rights is not about ignoring the constitution, which would have to occur to re-instate Jim Crow Laws. The only way that would happen is if we get another Plessey type SC judgement that overtsteps the courts power, and ignores the 14th amendment.

State's rights is about letting the States manage things that are 1) Not Explicitly given to the Feds and 2) Explicitly protected as a right of the people by the Federal Constitution and incorporated onto the States as well.

Well, Reagan did give a tacit call out to racists when he introduced the term at the Neshoba County fair here in Miss kicking off his 1980 primary run. However, to me, you can make an argument that there is a necessity to have natl regulation of commerce (including healthcare and educational standards) but leave the social issue stuff up to the states. And, we can block grant stuff like fed aid to medical indigents and even special education (assuming we want to fund that nationally).

As for Jim Crow Laws, just enforcing the 14th prevents that from ever arising. And, yes the current Supreme Court is not enforcing the equal protection clause with states opting to make it harder for blacks and the poor to vote.

 

[martybegan]

Interesting observation from 50 years ago

But it is TODAYS Republicans fighting for the display of the Confederate Flag
TODAYS Republicans opposing affirmative action and voting rights
TODAYS Republicans fighting for States Rights

At least, you admit you lost 1964. Ha ha. Revisionist history again. It's not the GOP who wants to display the Confederate Flag but white Southerners who are Democrat. His name was Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, well-known Democrat -- senator from South Carolina -- is responsible for the Confederate flag flying over South Carolina.

The rest has nothing to do with racism.

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

the whole "states' rights" thing is a scam that they think would allow them to have jim crow laws again.

State's rights is not about ignoring the constitution, which would have to occur to re-instate Jim Crow Laws. The only way that would happen is if we get another Plessey type SC judgement that overtsteps the courts power, and ignores the 14th amendment.

State's rights is about letting the States manage things that are 1) Not Explicitly given to the Feds and 2) Explicitly protected as a right of the people by the Federal Constitution and incorporated onto the States as well.

Well, Reagan did give a tacit call out to racists when he introduced the term at the Neshoba County fair here in Miss kicking off his 1980 primary run. However, to me, you can make an argument that there is a necessity to have natl regulation of commerce (including healthcare and educational standards) but leave the social issue stuff up to the states. And, we can block grant stuff like fed aid to medical indigents and even special education (assuming we want to fund that nationally).

National Standards for education should be as basic and broad as possible, and allow States and localities to specialize as they see fit. One of the issues we have now is the push for "everyone to go to college" when the number of jobs that actually REQUIRE a college degree has remained stagnant mostly.

As for Healthcare, again, broad basic standards. For both funding should be local, not put into the federal pool, then the feds take their cut and send the remainder back to the Stares.

 

[bendog]

At least, you admit you lost 1964. Ha ha. Revisionist history again. It's not the GOP who wants to display the Confederate Flag but white Southerners who are Democrat. His name was Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, well-known Democrat -- senator from South Carolina -- is responsible for the Confederate flag flying over South Carolina.

The rest has nothing to do with racism.

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

the whole "states' rights" thing is a scam that they think would allow them to have jim crow laws again.

State's rights is not about ignoring the constitution, which would have to occur to re-instate Jim Crow Laws. The only way that would happen is if we get another Plessey type SC judgement that overtsteps the courts power, and ignores the 14th amendment.

State's rights is about letting the States manage things that are 1) Not Explicitly given to the Feds and 2) Explicitly protected as a right of the people by the Federal Constitution and incorporated onto the States as well.

Well, Reagan did give a tacit call out to racists when he introduced the term at the Neshoba County fair here in Miss kicking off his 1980 primary run. However, to me, you can make an argument that there is a necessity to have natl regulation of commerce (including healthcare and educational standards) but leave the social issue stuff up to the states. And, we can block grant stuff like fed aid to medical indigents and even special education (assuming we want to fund that nationally).

National Standards for education should be as basic and broad as possible, and allow States and localities to specialize as they see fit. One of the issues we have now is the push for "everyone to go to college" when the number of jobs that actually REQUIRE a college degree has remained stagnant mostly.

As for Healthcare, again, broad basic standards. For both funding should be local, not put into the federal pool, then the feds take their cut and send the remainder back to the Stares.

There's no way a state like Mississippi can fund healthcare. As for education, we have to teach basic science. If people want to teach kids that Jesus really guides everything in the world or something ... fine. But men did not walk with dinosaurs. Theme parks notwithstanding.

But the whole gay marriage thing was unnecessary.

 

[martybegan]

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

the whole "states' rights" thing is a scam that they think would allow them to have jim crow laws again.

State's rights is not about ignoring the constitution, which would have to occur to re-instate Jim Crow Laws. The only way that would happen is if we get another Plessey type SC judgement that overtsteps the courts power, and ignores the 14th amendment.

State's rights is about letting the States manage things that are 1) Not Explicitly given to the Feds and 2) Explicitly protected as a right of the people by the Federal Constitution and incorporated onto the States as well.

