Voting Rights, Filibuster, Conservatives & MLK

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Democrats today have no problem stating that the Civil War was over slavery....only reactionary right wing cucks get triggered and say "no no no, it was over states rights!!!"

Both are correct. It was over the state’s rights to keep slavery legal.

Yes, which means it was over slavery....

Which is why they wrote that reason into virtually every Confederate State's order of secession.....


So again......what is it with the Conservative fixation on glorifying the Confederacy??

It definitely can't be "heritage" -- unless they think something that was formed PRECISELY for maintaining slavery and only existed for 4 or 5 years represents the entirety of "southern heritage"

Boy bands have lasted longer than the Confederacy....so why the fixation?

Who is glorifying the failed Confederacy?

I have ancestors who were conscripted into the Confederate Military. Is learning their history and the events they experience "glorifying" the Confederacy?

More of the passive aggressive "Let's play dumb" shit...
View attachment 499171

Oh, THE JANUARY 6 thing.

Right

NOW WE GET TO THE REAL ISSUE.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Then how come the main ones who glorify the Confederates -- you know, the side that was fighting to maintain slavery?? How come it's usually conservatives who do that??

Glorify the Confederates? Example?

You do understand its a bitch move to play dumb like this right??

Opinion: The GOP is now the party of neo-Confederates

The far left and far right have long been warning about neocons taking over the Republican Party. Turns out they are right. Only the “neocons” in question aren’t the neoconservati…

www.mcall.com

Some asshole's opinion is not fact.

 

[jc456]

but it is definitely possible to try to place voting restrictions on people in the hopes that minority voters are the most adversely affected

name something.

 

[jc456]

Democrats today have no problem stating that the Civil War was over slavery....only reactionary right wing cucks get triggered and say "no no no, it was over states rights!!!"

Both are correct. It was over the state’s rights to keep slavery legal.

Yes, which means it was over slavery....

Which is why they wrote that reason into virtually every Confederate State's order of secession.....


So again......what is it with the Conservative fixation on glorifying the Confederacy??

It definitely can't be "heritage" -- unless they think something that was formed PRECISELY for maintaining slavery and only existed for 4 or 5 years represents the entirety of "southern heritage"

Boy bands have lasted longer than the Confederacy....so why the fixation?

Who is glorifying the failed Confederacy?

I have ancestors who were conscripted into the Confederate Military. Is learning their history and the events they experience "glorifying" the Confederacy?

the demofks must deter and deflect for this civil war mess they made. Shit, they actively blame republicans. it's truly amazing the alternate species of the demofks.

 

[jc456]

Then how come the main ones who glorify the Confederates -- you know, the side that was fighting to maintain slavery?? How come it's usually conservatives who do that??

Glorify the Confederates? Example?

You do understand its a bitch move to play dumb like this right??

Opinion: The GOP is now the party of neo-Confederates

The far left and far right have long been warning about neocons taking over the Republican Party. Turns out they are right. Only the “neocons” in question aren’t the neoconservati…

www.mcall.com

Some asshole's opinion is not fact.

See, there it is the demofks who started the civil war were really republicans saying they were demofks I guess. Too fking funny. They have no shame.

 

[jc456]

Then how come the main ones who glorify the Confederates -- you know, the side that was fighting to maintain slavery?? How come it's usually conservatives who do that??

Glorify the Confederates? Example?

You do understand its a bitch move to play dumb like this right??

Opinion: The GOP is now the party of neo-Confederates

The far left and far right have long been warning about neocons taking over the Republican Party. Turns out they are right. Only the “neocons” in question aren’t the neoconservati…

www.mcall.com

nope, Demofks created the confederation. PERIOD!!! you history deviate fk!

 

[theHawk]

Democrats today have no problem stating that the Civil War was over slavery....only reactionary right wing cucks get triggered and say "no no no, it was over states rights!!!"

Both are correct. It was over the state’s rights to keep slavery legal.

Yes, which means it was over slavery....

