Is the Democrat Party Racist ?

[poet]

against women hating Republicans toward whom you feel morally superior!!




liberals are perfect bigots. They feel they are morally superior to hateful Republicans but when asked for evidence, in this case that Republicans hate women, they change the subject!!

LOL. Having sour grapes is not going to help you.

liberals are perfect bigots. They feel they are morally superior to hateful Republicans but when asked for evidence, in this case that Republicans hate women, they change the subject!!

Liberals don't "feel" that we're morally and intellectually superior to conservatives (read: Republicans).....we are superior and have the documentation and the poll numbers to back it up.

 

[Londoner]

Indeed, the amazing electoral success of Reagan and the New Right .

yes yes dear it was amazing but do you have the IQ to understand
the political pholosophy of Reagan, Jefferson and our Founders??

Be careful comparing Reagan to Jefferson.

Jefferson is complex, and does not easily fit into either party.

Though a slave owner who denounced women's suffrage, Jefferson would be disgusted by the New Right, created when Reagan merged Conservatism and Libertarianism - God and Business, Jesus and Profit.

Research Jefferson's views on banking regulation.

Research his views on monied corporations, as he called them.


Jefferson was the opposite of Reagan in many ways. His progressive anti-corporate beliefs would earn him the contempt of today's Right. Indeed, Jefferson was far to the Left of Carter and Clinton when it came to regulating business. He wanted to"crush in it's birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

Let's not even talk about Citizen's United, whereby the activist Roberts court sanctioned the buying of elections by corporations, including foreign entities who can make donations under the protection of darkness.

Read this > Sounding Circle: Jefferson Was Right.

Jefferson is the source of the Liberal anti-trust regulatory state. Jefferson was obsessed with controlling corporations and limiting monopolies. He was the anti-Reagan. Please turn off talk radio. You have given your brain to an idiot movement which has replaced your capacity for analytical thought with bumper sticker anger.


Do me a favor. At the very least, research the era of mega-mergers that took place just after Reagan dismantled anti-trust regulations and stopped enforcing the Sherman Act. This was Jefferson's greatest fears. The fact that your Rightwing pundits tell you none of this should make you broaden your information sources. Please don't ever confuse Jefferson's greatness with Reagan's corporate cronyism. I am a Teddy Roosevelt Republican sir. Your party kicked me out long ago when it became the whore of monied special interests.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Be careful comparing Reagan to Jefferson.
Jefferson is complex, and does not easily fit into either party.

perfectly idiotic and 1000% liberal!! Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1793 to stand for freedom from liberal government while modern Republicans like Reagan stand for exactly and precisely the same thing. Domocrats are 100% opposed. How is it possible that you would not know that??

See why we are 1000% positve a liberal will be slow?

Welcome to your first lesson in American History!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Jefferson was the opposite of Reagan in many ways. His progressive anti-corporate beliefs would earn him the contempt of today's Right.

1000% stupid and liberal!! There were no corporations to speak of in Jeffersons day. The few that existed were hated government monopolies like the British East India Company involved in the Tea Party.

Again, welcome to your first lesson in American History!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Let's not even talk about Citizen's United, whereby the activist Roberts court sanctioned the buying of elections by corporations,

1000% stupid and liberal as expected. 12,560 elections since Citizens and none bought by corporations you perfect fool!! In fact, Obama just get reelected!!

What planet have you been on, liberal??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Liberals don't "feel" that we're morally and intellectually superior to conservatives (read: Republicans).....we are superior and have the documentation and the poll numbers to back it up.

if you feel superior without reason you are a typical liberal bigot!

What not present your documentation and polls to prove your superiority or just embrace your bigotry? I wonder why you have to be asked???

 

[poet]

Liberals don't "feel" that we're morally and intellectually superior to conservatives (read: Republicans).....we are superior and have the documentation and the poll numbers to back it up.

if you feel superior without reason you are a typical liberal bigot!

What not present your documentation and polls to prove your superiority or just embrace your bigotry? I wonder why you have to be asked???

Why? Because you said so? LOL. Liberals aren't bigots by definition, dumb dora.
And who are you that I should have to prove myself to you? You better find you something to do, or somewhere to be.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Liberals aren't bigots by definition,

of course they are. The liberals bleeding heart compels them to support more and more welfare. The liberal bleeding heart makes him feel morally superior.