Well, Reagan did give a tacit call out to racists when he introduced the term at the Neshoba County fair here in Miss kicking off his 1980 primary run. However, to me, you can make an argument that there is a necessity to have natl regulation of commerce (including healthcare and educational standards) but leave the social issue stuff up to the states. And, we can block grant stuff like fed aid to medical indigents and even special education (assuming we want to fund that nationally).

National Standards for education should be as basic and broad as possible, and allow States and localities to specialize as they see fit. One of the issues we have now is the push for "everyone to go to college" when the number of jobs that actually REQUIRE a college degree has remained stagnant mostly.

As for Healthcare, again, broad basic standards. For both funding should be local, not put into the federal pool, then the feds take their cut and send the remainder back to the Stares.

There's no way a state like Mississippi can fund healthcare. As for education, we have to teach basic science. If people want to teach kids that Jesus really guides everything in the world or something ... fine. But men did not walk with dinosaurs. Theme parks notwithstanding.

But the whole gay marriage thing was unnecessary.

It depends on how many federal dollars are saved due to cuts in federal agencies, once the deficit is taken care of, taxes can be reduced, and the States could increase theirs to provide the funding.

For education, making up a basic standards list doesn't take a mammoth organization that gets funding and dishes it out. Set the standards and let DOJ mess with any locality that doesn't follow them.

 

[james bond]

We have no disagreement that governments cannot treat citizens differently because of any irrelevant differences based on race, belief, sexual orientation or gender.

We do have a disagreement on whether the fed govt should have had the power to prevent any person of any race deciding that he/she didn't want to contract with another person because of their race ... or belief, sexual orientation or gender. That is a black person, or even a gay person, had the right to be boorish, just as a white person did. Accepting that the Founders did not intend to make it illegal for people to be boorish or prejudiced in their own private dealings does not make one racist. Rather, it means that one believes the Founders believed that when ideas were freely debated and left open to being tested, the majority would reach the right decision. And Wal-Mart and Kentucky Fried would do away with segregated businesses.

government has every right to make sure that we don't live with jim crow laws.

Hah. Do you know what you are talking about? What it means is we need to get rid of Al Gore Jr, Bill Clinton and his beotch as well as the rest of the KKK in the Democrat Party. Get rid of the liberal Southern Poverty Law Center that is all white. Talk about revisionist history on the part of the Dems here!

"In 1832, the phrase “Jim Crow” was born. By 1900, every former Confederate state (including Wyoming, Missouri, Ohio, Utah, Kentucky, Kansas and Oklahoma) had enacted “Jim Crow” laws prohibiting everything from interracial marriage to racially integrated public school systems. These state laws served to place blacks back on a virtual plantation. Similar to the “Black Codes” that came before them, Jim Crow laws were numerous. However, one denominator codified their sound support in Southern states: They all resulted from Democratic legislators of the “Solid South.”

When Bill Clinton was 18, his future vice president’s father, Sen. Al Gore Sr., was locked arm-in-arm with other segregationist Democrats to kill the Civil Rights act of 1964. Clinton’s “mentor” and “friend,” klansman J. William Fulbright, joined the Dixiecrats, an ultra-segregationist wing of Democratic lawmakers, in filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and in killing the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Clinton, now 64, in his dotage, probably forgot (or was too embarrassed) to mention to the far-Left crowd of youngsters that his party is the party of segregation. Or as Congressman Jessie Jackson Jr. (D.-Ill.) explained in an interview with Fox News contributor Angela McGlowan in her book Bamboozled:

“There is no doubt that the Democratic Party is the party of the Confederacy, historically, that the Democratic Party’s flag is the Confederate flag. It was our party’s flag. That Jefferson Davis was a Democrat, that Stonewall Jackson strongly identified with the Democratic Party, that secessionists in the South saw themselves as Democrats and were Democrats. That so much of the Democratic Party’s history, since it is our nation’s oldest political party, has its roots in slavery.”

How did the same Jim Crow Democrats who fought tooth-and-nail with segregationists to keep blacks on a virtual plantation become the party that now wins 95% of the black vote? Republicans passed Civil Rights laws, Democrats wrote revisionist history.

Nevertheless, deception—what all warfare is based on, according to ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu, won’t work with independents. Obama’s reelection strategy of slander and defaming all conservatives and Republicans as racists won’t win him that all-important center.

With a “recovery” missing 8.5 million jobs, unemployment going in the wrong direction and no perceived end to our economic misery in sight, Obama obviously doesn’t see winning a second term without getting down in the gutter to inspire his bulwark leftists.

This latest attempt to stir up Obama’s base by former President Clinton is just the beginning. Digging up the ghost of Jim Crow Past may have worked before, but the political landscape has changed. And Americans are seemingly ready to vote their wallets in 2012.

This contest will be a battle between the Democrat Party of higher taxes, more spending and backbiting, and the Republican Party of lower taxes, job creation and solving America’s problems."

