Old Republican people

[Hutch Starskey]

Segregation was mostly a Democrat thing. Look it up, junior.

I am grateful my GOP followed the lead of the Democratic President and his party's leaders in the Senate and House in ending it with the CRA.

Interestingly, the decency displayed in the voting was dominated by geography not party: Dems and Pubs in the North and the West overwhelmingly voted for it, and their southern counterparts voted overwhelmingly against it. The Pubs willingness to put aside party considerations provided the votes necessary to pass the bill in both chambers.

A great narrative accurately taught in our schools.

Democrats had the power, your twist doesn't alter facts. Because the Democrats were in the south doesn't mean they weren't Democrats. Accuracy is not your goal.

Quit blubbering. Yes, the Dems had the power and passed the CRA with the minority help of good GOP.

The conservatives in the South, Dems and GOP, almost universally voted against the CRA.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

You continue to stuff your fingers up your ass, sniff them and post here in your elated state. No one agreed with you and I've never seen you post anything worth thin king about. If you insult me I'll return the favor, flaming is all you know how to do.

Go ahead and prove that conservatives favored segregation if you want to try. The topic is about how Republicans were the racists. Try to read the fucking thread.

Lol....who are modern conservatives?

 

[Iceweasel]

Segregation exists only within a socially conservative worldview. Civil rights are inherintly within a socially liberal worldview.
Regardless of party, it was the conservatives who resisted as well as resented the civil rights movement.

That is utter nonsense.

Your comment is utter nonsense. You must be a far right reactionary wannabee conservative.

How dare you call me a wannabee?

And my comment in right on target.

He's a troll. Look at his post count, this is what he does. I think I'm just going to filter his ass out, it ain't worth reading.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Segregation was mostly a Democrat thing. Look it up, junior.

I am grateful my GOP followed the lead of the Democratic President and his party's leaders in the Senate and House in ending it with the CRA.

Interestingly, the decency displayed in the voting was dominated by geography not party: Dems and Pubs in the North and the West overwhelmingly voted for it, and their southern counterparts voted overwhelmingly against it. The Pubs willingness to put aside party considerations provided the votes necessary to pass the bill in both chambers.

A great narrative accurately taught in our schools.

Democrats had the power, your twist doesn't alter facts. Because the Democrats were in the south doesn't mean they weren't Democrats. Accuracy is not your goal.

Quit blubbering. Yes, the Dems had the power and passed the CRA with the minority help of good GOP.

The conservatives in the South, Dems and GOP, almost universally voted against the CRA. Thank you for agreeing with me.

You continue to stuff your fingers up your ass, sniff them and post here in your elated state. No one agreed with you and I've never seen you post anything worth thin king about. If you insult me I'll return the favor, flaming is all you know how to do. Go ahead and prove that conservatives favored segregation if you want to try. The topic is about how Republicans were the racists. Try to read the fucking thread.

You began the insulting, and I kiced your ass over the fence, which will happen every time you act like a fuck wit, dimwit far right reactionary wannabee conservative. Check the voting patterns on the CRA. The far right conservatives in the South of both parties voted almost to the man and woman against it. You know that. Act up, get smacked down, Ice. That is inevitable outcome for you every time. That will never change.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Fuck old Republican people! They were bullies! They separated people into groups when they were in school. Blacks and nerds. I'm glad my generation is more evolved!

Hey, asshole, that was southern democrats... the Civil Rights Act only happened because of Republicans.

Are you really this stupid?

 

[Correll]

Segregation exists only within a socially conservative worldview. Civil rights are inherintly within a socially liberal worldview.
Regardless of party, it was the conservatives who resisted as well as resented the civil rights movement.

That is utter nonsense.

1. Social conservatism is a group of political ideologies centred around preserving traditional beliefs, attitudes and philosophy, in the face of socialprogressivism.

1. Social liberalism is a political ideology that seeks to find a balance between individual liberty and social justice.

Which is more likely to advocate for social change such as civil rights? How is that ideological difference apparent in today's civil rights issues?

American conservative principles are based in the Age of Enlightenment beliefs of the FOunding Fathers. Individual rights and freedoms were obviously a big part of that. NOt group rights, individual rights and freedoms. Social justice lumps people into groups and grants special protections and rights based on past disadvantages.
This divides and segregates them. As I said, utter nonsense.

The Founders would turn your ass into the alley because of your lame-o response. Respond correctly, dimwit.

The FOunding Fathers would be fine with me commenting on their philosophy.

NOthing I said would strike them as lame.

NOw, your moronic and arrogant comment? WOuld likely get you horsewhipped.

 

[Iceweasel]

Segregation was mostly a Democrat thing. Look it up, junior.

I am grateful my GOP followed the lead of the Democratic President and his party's leaders in the Senate and House in ending it with the CRA.

Interestingly, the decency displayed in the voting was dominated by geography not party: Dems and Pubs in the North and the West overwhelmingly voted for it, and their southern counterparts voted overwhelmingly against it. The Pubs willingness to put aside party considerations provided the votes necessary to pass the bill in both chambers.