When you feel superior without reason you are a bigot, in this case a typical liberal bigot who quite understandably is unable to provde a reason for his moral superiority. Its something a liberals knows, but only from his bleeding heart

 

[poet]

Liberals aren't bigots by definition,

of course they are. The liberals bleeding heart compels them to support more and more welfare. The liberal bleeding heart makes him feel morally superior.

When you feel superior without reason you are a bigot, in this case a typical liberal bigot who quite understandably is unable to provde a reason for his moral superiority. Its something a liberals knows, but only from his bleeding heart

What you're confusing for liberals "bleeding hearts" is the lack of one, on the part of conservatives, who only care about themselves, and their kind (meaning, "white conservative men)...and here's an article to back up that notion:
Original Sin | New Republic

 

[poet]

Posted on Facebook by G.P. :
"I was researching school vouchers decades ago and came across the infamous Buckley editorial.

"In his most notorious editorial, "Why the South Must Prevail," Buckley drew on Calhoun's championing of the "concurrent voice" to defend voting restrictions since "the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically," even if it meant violating the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Buckley repeated the argument in his book Up From Liberalism(1959), suggesting that African Americans needed to be properly educated and trained before they were brought up to the level of the enfranchised whites who were holding them down. And just as Calhoun had defended the "positive good" of slavery, so Buckley defended Jim Crow as being born of "custom and tradition ... a whole set of deeply-rooted folkways and mores." As long as the South did "not exploit the fact of Negro backwardness to preserve the Negro as a servile class," segregation was acceptable."
School vouchers for white academies was one of the first things segregationists thought of after Brown. However, as religious run elementary and high schools were mostly Catholic, the voucherites all agreed that it was unconstitutional for tax money to go to church affiliated schools. (Buckley, a Catholic, nevertheless agree, if ancient memory serves.)

The National Review also championed people who claimed that Black people had lower IQs, people whom Julian Bond's father had already mercilessly satirized that nonsense. As near as I can tell, Buckley, at that time anyway, believed that secular hope was...hopeless. There was no reason for the government to try to help people because only religion offered hope for a better life... or afterlife anyway.

The Syndicate | New Republic

William Buckley, Jr. was a stalwart conservative and intellectual, and obviously, a racist and a bigot, like most of the Republican Party.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Posted on Facebook by G.P. :
"I was researching school vouchers decades ago and came across the infamous Buckley editorial.

"In his most notorious editorial, "Why the South Must Prevail," Buckley drew on Calhoun's championing of the "concurrent voice" to defend voting restrictions since "the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically," even if it meant violating the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Buckley repeated the argument in his book Up From Liberalism(1959), suggesting that African Americans needed to be properly educated and trained before they were brought up to the level of the enfranchised whites who were holding them down. And just as Calhoun had defended the "positive good" of slavery, so Buckley defended Jim Crow as being born of "custom and tradition ... a whole set of deeply-rooted folkways and mores." As long as the South did "not exploit the fact of Negro backwardness to preserve the Negro as a servile class," segregation was acceptable."
School vouchers for white academies was one of the first things segregationists thought of after Brown. However, as religious run elementary and high schools were mostly Catholic, the voucherites all agreed that it was unconstitutional for tax money to go to church affiliated schools. (Buckley, a Catholic, nevertheless agree, if ancient memory serves.)

The National Review also championed people who claimed that Black people had lower IQs, people whom Julian Bond's father had already mercilessly satirized that nonsense. As near as I can tell, Buckley, at that time anyway, believed that secular hope was...hopeless. There was no reason for the government to try to help people because only religion offered hope for a better life... or afterlife anyway.

The Syndicate | New Republic

William Buckley, Jr. was a stalwart conservative and intellectual, and obviously, a racist and a bigot, like most of the Republican Party.

Too stupid!! In 1959 the entire white Democratic south was openly racist.

Also, lets never forget the near Genocidal Democratic War on Poverty and Great Society!!

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Identity politics, pandering , and redistributionist grievance mongers............These special folks deserve your stolen tax dollars. They earned it...'.........

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Identity politics, pandering , and redistributionist grievance mongers............These special folks deserve your stolen tax dollars. They earned it...'.........