Democrats Should Know Jim Crow, They Created Him | Human Events

Interesting observation from 50 years ago

But it is TODAYS Republicans fighting for the display of the Confederate Flag
TODAYS Republicans opposing affirmative action and voting rights
TODAYS Republicans fighting for States Rights

At least, you admit you lost 1964. Ha ha. Revisionist history again. It's not the GOP who wants to display the Confederate Flag but white Southerners who are Democrat. His name was Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, well-known Democrat -- senator from South Carolina -- is responsible for the Confederate flag flying over South Carolina.

The rest has nothing to do with racism.

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

>>There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag<<

Quit lying. Hillary and Bill Clinton. The Clintons were in Arkansas when they presided over something called the annual celebration of Confederate Flag Day, which continues to this day.

Just like you're no rightwinger.

 

[jillian]

Interesting observation from 50 years ago

But it is TODAYS Republicans fighting for the display of the Confederate Flag
TODAYS Republicans opposing affirmative action and voting rights
TODAYS Republicans fighting for States Rights

At least, you admit you lost 1964. Ha ha. Revisionist history again. It's not the GOP who wants to display the Confederate Flag but white Southerners who are Democrat. His name was Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, well-known Democrat -- senator from South Carolina -- is responsible for the Confederate flag flying over South Carolina.

The rest has nothing to do with racism.

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

the whole "states' rights" thing is a scam that they think would allow them to have jim crow laws again.

States rights is just a cop out to show you lack the backbone to stand up for what is right

I don't believe in slavery....But I think each state should decide whether they want to own other human beings
I oppose segregation ...but think the states should decide whether blacks and whites can use the same facilities
I support same sex marriage......but I think the states should decide whether gays should have rights

Not any State in this country.

because federal troops enforced federal law.

 

[jillian]

the whole "states' rights" thing is a scam that they think would allow them to have jim crow laws again.

State's rights is not about ignoring the constitution, which would have to occur to re-instate Jim Crow Laws. The only way that would happen is if we get another Plessey type SC judgement that overtsteps the courts power, and ignores the 14th amendment.

State's rights is about letting the States manage things that are 1) Not Explicitly given to the Feds and 2) Explicitly protected as a right of the people by the Federal Constitution and incorporated onto the States as well.

Well, Reagan did give a tacit call out to racists when he introduced the term at the Neshoba County fair here in Miss kicking off his 1980 primary run. However, to me, you can make an argument that there is a necessity to have natl regulation of commerce (including healthcare and educational standards) but leave the social issue stuff up to the states. And, we can block grant stuff like fed aid to medical indigents and even special education (assuming we want to fund that nationally).

National Standards for education should be as basic and broad as possible, and allow States and localities to specialize as they see fit. One of the issues we have now is the push for "everyone to go to college" when the number of jobs that actually REQUIRE a college degree has remained stagnant mostly.

As for Healthcare, again, broad basic standards. For both funding should be local, not put into the federal pool, then the feds take their cut and send the remainder back to the Stares.

There's no way a state like Mississippi can fund healthcare. As for education, we have to teach basic science. If people want to teach kids that Jesus really guides everything in the world or something ... fine. But men did not walk with dinosaurs. Theme parks notwithstanding.

But the whole gay marriage thing was unnecessary.

It depends on how many federal dollars are saved due to cuts in federal agencies, once the deficit is taken care of, taxes can be reduced, and the States could increase theirs to provide the funding.

For education, making up a basic standards list doesn't take a mammoth organization that gets funding and dishes it out. Set the standards and let DOJ mess with any locality that doesn't follow them.

that's right...defund everything that matters

and then give michelle Bachmann her subsidies for her "family farm" and her husband the scam artist money for his "pray away the gay".

rightwingers are funny...you only care about "debt" when it doesn't pay for what *you* want it to, but you'll cut taxes for billionaires.

idiots.

 

[rightwinger]

government has every right to make sure that we don't live with jim crow laws.

Hah. Do you know what you are talking about? What it means is we need to get rid of Al Gore Jr, Bill Clinton and his beotch as well as the rest of the KKK in the Democrat Party. Get rid of the liberal Southern Poverty Law Center that is all white. Talk about revisionist history on the part of the Dems here!

"In 1832, the phrase “Jim Crow” was born. By 1900, every former Confederate state (including Wyoming, Missouri, Ohio, Utah, Kentucky, Kansas and Oklahoma) had enacted “Jim Crow” laws prohibiting everything from interracial marriage to racially integrated public school systems. These state laws served to place blacks back on a virtual plantation. Similar to the “Black Codes” that came before them, Jim Crow laws were numerous. However, one denominator codified their sound support in Southern states: They all resulted from Democratic legislators of the “Solid South.”