Which is why they wrote that reason into virtually every Confederate State's order of secession.....


So again......what is it with the Conservative fixation on glorifying the Confederacy??

It definitely can't be "heritage" -- unless they think something that was formed PRECISELY for maintaining slavery and only existed for 4 or 5 years represents the entirety of "southern heritage"

Boy bands have lasted longer than the Confederacy....so why the fixation?

Who is glorifying the failed Confederacy?

I have ancestors who were conscripted into the Confederate Military. Is learning their history and the events they experience "glorifying" the Confederacy?

More of the passive aggressive "Let's play dumb" shit...
View attachment 499171

That’s not the Confederate Flag. It was a flag used before the Civil War and the Confederacy, and after. But you’re a brainwashed dolt who doesn’t know what the actual Confederate flag looked like.

.

 

[theHawk]

30 comments in and still not a single point I made has been refuted...

30 comments and you’re still enable to show a law that restricts anyone’s right to vote based on race.

A law that restricts voting solely on the basis of race is already illegal....we won that fight already...

However, voting restrictions meant to target minority voters with almost surgical precision became very rampant the second the Voting Rights Act was gutted....

"In its ruling, the appeals court said the law was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. North Carolina legislators had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," the court said."

Supreme Court Declines Republican Bid To Revive North Carolina Voter ID Law

The restrictive law was thrown out last year after a court ruled it was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. State Republicans have tried several times to appeal.

www.npr.org

Not my words...that was a North Carolina Supreme Court ruling......

hmmmm...I wonder why...and I wonder why its CONSISTENTLY been conservative policy makers pushing these bills....it's almost as if they were against the Voting Rights Act the whole time....

Then it should be easy for you to provide the text in the law that discriminated against blacks.

So far you’re haven’t proven shit.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Democrats today have no problem stating that the Civil War was over slavery....only reactionary right wing cucks get triggered and say "no no no, it was over states rights!!!"

Both are correct. It was over the state’s rights to keep slavery legal.

Yes, which means it was over slavery....

Which is why they wrote that reason into virtually every Confederate State's order of secession.....


So again......what is it with the Conservative fixation on glorifying the Confederacy??

It definitely can't be "heritage" -- unless they think something that was formed PRECISELY for maintaining slavery and only existed for 4 or 5 years represents the entirety of "southern heritage"

Boy bands have lasted longer than the Confederacy....so why the fixation?

Who is glorifying the failed Confederacy?

I have ancestors who were conscripted into the Confederate Military. Is learning their history and the events they experience "glorifying" the Confederacy?

More of the passive aggressive "Let's play dumb" shit...
View attachment 499171

That’s not the Confederate Flag. It was a flag used before the Civil War and the Confederacy, and after. But you’re a brainwashed dolt who doesn’t know what the actual Confederate flag looked like.

.

This is why I have zero respect for cowardly dishonest cucks like yourself....

Confederate flag from 1861 to 1863..


Confederate flag from 1865 to 1865....


Confederate flag from 1865 to being the preferred flag of Neo-Confederates and white supremacists today...


It isn't my fault that this flag is so popular with folks who claim to be "honoring" their Confederate heritage....

Maybe you should teach them about using the right flag when they are marching next to Neo-Nazis yelling "Jews will not replace us"

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

30 comments in and still not a single point I made has been refuted...

30 comments and you’re still enable to show a law that restricts anyone’s right to vote based on race.

A law that restricts voting solely on the basis of race is already illegal....we won that fight already...

However, voting restrictions meant to target minority voters with almost surgical precision became very rampant the second the Voting Rights Act was gutted....

"In its ruling, the appeals court said the law was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. North Carolina legislators had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," the court said."

Supreme Court Declines Republican Bid To Revive North Carolina Voter ID Law

The restrictive law was thrown out last year after a court ruled it was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. State Republicans have tried several times to appeal.

www.npr.org

Not my words...that was a North Carolina Supreme Court ruling......

hmmmm...I wonder why...and I wonder why its CONSISTENTLY been conservative policy makers pushing these bills....it's almost as if they were against the Voting Rights Act the whole time....