Daniel Patrick Moynihan said long ago that the danger in welfare was not to the people who provide it, but to the people who receive it!!

Today's liberals have no taste for one time bank bailouts that are paid back, but unlimited taste for continuious personal bailouts that are never to be paid back and lead to intergenerational dependency.

Another reason why we are positive a liberal will be very very slow, to be polite.

 

[P@triot]

By your post, it shows how inclusive it is!

Oh, and by the way..

The majority of non-white peeps in this country went Democrat last Presidential election.

No... it shows how many different sectors of the population prefer qto live off of government rather than live the American dream and pursue their aspirations.

As usual, you twist facts to interpret how you WISH things were, rather than accepting the cold, hard, data for what it actually indicates.

 

[poet]

h

Posted on Facebook by G.P. :
"I was researching school vouchers decades ago and came across the infamous Buckley editorial.

"In his most notorious editorial, "Why the South Must Prevail," Buckley drew on Calhoun's championing of the "concurrent voice" to defend voting restrictions since "the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically," even if it meant violating the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Buckley repeated the argument in his book Up From Liberalism(1959), suggesting that African Americans needed to be properly educated and trained before they were brought up to the level of the enfranchised whites who were holding them down. And just as Calhoun had defended the "positive good" of slavery, so Buckley defended Jim Crow as being born of "custom and tradition ... a whole set of deeply-rooted folkways and mores." As long as the South did "not exploit the fact of Negro backwardness to preserve the Negro as a servile class," segregation was acceptable."
School vouchers for white academies was one of the first things segregationists thought of after Brown. However, as religious run elementary and high schools were mostly Catholic, the voucherites all agreed that it was unconstitutional for tax money to go to church affiliated schools. (Buckley, a Catholic, nevertheless agree, if ancient memory serves.)

The National Review also championed people who claimed that Black people had lower IQs, people whom Julian Bond's father had already mercilessly satirized that nonsense. As near as I can tell, Buckley, at that time anyway, believed that secular hope was...hopeless. There was no reason for the government to try to help people because only religion offered hope for a better life... or afterlife anyway.

The Syndicate | New Republic

William Buckley, Jr. was a stalwart conservative and intellectual, and obviously, a racist and a bigot, like most of the Republican Party.

Too stupid!! In 1959 the entire white Democratic south was openly racist.

Also, lets never forget the near Genocidal Democratic War on Poverty and Great Society!!

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

lol. How embarrassing for you.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

h

Posted on Facebook by G.P. :
"I was researching school vouchers decades ago and came across the infamous Buckley editorial.

"In his most notorious editorial, "Why the South Must Prevail," Buckley drew on Calhoun's championing of the "concurrent voice" to defend voting restrictions since "the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically," even if it meant violating the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Buckley repeated the argument in his book Up From Liberalism(1959), suggesting that African Americans needed to be properly educated and trained before they were brought up to the level of the enfranchised whites who were holding them down. And just as Calhoun had defended the "positive good" of slavery, so Buckley defended Jim Crow as being born of "custom and tradition ... a whole set of deeply-rooted folkways and mores." As long as the South did "not exploit the fact of Negro backwardness to preserve the Negro as a servile class," segregation was acceptable."
School vouchers for white academies was one of the first things segregationists thought of after Brown. However, as religious run elementary and high schools were mostly Catholic, the voucherites all agreed that it was unconstitutional for tax money to go to church affiliated schools. (Buckley, a Catholic, nevertheless agree, if ancient memory serves.)

The National Review also championed people who claimed that Black people had lower IQs, people whom Julian Bond's father had already mercilessly satirized that nonsense. As near as I can tell, Buckley, at that time anyway, believed that secular hope was...hopeless. There was no reason for the government to try to help people because only religion offered hope for a better life... or afterlife anyway.

The Syndicate | New Republic

William Buckley, Jr. was a stalwart conservative and intellectual, and obviously, a racist and a bigot, like most of the Republican Party.

Too stupid!! In 1959 the entire white Democratic south was openly racist.

Also, lets never forget the near Genocidal Democratic War on Poverty and Great Society!!

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

lol. How embarrassing for you.

dear, you forgot to say what you feel is embarrassing!! I wonder why the liberal forgot once again??