When Bill Clinton was 18, his future vice president’s father, Sen. Al Gore Sr., was locked arm-in-arm with other segregationist Democrats to kill the Civil Rights act of 1964. Clinton’s “mentor” and “friend,” klansman J. William Fulbright, joined the Dixiecrats, an ultra-segregationist wing of Democratic lawmakers, in filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and in killing the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Clinton, now 64, in his dotage, probably forgot (or was too embarrassed) to mention to the far-Left crowd of youngsters that his party is the party of segregation. Or as Congressman Jessie Jackson Jr. (D.-Ill.) explained in an interview with Fox News contributor Angela McGlowan in her book Bamboozled:

“There is no doubt that the Democratic Party is the party of the Confederacy, historically, that the Democratic Party’s flag is the Confederate flag. It was our party’s flag. That Jefferson Davis was a Democrat, that Stonewall Jackson strongly identified with the Democratic Party, that secessionists in the South saw themselves as Democrats and were Democrats. That so much of the Democratic Party’s history, since it is our nation’s oldest political party, has its roots in slavery.”

How did the same Jim Crow Democrats who fought tooth-and-nail with segregationists to keep blacks on a virtual plantation become the party that now wins 95% of the black vote? Republicans passed Civil Rights laws, Democrats wrote revisionist history.

Nevertheless, deception—what all warfare is based on, according to ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu, won’t work with independents. Obama’s reelection strategy of slander and defaming all conservatives and Republicans as racists won’t win him that all-important center.

With a “recovery” missing 8.5 million jobs, unemployment going in the wrong direction and no perceived end to our economic misery in sight, Obama obviously doesn’t see winning a second term without getting down in the gutter to inspire his bulwark leftists.

This latest attempt to stir up Obama’s base by former President Clinton is just the beginning. Digging up the ghost of Jim Crow Past may have worked before, but the political landscape has changed. And Americans are seemingly ready to vote their wallets in 2012.

This contest will be a battle between the Democrat Party of higher taxes, more spending and backbiting, and the Republican Party of lower taxes, job creation and solving America’s problems."

Democrats Should Know Jim Crow, They Created Him | Human Events

Interesting observation from 50 years ago

But it is TODAYS Republicans fighting for the display of the Confederate Flag
TODAYS Republicans opposing affirmative action and voting rights
TODAYS Republicans fighting for States Rights

At least, you admit you lost 1964. Ha ha. Revisionist history again. It's not the GOP who wants to display the Confederate Flag but white Southerners who are Democrat. His name was Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, well-known Democrat -- senator from South Carolina -- is responsible for the Confederate flag flying over South Carolina.

The rest has nothing to do with racism.

There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag
That is a position of TODAYs Republicans who hide their racism in a broad States Rights position

>>There is not a Democrat anywhere that supports flying the Confederate Flag<<

Quit lying. Hillary and Bill Clinton. The Clintons were in Arkansas when they presided over something called the annual celebration of Confederate Flag Day, which continues to this day.

Just like you're no rightwinger.

Still living in the past

We are talking about the 21st century

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Well if you believe in the respect of our federal immigration laws through enforcement, you are considered a racist.

When you present them with the real world "reality" of the kind of people that are behind these terrorists attacks. As well as present them with where their strongholds and training camps reside, with the common sense approach as to why you simply don't open your doors to refugees in regions where the threat terrorists thrives, you are called a racist.

It's just the kind of games that liberals play, when you just don't agree with their views on the issues and they simply can't get their way.

we have been deporting people. the numbers of people coming in has been flat for ages.

the games are yours. if you don't like the labels you get, stop nominating people who call mexicans rapists, a latina beauty queen "miss housekeeping" (which doesn't even begin to touch on the disgusting things your orange loser says about women) and stop cheering every time black kids get killed.

now go pretend that you don't vote for bigoted policies. in normal society, a man who re-tweets white supremacists wouldn't even be considered acceptable to have lunch with, much less represent this country to the world.

the bigger joke is that your ilk doesn't care if your electoral system is hacked by putin. how much must you hate your country.

Again the flat out lie that Trump called "mexicans rapists." He said rapists come across the border from Mexico, which is true and an entirely different thing.

This is how you prove what a political slut you are. If Trump was really what you say, you'd say the truth. But lies like this prove you are to be ignored. It actually defends Trump because you kill all your credibility and nothing you say is to be believed

Trump was fear mongering...

Mexico is sending "its worst" across the border...murderers, rapists, drug dealers
Lock up your wives and daughters, look suspiciously at all Mexicans...you can't be too safe

Fear mongering to justify a needless wall

This post is nothing but fear mongering & lies.

An ILLEGAL MEXICAN killed this poor woman in California. If we didn't have 11 million illegal Mexicans, she would be alive

Be very afraid of these Mexicans, they will murder you...rape you...bring disease into the country

That is why we need to ignore all of our other needs and build a wall. Why we need to ramp up deportation and build holding camps to protect us from these scary Mexicans

When the reality is....most are just here trying to work and support a family

They are ILLEGAL. Trying to justify it does not change the fact they are breaking a Federal Immigration Law. If we are going to show a small ounce of respect to those who can spend YEARS trying to go through the immigration process to become citizens LEGALLY, we need to show strict enforcement of those laws we have and deport them. Give ICE and border agents the resources they need to do their job and give ample warning of cutting Federal funding from any state (sanctuary cities) that hinders those efforts. We already have a process for any immigrant who wishes to become a part of this country, they can utilize tte same process on an equal footing with those who have endured the LEGAL process for decades. No favoritism, no singling out of a particular group, no special treatment.