Then it should be easy for you to provide the text in the law that discriminated against blacks.

So far you’re haven’t proven shit.

Why did republicans need to see voting data by race for writing a "voting restrictions" bill??

If race isn't a factor in these bills -- why would they need to write a bill based on racial voting data?

I'll wait while you deflecting like a bitch...

 

[theHawk]

Democrats today have no problem stating that the Civil War was over slavery....only reactionary right wing cucks get triggered and say "no no no, it was over states rights!!!"

Both are correct. It was over the state’s rights to keep slavery legal.

Yes, which means it was over slavery....

Which is why they wrote that reason into virtually every Confederate State's order of secession.....


So again......what is it with the Conservative fixation on glorifying the Confederacy??

It definitely can't be "heritage" -- unless they think something that was formed PRECISELY for maintaining slavery and only existed for 4 or 5 years represents the entirety of "southern heritage"

Boy bands have lasted longer than the Confederacy....so why the fixation?

Who is glorifying the failed Confederacy?

I have ancestors who were conscripted into the Confederate Military. Is learning their history and the events they experience "glorifying" the Confederacy?

More of the passive aggressive "Let's play dumb" shit...
View attachment 499171

That’s not the Confederate Flag. It was a flag used before the Civil War and the Confederacy, and after. But you’re a brainwashed dolt who doesn’t know what the actual Confederate flag looked like.

.

This is why I have zero respect for cowardly dishonest cucks like yourself....

Confederate flag from 1861 to 1863..
View attachment 499183

Confederate flag from 1865 to 1865....
View attachment 499182

Confederate flag from 1865 to being the preferred flag of Neo-Confederates and white supremacists today...
View attachment 499184

It isn't my fault that this flag is so popular with folks who claim to be "honoring" their Confederate heritage....

Maybe you should teach them about using the right flag when they are marching next to Neo-Nazis yelling "Jews will not replace us"

Yes a white rectangle flag with a square flag of the Army of Virginia is the Navy Ensign flag.

The flag waived by Southerns often today is the Battle flag of the Army of Tennessee.

Like I said, a flag that existed before the civil war, and after. But it was never the official Confederate Flag itself.

I know these facts are inconvenient for your narrative, but they remain true.

 

[theHawk]

30 comments in and still not a single point I made has been refuted...

30 comments and you’re still enable to show a law that restricts anyone’s right to vote based on race.

A law that restricts voting solely on the basis of race is already illegal....we won that fight already...

However, voting restrictions meant to target minority voters with almost surgical precision became very rampant the second the Voting Rights Act was gutted....

"In its ruling, the appeals court said the law was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. North Carolina legislators had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," the court said."

Supreme Court Declines Republican Bid To Revive North Carolina Voter ID Law

The restrictive law was thrown out last year after a court ruled it was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. State Republicans have tried several times to appeal.

www.npr.org

Not my words...that was a North Carolina Supreme Court ruling......

hmmmm...I wonder why...and I wonder why its CONSISTENTLY been conservative policy makers pushing these bills....it's almost as if they were against the Voting Rights Act the whole time....

Then it should be easy for you to provide the text in the law that discriminated against blacks.

So far you’re haven’t proven shit.

Why did republicans need to see voting data by race for writing a "voting restrictions" bill??

If race isn't a factor in these bills -- why would they need to write a bill based on racial voting data?

I'll wait while you deflecting like a bitch...

You can huff and puff about “what they were thinking” all you want. As I said, provide the actual text that discriminates against blacks.

Put up or shut up. I’ll wait while you deflect like a bitch...

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

30 comments in and still not a single point I made has been refuted...

30 comments and you’re still enable to show a law that restricts anyone’s right to vote based on race.

A law that restricts voting solely on the basis of race is already illegal....we won that fight already...

However, voting restrictions meant to target minority voters with almost surgical precision became very rampant the second the Voting Rights Act was gutted....