A great narrative accurately taught in our schools.

Democrats had the power, your twist doesn't alter facts. Because the Democrats were in the south doesn't mean they weren't Democrats. Accuracy is not your goal.

Quit blubbering. Yes, the Dems had the power and passed the CRA with the minority help of good GOP.

The conservatives in the South, Dems and GOP, almost universally voted against the CRA.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

You continue to stuff your fingers up your ass, sniff them and post here in your elated state. No one agreed with you and I've never seen you post anything worth thin king about. If you insult me I'll return the favor, flaming is all you know how to do.

Go ahead and prove that conservatives favored segregation if you want to try. The topic is about how Republicans were the racists. Try to read the fucking thread.

Lol....who are modern conservatives?

I'm one of them. No one can read your mind, you like to state half assed questions and expect people to know what you're talking about.

 

[RKMBrown]

Segregation was mostly a Democrat thing. Look it up, junior.

I am grateful my GOP followed the lead of the Democratic President and his party's leaders in the Senate and House in ending it with the CRA.

Interestingly, the decency displayed in the voting was dominated by geography not party: Dems and Pubs in the North and the West overwhelmingly voted for it, and their southern counterparts voted overwhelmingly against it. The Pubs willingness to put aside party considerations provided the votes necessary to pass the bill in both chambers.

A great narrative accurately taught in our schools.

Democrats had the power, your twist doesn't alter facts. Because the Democrats were in the south doesn't mean they weren't Democrats. Accuracy is not your goal.

Quit blubbering. Yes, the Dems had the power and passed the CRA with the minority help of good GOP.

The conservatives in the South, Dems and GOP, almost universally voted against the CRA.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

You continue to stuff your fingers up your ass, sniff them and post here in your elated state. No one agreed with you and I've never seen you post anything worth thin king about. If you insult me I'll return the favor, flaming is all you know how to do.

Go ahead and prove that conservatives favored segregation if you want to try. The topic is about how Republicans were the racists. Try to read the fucking thread.

Lol....who are modern conservatives?

Modern conservatives are a mix of libertarians, religious zealots, neo-cons, and democrats.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Segregation exists only within a socially conservative worldview. Civil rights are inherintly within a socially liberal worldview.
Regardless of party, it was the conservatives who resisted as well as resented the civil rights movement.

That is utter nonsense.

Your comment is utter nonsense. You must be a far right reactionary wannabee conservative.

How dare you call me a wannabee?

And my comment in right on target.

He's a troll. Look at his post count, this is what he does. I think I'm just going to filter his ass out, it ain't worth reading.

Good idea... what a dipshit.

 

[paulitician]

Republicans are doing nothing to shed their 'greedy angry old white guy' image. In fact, they're reinforcing it everyday. That image is a big turn-off in General Elections.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jake: What you wrote was "Changing comments is in poor form." He did not changer your "comments", which matches my "He did not change anything of the original post, which he carefully preserved to illustrate his annotation." You lie as effortlessly and poorly as Yurt. Keep it up.

DumbAss: No wonder your post count is so high, your stupid clit. You lied when you said I complained about him altering my post. Keep sniffing your fingers, girl!

Jake: Read it, dumb ass. He did not change your comments, he preserved them to show your stupidity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Segregation exists only within a socially conservative worldview. Civil rights are inherintly within a socially liberal worldview.
Regardless of party, it was the conservatives who resisted as well as resented the civil rights movement.

That is utter nonsense.

1. Social conservatism is a group of political ideologies centred around preserving traditional beliefs, attitudes and philosophy, in the face of socialprogressivism.

1. Social liberalism is a political ideology that seeks to find a balance between individual liberty and social justice.

Which is more likely to advocate for social change such as civil rights? How is that ideological difference apparent in today's civil rights issues?

American conservative principles are based in the Age of Enlightenment beliefs of the FOunding Fathers. Individual rights and freedoms were obviously a big part of that. NOt group rights, individual rights and freedoms. Social justice lumps people into groups and grants special protections and rights based on past disadvantages.
This divides and segregates them. As I said, utter nonsense.

The Founders would turn your ass into the alley because of your lame-o response. Respond correctly, dimwit.

The FOunding Fathers would be fine with me commenting on their philosophy.

NOthing I said would strike them as lame.

NOw, your moronic and arrogant comment? WOuld likely get you horsewhipped.

You have been caught in two lies and your stupidity insisting you are like the Founders.

 

[Iceweasel]

Republicans are doing nothing to shed their 'greedy angry old white guy' image. In fact, they're reinforcing it everyday. That image is a big turn-off in General Elections.

How come the image didn't matter in the mid term?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Republicans are doing nothing to shed their 'greedy angry old white guy' image. In fact, they're reinforcing it everyday. That image is a big turn-off in General Elections.

Do elaborate...

 

[JakeStarkey]

I am grateful my GOP followed the lead of the Democratic President and his party's leaders in the Senate and House in ending it with the CRA.