 

[rightwinger]

we have been deporting people. the numbers of people coming in has been flat for ages.

the games are yours. if you don't like the labels you get, stop nominating people who call mexicans rapists, a latina beauty queen "miss housekeeping" (which doesn't even begin to touch on the disgusting things your orange loser says about women) and stop cheering every time black kids get killed.

now go pretend that you don't vote for bigoted policies. in normal society, a man who re-tweets white supremacists wouldn't even be considered acceptable to have lunch with, much less represent this country to the world.

the bigger joke is that your ilk doesn't care if your electoral system is hacked by putin. how much must you hate your country.

Again the flat out lie that Trump called "mexicans rapists." He said rapists come across the border from Mexico, which is true and an entirely different thing.

This is how you prove what a political slut you are. If Trump was really what you say, you'd say the truth. But lies like this prove you are to be ignored. It actually defends Trump because you kill all your credibility and nothing you say is to be believed

Trump was fear mongering...

Mexico is sending "its worst" across the border...murderers, rapists, drug dealers
Lock up your wives and daughters, look suspiciously at all Mexicans...you can't be too safe

Fear mongering to justify a needless wall

This post is nothing but fear mongering & lies.

An ILLEGAL MEXICAN killed this poor woman in California. If we didn't have 11 million illegal Mexicans, she would be alive

Be very afraid of these Mexicans, they will murder you...rape you...bring disease into the country

That is why we need to ignore all of our other needs and build a wall. Why we need to ramp up deportation and build holding camps to protect us from these scary Mexicans

When the reality is....most are just here trying to work and support a family

They are ILLEGAL. Trying to justify it does not change the fact they are breaking a Federal Immigration Law. If we are going to show a small ounce of respect to those who can spend YEARS trying to go through the immigration process to become citizens LEGALLY, we need to show strict enforcement of those laws we have and deport them. Give ICE and border agents the resources they need to do their job and give ample warning of cutting Federal funding from any state (sanctuary cities) that hinders those efforts. We already have a process for any immigrant who wishes to become a part of this country, they can utilize tte same process on an equal footing with those who have endured the LEGAL process for decades. No favoritism, no singling out of a particular group, no special treatment.

I don't really care
It is a paperwork issue. If they are here, working, abiding by our laws, raising a family.........I don't mind giving them proper paperwork to work and an eventual path to citizenship

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Again the flat out lie that Trump called "mexicans rapists." He said rapists come across the border from Mexico, which is true and an entirely different thing.

This is how you prove what a political slut you are. If Trump was really what you say, you'd say the truth. But lies like this prove you are to be ignored. It actually defends Trump because you kill all your credibility and nothing you say is to be believed

Trump was fear mongering...

Mexico is sending "its worst" across the border...murderers, rapists, drug dealers
Lock up your wives and daughters, look suspiciously at all Mexicans...you can't be too safe

Fear mongering to justify a needless wall

This post is nothing but fear mongering & lies.

An ILLEGAL MEXICAN killed this poor woman in California. If we didn't have 11 million illegal Mexicans, she would be alive

Be very afraid of these Mexicans, they will murder you...rape you...bring disease into the country

That is why we need to ignore all of our other needs and build a wall. Why we need to ramp up deportation and build holding camps to protect us from these scary Mexicans

When the reality is....most are just here trying to work and support a family

They are ILLEGAL. Trying to justify it does not change the fact they are breaking a Federal Immigration Law. If we are going to show a small ounce of respect to those who can spend YEARS trying to go through the immigration process to become citizens LEGALLY, we need to show strict enforcement of those laws we have and deport them. Give ICE and border agents the resources they need to do their job and give ample warning of cutting Federal funding from any state (sanctuary cities) that hinders those efforts. We already have a process for any immigrant who wishes to become a part of this country, they can utilize tte same process on an equal footing with those who have endured the LEGAL process for decades. No favoritism, no singling out of a particular group, no special treatment.

I don't really care
It is a paperwork issue. If they are here, working, abiding by our laws, raising a family.........I don't mind giving them proper paperwork to work and an eventual path to citizenship

It's showing respect to those immigrants who DO take the time in coming here to willfully put themselves through the process already laid out under Federal Law. Your excuse of a "Paperwork issue" is what undermines our Federal Law and brings encouragement to allow more illegals to come here. An open border such as that, also gives an opportunity for terrorists to come here and exploit it. It's decisions such as this which reflects on their poor decisions in foreign policy, while at the same time burdens our taxpayers with further debt everytime a democrat wants to provide illegals with turition costs, housing, healthcare, a drivers license, as well as unemployment. If you don't have "paperwork" because you sneaked across the border or extended your stay hoping to not get caught, you don't deserve to be here.