"In its ruling, the appeals court said the law was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. North Carolina legislators had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," the court said."

Supreme Court Declines Republican Bid To Revive North Carolina Voter ID Law

The restrictive law was thrown out last year after a court ruled it was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. State Republicans have tried several times to appeal.

www.npr.org

Not my words...that was a North Carolina Supreme Court ruling......

hmmmm...I wonder why...and I wonder why its CONSISTENTLY been conservative policy makers pushing these bills....it's almost as if they were against the Voting Rights Act the whole time....

Then it should be easy for you to provide the text in the law that discriminated against blacks.

So far you’re haven’t proven shit.

Why did republicans need to see voting data by race for writing a "voting restrictions" bill??

If race isn't a factor in these bills -- why would they need to write a bill based on racial voting data?

I'll wait while you deflecting like a bitch...

You can huff and puff about “what they were thinking” all you want. As I said, provide the actual text that discriminates against blacks.

Put up or shut up. I’ll wait while you deflect like a bitch...

No answer got it....

I have already told you that explicitly stating a voting restriction is based on race in whatever bill you are passing is illegal....

But that doesn't mean that voting restriction laws don't target minority voters...this has been proven......including the Supreme Court decision stating this reality.....the fact you keep ignoring it is of no consequence to me...it shows you are intellectually dishonest...like most Conservatives have to be

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

The argument about filibuster is ludicrous. Democrats want to do away with it when they are in charge. Republicans want to do away with it when they are in charge. You almost gotta laugh that democrats won all the marbles but they still act like losers.

They're obsession for bipartisanship does make them weak ... and republicans take advantage of that every time....

Republicans never gave a fuck about bipartisanship -- they just whine about it when they are out of power....and Democrats are dumb enough to allow it to work

A simple glance at the votes fo just about any bill will show how the demleftist vote in lockstep and republicans no so much. It will also prove that you’re an idiot.

Cool....let's take a glance....

How about the Senate Vote on the 1957 Voting Rights Act.....
View attachment 499163


How about the vote on the House Vote on the 1964...
View attachment 499164

If by lockstep you mean the majority of "progressives" voted for the bill and the majority of "conservatives" voted against it -- you would be correct...

Can you refute this??

Is there some "alternative" vote count you saw on a meme or something?

1957? 1964?
Idiot!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

30 comments in and still not a single point I made has been refuted...

30 comments and you’re still enable to show a law that restricts anyone’s right to vote based on race.

A law that restricts voting solely on the basis of race is already illegal....we won that fight already...

However, voting restrictions meant to target minority voters with almost surgical precision became very rampant the second the Voting Rights Act was gutted....

"In its ruling, the appeals court said the law was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. North Carolina legislators had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," the court said."

Supreme Court Declines Republican Bid To Revive North Carolina Voter ID Law

The restrictive law was thrown out last year after a court ruled it was intentionally designed to discriminate against black people. State Republicans have tried several times to appeal.

www.npr.org

Not my words...that was a North Carolina Supreme Court ruling......

hmmmm...I wonder why...and I wonder why its CONSISTENTLY been conservative policy makers pushing these bills....it's almost as if they were against the Voting Rights Act the whole time....

Then it should be easy for you to provide the text in the law that discriminated against blacks.

So far you’re haven’t proven shit.

Why did republicans need to see voting data by race for writing a "voting restrictions" bill??

If race isn't a factor in these bills -- why would they need to write a bill based on racial voting data?

I'll wait while you deflecting like a bitch...

You can huff and puff about “what they were thinking” all you want. As I said, provide the actual text that discriminates against blacks.

Put up or shut up. I’ll wait while you deflect like a bitch...

No answer got it....

I have already told you that explicitly stating a voting restriction is based on race in whatever bill you are passing is illegal....

But that doesn't mean that voting restriction laws don't target minority voters...this has been proven......including the Supreme Court decision stating this reality.....the fact you keep ignoring it is of no consequence to me...it shows you are intellectually dishonest...like most Conservatives have to be

...for example????