Interestingly, the decency displayed in the voting was dominated by geography not party: Dems and Pubs in the North and the West overwhelmingly voted for it, and their southern counterparts voted overwhelmingly against it. The Pubs willingness to put aside party considerations provided the votes necessary to pass the bill in both chambers.

A great narrative accurately taught in our schools.

Democrats had the power, your twist doesn't alter facts. Because the Democrats were in the south doesn't mean they weren't Democrats. Accuracy is not your goal.

Quit blubbering. Yes, the Dems had the power and passed the CRA with the minority help of good GOP.

The conservatives in the South, Dems and GOP, almost universally voted against the CRA.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

You continue to stuff your fingers up your ass, sniff them and post here in your elated state. No one agreed with you and I've never seen you post anything worth thin king about. If you insult me I'll return the favor, flaming is all you know how to do.

Go ahead and prove that conservatives favored segregation if you want to try. The topic is about how Republicans were the racists. Try to read the fucking thread.

Lol....who are modern conservatives?

I'm one of them. No one can read your mind, you like to state half assed questions and expect people to know what you're talking about.

You are no modern conservative at all, just a jack off far right reactionary.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Segregation exists only within a socially conservative worldview. Civil rights are inherintly within a socially liberal worldview.
Regardless of party, it was the conservatives who resisted as well as resented the civil rights movement.

That is utter nonsense.

Your comment is utter nonsense. You must be a far right reactionary wannabee conservative.

How dare you call me a wannabee?

And my comment in right on target.

He's a troll. Look at his post count, this is what he does. I think I'm just going to filter his ass out, it ain't worth reading.

Good idea... what a dipshit.

Another far right reactionary wannabee off the board. In my six years (almost) on the board, we have seen a lot of wannabees go off the Board.

 

[paulitician]

Republicans are doing nothing to shed their 'greedy angry old white guy' image. In fact, they're reinforcing it everyday. That image is a big turn-off in General Elections.

How come the image didn't matter in the mid term?

A General Election is a completely different animal. Voters just don't get excited over greedy angry white guys bitchin about everything. The Democrats should win the White House again pretty easily. It won't matter who their Candidate is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Republicans are doing nothing to shed their 'greedy angry old white guy' image. In fact, they're reinforcing it everyday. That image is a big turn-off in General Elections.

We in the mainstream GOP are trying to change that. It's folks like the weasel that are trying to drag us back to the bad old fifties.

 

[Correll]

That is utter nonsense.

1. Social conservatism is a group of political ideologies centred around preserving traditional beliefs, attitudes and philosophy, in the face of socialprogressivism.

1. Social liberalism is a political ideology that seeks to find a balance between individual liberty and social justice.

Which is more likely to advocate for social change such as civil rights? How is that ideological difference apparent in today's civil rights issues?

American conservative principles are based in the Age of Enlightenment beliefs of the FOunding Fathers. Individual rights and freedoms were obviously a big part of that. NOt group rights, individual rights and freedoms. Social justice lumps people into groups and grants special protections and rights based on past disadvantages.
This divides and segregates them. As I said, utter nonsense.

The Founders would turn your ass into the alley because of your lame-o response. Respond correctly, dimwit.

The FOunding Fathers would be fine with me commenting on their philosophy.

NOthing I said would strike them as lame.

NOw, your moronic and arrogant comment? WOuld likely get you horsewhipped.

You have been caught in two lies and your stupidity insisting you are like the Founders.

NOthing in this post has any connection to reality.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

That is utter nonsense.

Your comment is utter nonsense. You must be a far right reactionary wannabee conservative.

How dare you call me a wannabee?

And my comment in right on target.

He's a troll. Look at his post count, this is what he does. I think I'm just going to filter his ass out, it ain't worth reading.

Good idea... what a dipshit.

Another far right reactionary wannabee off the board. In my six years (almost) on the board, we have seen a lot of wannabees go off the Board.

No doubt you are interested in the posts of someone that is that ill-informed... two dumbfucks in a pod you two are.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

1. Social conservatism is a group of political ideologies centred around preserving traditional beliefs, attitudes and philosophy, in the face of socialprogressivism.

1. Social liberalism is a political ideology that seeks to find a balance between individual liberty and social justice.

Which is more likely to advocate for social change such as civil rights? How is that ideological difference apparent in today's civil rights issues?

American conservative principles are based in the Age of Enlightenment beliefs of the FOunding Fathers. Individual rights and freedoms were obviously a big part of that. NOt group rights, individual rights and freedoms. Social justice lumps people into groups and grants special protections and rights based on past disadvantages.
This divides and segregates them. As I said, utter nonsense.

The Founders would turn your ass into the alley because of your lame-o response. Respond correctly, dimwit.

The FOunding Fathers would be fine with me commenting on their philosophy.

NOthing I said would strike them as lame.

NOw, your moronic and arrogant comment? WOuld likely get you horsewhipped.

You have been caught in two lies and your stupidity insisting you are like the Founders.

NOthing in this post has any connection to reality.

I think Jake got ahold of bad batch of meth...