 

[rightwinger]

Trump was fear mongering...

Mexico is sending "its worst" across the border...murderers, rapists, drug dealers
Lock up your wives and daughters, look suspiciously at all Mexicans...you can't be too safe

Fear mongering to justify a needless wall

This post is nothing but fear mongering & lies.

An ILLEGAL MEXICAN killed this poor woman in California. If we didn't have 11 million illegal Mexicans, she would be alive

Be very afraid of these Mexicans, they will murder you...rape you...bring disease into the country

That is why we need to ignore all of our other needs and build a wall. Why we need to ramp up deportation and build holding camps to protect us from these scary Mexicans

When the reality is....most are just here trying to work and support a family

They are ILLEGAL. Trying to justify it does not change the fact they are breaking a Federal Immigration Law. If we are going to show a small ounce of respect to those who can spend YEARS trying to go through the immigration process to become citizens LEGALLY, we need to show strict enforcement of those laws we have and deport them. Give ICE and border agents the resources they need to do their job and give ample warning of cutting Federal funding from any state (sanctuary cities) that hinders those efforts. We already have a process for any immigrant who wishes to become a part of this country, they can utilize tte same process on an equal footing with those who have endured the LEGAL process for decades. No favoritism, no singling out of a particular group, no special treatment.

I don't really care
It is a paperwork issue. If they are here, working, abiding by our laws, raising a family.........I don't mind giving them proper paperwork to work and an eventual path to citizenship

It's showing respect to those immigrants who DO take the time in coming here to willfully put themselves through the process already laid out under Federal Law. Your excuse of a "Paperwork issue" is what undermines our Federal Law and brings encouragement to allow more illegals to come here. An open border such as that, also gives an opportunity for terrorists to come here and exploit it. It's decisions such as this which reflects on their poor decisions in foreign policy, while at the same time burdens our taxpayers with further debt everytime a democrat wants to provide illegals with turition costs, housing, healthcare, a drivers license, as well as unemployment. If you don't have "paperwork" because you sneaked across the border or extended your stay hoping to not get caught, you don't deserve to be here.

Sometimes life is not fair

The immigrants who are here are already working and contributing to society. It makes more sense to allow them to continue to do so then spend the resources to round them up, have judicial hearings and exportations of a population the size of Ohio

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

This post is nothing but fear mongering & lies.

An ILLEGAL MEXICAN killed this poor woman in California. If we didn't have 11 million illegal Mexicans, she would be alive

Be very afraid of these Mexicans, they will murder you...rape you...bring disease into the country

That is why we need to ignore all of our other needs and build a wall. Why we need to ramp up deportation and build holding camps to protect us from these scary Mexicans

When the reality is....most are just here trying to work and support a family

They are ILLEGAL. Trying to justify it does not change the fact they are breaking a Federal Immigration Law. If we are going to show a small ounce of respect to those who can spend YEARS trying to go through the immigration process to become citizens LEGALLY, we need to show strict enforcement of those laws we have and deport them. Give ICE and border agents the resources they need to do their job and give ample warning of cutting Federal funding from any state (sanctuary cities) that hinders those efforts. We already have a process for any immigrant who wishes to become a part of this country, they can utilize tte same process on an equal footing with those who have endured the LEGAL process for decades. No favoritism, no singling out of a particular group, no special treatment.

I don't really care
It is a paperwork issue. If they are here, working, abiding by our laws, raising a family.........I don't mind giving them proper paperwork to work and an eventual path to citizenship

It's showing respect to those immigrants who DO take the time in coming here to willfully put themselves through the process already laid out under Federal Law. Your excuse of a "Paperwork issue" is what undermines our Federal Law and brings encouragement to allow more illegals to come here. An open border such as that, also gives an opportunity for terrorists to come here and exploit it. It's decisions such as this which reflects on their poor decisions in foreign policy, while at the same time burdens our taxpayers with further debt everytime a democrat wants to provide illegals with turition costs, housing, healthcare, a drivers license, as well as unemployment. If you don't have "paperwork" because you sneaked across the border or extended your stay hoping to not get caught, you don't deserve to be here.

Sometimes life is not fair

The immigrants who are here are already working and contributing to society. It makes more sense to allow them to continue to do so then spend the resources to round them up, have judicial hearings and exportations of a population the size of Ohio

Fuckem. This is MY country and if they're here illegally they need to get the fuck out.

Period. Full stop.

 

[martybegan]

State's rights is not about ignoring the constitution, which would have to occur to re-instate Jim Crow Laws. The only way that would happen is if we get another Plessey type SC judgement that overtsteps the courts power, and ignores the 14th amendment.

State's rights is about letting the States manage things that are 1) Not Explicitly given to the Feds and 2) Explicitly protected as a right of the people by the Federal Constitution and incorporated onto the States as well.

Well, Reagan did give a tacit call out to racists when he introduced the term at the Neshoba County fair here in Miss kicking off his 1980 primary run. However, to me, you can make an argument that there is a necessity to have natl regulation of commerce (including healthcare and educational standards) but leave the social issue stuff up to the states. And, we can block grant stuff like fed aid to medical indigents and even special education (assuming we want to fund that nationally).

National Standards for education should be as basic and broad as possible, and allow States and localities to specialize as they see fit. One of the issues we have now is the push for "everyone to go to college" when the number of jobs that actually REQUIRE a college degree has remained stagnant mostly.

As for Healthcare, again, broad basic standards. For both funding should be local, not put into the federal pool, then the feds take their cut and send the remainder back to the Stares.

There's no way a state like Mississippi can fund healthcare. As for education, we have to teach basic science. If people want to teach kids that Jesus really guides everything in the world or something ... fine. But men did not walk with dinosaurs. Theme parks notwithstanding.

But the whole gay marriage thing was unnecessary.

It depends on how many federal dollars are saved due to cuts in federal agencies, once the deficit is taken care of, taxes can be reduced, and the States could increase theirs to provide the funding.

For education, making up a basic standards list doesn't take a mammoth organization that gets funding and dishes it out. Set the standards and let DOJ mess with any locality that doesn't follow them.

that's right...defund everything that matters

and then give michelle Bachmann her subsidies for her "family farm" and her husband the scam artist money for his "pray away the gay".

rightwingers are funny...you only care about "debt" when it doesn't pay for what *you* want it to, but you'll cut taxes for billionaires.

idiots.

Let the States handle the funding themselves as long as they meet the basic standards. Why send money to the feds only to have them take their cut and then send it back to the States with strings attached?

Of course that leaves more opportunities for graft, something progressives LOVE.

And as for farm subsidies, that would be next on the list.

And your constant attempts to frame me as a social conservative are getting tiresome, I have explained my positions and their basis numerous times, and yet you can't seem to get it through your thick skull.

 

[rightwinger]

An ILLEGAL MEXICAN killed this poor woman in California. If we didn't have 11 million illegal Mexicans, she would be alive

Be very afraid of these Mexicans, they will murder you...rape you...bring disease into the country

That is why we need to ignore all of our other needs and build a wall. Why we need to ramp up deportation and build holding camps to protect us from these scary Mexicans

When the reality is....most are just here trying to work and support a family

They are ILLEGAL. Trying to justify it does not change the fact they are breaking a Federal Immigration Law. If we are going to show a small ounce of respect to those who can spend YEARS trying to go through the immigration process to become citizens LEGALLY, we need to show strict enforcement of those laws we have and deport them. Give ICE and border agents the resources they need to do their job and give ample warning of cutting Federal funding from any state (sanctuary cities) that hinders those efforts. We already have a process for any immigrant who wishes to become a part of this country, they can utilize tte same process on an equal footing with those who have endured the LEGAL process for decades. No favoritism, no singling out of a particular group, no special treatment.

I don't really care
It is a paperwork issue. If they are here, working, abiding by our laws, raising a family.........I don't mind giving them proper paperwork to work and an eventual path to citizenship

It's showing respect to those immigrants who DO take the time in coming here to willfully put themselves through the process already laid out under Federal Law. Your excuse of a "Paperwork issue" is what undermines our Federal Law and brings encouragement to allow more illegals to come here. An open border such as that, also gives an opportunity for terrorists to come here and exploit it. It's decisions such as this which reflects on their poor decisions in foreign policy, while at the same time burdens our taxpayers with further debt everytime a democrat wants to provide illegals with turition costs, housing, healthcare, a drivers license, as well as unemployment. If you don't have "paperwork" because you sneaked across the border or extended your stay hoping to not get caught, you don't deserve to be here.

Sometimes life is not fair

The immigrants who are here are already working and contributing to society. It makes more sense to allow them to continue to do so then spend the resources to round them up, have judicial hearings and exportations of a population the size of Ohio

Fuckem. This is MY country and if they're here illegally they need to get the fuck out.

Period. Full stop.

I would rather spend the hundred billion dollars on serious infrastructure, healthcare, energy.....

 

[Correll]

Now if Hillary is elected that meme will change to sexist.
Liberals just can't fathom that people vehemently disagree with their positions. Their tunnel vision blinds them completely to the fact that their train of thought is but one narrow view of the world.

Insane ^^^

There is nothing liberal or violent about me or anyone reading the threads you post and concluding that you are way out of touch with reality. You make stuff up in your head and convince yourself that it is true, or lie.

The crazy right wing has shown to be (on this forum and at Trump rallies) biddable, sexist, racist, homophobic and misogynist.

The Right Wing supports Plutocrats and fears democracy, aka, WE The People.

Remember the Big Tent once claimed by the GOP? They dropped that fiction with the nomination of Trump. Bush claimed to be a "uniter", Trump is all about dividing the country in his quest for power.

The NYT printed the 281 people, places and things Trump has insulted on Twitter:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-trump-twitter-insults.html

Keep in mind the Bible and President Lincoln's speech on a house divided. And many of Trump's loyalists seek to end the founders Great Experiment, a nation of the people, by the people and for the people.

ZOMG HE INSULTED PEOPLE ON TWITTER!!!!

On Twitter alone, now let's add the billion or so Muslims, millions of Mexicans, countless women, liberals, judges and justices, journalists, in fact the media in general. Each group and individual a member of each group insulted in his stump speech, off the cuff comments and let's not forget all the women he groped.

1. The Muslims are insulted by the fact that we won't just let them destroy Israel.

2. Mexico deserves to be insulted. THey have been terrible neighbors.

3. Women? Women in the rest of the world should have more to worry about than Trump. Hell the women in Europe should be so lucky as to have a Trump come along.

4. LIberals. Fuck them

5. Judges? Justices? WTF?

6. The Media? They are vile pieces of shit.

Listed by a bigot, a racist, a sexist/misogynist, a homophobe and an all around nasty curmudgeon.

You do nothing but call me names for 50 fucking pages and have the nerve to call me a "nasty curmudgeon?


You are the bad person here.


If you cannot grasp that, you will remain completely out of touch with reality.

 

[Correll]

Now if Hillary is elected that meme will change to sexist.
Liberals just can't fathom that people vehemently disagree with their positions. Their tunnel vision blinds them completely to the fact that their train of thought is but one narrow view of the world.

The meme will not be changed to sexist....it will be changed to racist AND sexist

If you can't make the case for your policies based on their merits without calling your enemies names,

then you can't make the case for you policies based on their merits.


That means that you are on the wrong side of the issues.

people with whom you have political disagreements are only "enemies" to the white trash uneducated ......

Racist, pretentious d-bag.

Liberals: All the self awareness of a turnip.

 

[Correll]

Note how you made no claim that you can support your platform/polices/positions based on their merits.

Instead you ripped out additional names that you like to call you enemies in PLACE of merits as arguments for your sides ideas.


YOu probably lack the self awareness or intellectual honesty to realize you just proved my point.

AND the OP.

This thread is not to discuss the merits of Trumps policies

It is to discuss his racism and sexism

You just lied again.

The OP is about how the Vile Left, such as your self, have used false accusations of racism and sexism as weapons.


My point was that you guys have to do that, because you cannot make the case for your positions based on their merits.


And that since you can't make the case for you policies,


that that indicates that you are wrong.



Your desperate dodging and attempts at distractions and deflections support my point, btw.

Actually, the accusations against Trump have been proven not to be false

Just look at all the women lining up to confirm he is a groper

That your corrupt and deceitful political operatives have the resources to generate a LOT of accusations, in no way is evidence that they are truthful.


That was either a lie on your part, or evidence of irrationality on your part.


And you have again failed to address any of my points, so they continue to stand.






The OP is about how the Vile Left, such as your self, have used false accusations of racism and sexism as weapons.


My point was that you guys have to do that, because you cannot make the case for your positions based on their merits.


And that since you can't make the case for you policies,


that that indicates that you are wrong.



Your desperate dodging and attempts at distractions and deflections support my point, btw.

Trump generated the accusations which only validated what he already bragged about

Yes Trump entered dressing rooms while teens were dressing
Yes Trump forcibly kissed and groped women

Then Trump has the gall to call THEM liars

Yet another liberal dishonestly pretending to not know what the word "let" means.

 

[rightwinger]

This thread is not to discuss the merits of Trumps policies

It is to discuss his racism and sexism

You just lied again.

The OP is about how the Vile Left, such as your self, have used false accusations of racism and sexism as weapons.


My point was that you guys have to do that, because you cannot make the case for your positions based on their merits.


And that since you can't make the case for you policies,


that that indicates that you are wrong.



Your desperate dodging and attempts at distractions and deflections support my point, btw.

Actually, the accusations against Trump have been proven not to be false

Just look at all the women lining up to confirm he is a groper

That your corrupt and deceitful political operatives have the resources to generate a LOT of accusations, in no way is evidence that they are truthful.


That was either a lie on your part, or evidence of irrationality on your part.


And you have again failed to address any of my points, so they continue to stand.






The OP is about how the Vile Left, such as your self, have used false accusations of racism and sexism as weapons.


My point was that you guys have to do that, because you cannot make the case for your positions based on their merits.


And that since you can't make the case for you policies,


that that indicates that you are wrong.



Your desperate dodging and attempts at distractions and deflections support my point, btw.

Trump generated the accusations which only validated what he already bragged about

Yes Trump entered dressing rooms while teens were dressing
Yes Trump forcibly kissed and groped women

Then Trump has the gall to call THEM liars

Yet another liberal dishonestly pretending to not know what the word "let" means.

They claim that they did not have to "let" Trump do anything, he automatically made unwelcome advances
Like Trump said in the Access Hollywood tape...I just can't help myself, I just start kissing.......get me a tic tac