Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
The first thing it supports is treason, and we know how much them there rednecks hate treason.
"Them there rednecks" are definitely not my crowd, but I'm not going to get worked up about their flag. If I want to make a statement about it or display my own pride, I will simply fly a modern-day standard U.S. flag.
I firmly support individuals' rights to fly whatever flags they choose, but I do oppose state government displays of the Confederate flag.
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
Slavery and oppression of minorities, being a social construct, never had a political party of course, but for those who wish to identify and slap a label on those who practice it ---- check out my stalker above who's always drooling about "NL".
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
It's time for another History Lesson. My Crap Meter went off scale on this one.
When the Republican party was formed, it was dead set against slavery. It was also the Progressive Party. During that time the Dems were the conservatives in the way you use that word now. But starting in 1932, a shift happened. The Big Money and Corporations bailed out of the Democratic Party and changed to the Republican Party. They overthrew the Progressives and changed the party. That change was not completed until the 1970s. This should explain the changes that Eisenhower pushed for but Reagan didn't so much. The Dems gave the Progressives a place which changed the Dem Party since they lost any and all power in the Republican Party. This also why human rights are not real important to the Reps. The Republican Party is what the old Democratic Party was and vice versa. What caused this change was FDRs policies starting in 1929. The old Democratic Party went out of it's mind. They couldn't do a thing about FDR. His WPA and CCC camps were considered treasonous by the powers that thought they controlled the Democratic Party. What they couldn't fathom was the fact there were over 3 million people out of work, cold and hungry with children and they were ARMED. The US was very, very close to an armed revolution.
To give you and idea. If Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower were alive today they would be middle of the pack Democrats. And not leaning towards the center. The center has moved to the point that there are now 2 centers and they are far apart. Neither party represents that dead space but almost all Americans fall securely into that voided area. The Democratic party leans towards socialism (No, Dorathy, they aren't really socialists) and the Republican party lean towards Corporatocracy (no, cupcake, the Republican party is not really a Corporatocracy).
The Democrats know that they need to move towards old center but can't quite figure out how to get there with the controlling factions they have now. The Democrat leaders have more in common with the "Conservatives" than the majority of the Democrats. That brand of Democratic is a Corporatocracy just controlled by other corporations than the Conservatives.
On the Republic side, it's made up of not one but two parties. One calls itself "Conservatives" and the other side calls itself "GOP" The GOP far outnumbers the "Conservatives" and the "Conservatives call the "GOPers" RINOs (Republican in Name Only). The "Conservatives" aren't really conservatives. The GOPers are the real conservatives. Much like the ruling people in the Democratic party aren't really Democrats. The "Conservatives (in name only) has been losing power very quickly as the GOP starts to wake up. The real name for the "Conservatives" would be "The John Birch Society" that was welcomed into the GOP in the 80s. Really bad choice by the then leader of the Republican Party, George Walker Bush. Until then, the John Birch Society wasn't invited to ANY GOP ANYTHING.
Tea Party Patriots Foundation
Don't confuse the Tea Party with the John Birch Society. It has a few corresponding points with the John Birch Society. But it makes a whole lot more sense if the original doctrine for the TeaParty was actually followed. But it's no longer what it was. It's doctrine is officially the same on paper as it was when I was once a Tea Party Member. But the John Birchers jumped into it and it's been a mess every since. It's become untenable with all the obstructions it now has but has never been actually written down. Like I said, if the Teaparty were to follow it's own written doctrines it would be the best thing since peanut butter.
Now, let's look at the John Birch Society. One of the found fathers was the Koch Brothers father but his Sons are members. Joe McCarthy would have been a member , and so is Ted Cruz. Cruz claims to be from the Republicans and Tea Party but his support in Texas is for the John Birch Society. It isn't a coincidence that the John Birch Society was formed the year AFTER McCarthy died. McCarthy is infamous. He died in 1957. In 1958 the John Birch Society was formed and had many of the same ideals that McCarthy had. It's so right wing, it's off the scale. In 1860, it would be part of the Democratic Party except it would still be so off the scale that the 1860 Democratic Party wouldn't want it either. This is partly why the Republicans went from a loose handful of like minded people to a major party. If John D Rockefeller were alive today, he would be a John Bircher and the KOCH brothers would not have the power they have today but nothing else would change. One of the first things to get thrown out would the Sherman Antitrust act passed by a republican congress and signed into law by President Harris also a Republican in 1890. That was used to reign in the power grabs and more of Standard Oil and many of the Robber Barons for the railroads and Land Grabbers. Read up on John D. Rockefeller. It's an interesting read. Read up on President Harris as well to see the other side. If President Harris were alive today he would be a middle of the road Democrat like Teddy R and Eisenhower.
Now, are you really a conservative or a John Birch Society spy?
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
It's time for another History Lesson. My Crap Meter went off scale on this one.
When the Republican party was formed, it was dead set against slavery. It was also the Progressive Party. During that time the Dems were the conservatives in the way you use that word now. But starting in 1932, a shift happened. The Big Money and Corporations bailed out of the Democratic Party and changed to the Republican Party. They overthrew the Progressives and changed the party. That change was not completed until the 1970s. This should explain the changes that Eisenhower pushed for but Reagan didn't so much. The Dems gave the Progressives a place which changed the Dem Party since they lost any and all power in the Republican Party. This also why human rights are not real important to the Reps. The Republican Party is what the old Democratic Party was and vice versa. What caused this change was FDRs policies starting in 1929. The old Democratic Party went out of it's mind. They couldn't do a thing about FDR. His WPA and CCC camps were considered treasonous by the powers that thought they controlled the Democratic Party. What they couldn't fathom was the fact there were over 3 million people out of work, cold and hungry with children and they were ARMED. The US was very, very close to an armed revolution.
To give you and idea. If Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower were alive today they would be middle of the pack Democrats. And not leaning towards the center. The center has moved to the point that there are now 2 centers and they are far apart. Neither party represents that dead space but almost all Americans fall securely into that voided area. The Democratic party leans towards socialism (No, Dorathy, they aren't really socialists) and the Republican party lean towards Corporatocracy (no, cupcake, the Republican party is not really a Corporatocracy).
The Democrats know that they need to move towards old center but can't quite figure out how to get there with the controlling factions they have now. The Democrat leaders have more in common with the "Conservatives" than the majority of the Democrats. That brand of Democratic is a Corporatocracy just controlled by other corporations than the Conservatives.
On the Republic side, it's made up of not one but two parties. One calls itself "Conservatives" and the other side calls itself "GOP" The GOP far outnumbers the "Conservatives" and the "Conservatives call the "GOPers" RINOs (Republican in Name Only). The "Conservatives" aren't really conservatives. The GOPers are the real conservatives. Much like the ruling people in the Democratic party aren't really Democrats. The "Conservatives (in name only) has been losing power very quickly as the GOP starts to wake up. The real name for the "Conservatives" would be "The John Birch Society" that was welcomed into the GOP in the 80s. Really bad choice by the then leader of the Republican Party, George Walker Bush. Until then, the John Birch Society wasn't invited to ANY GOP ANYTHING.
Tea Party Patriots Foundation
Don't confuse the Tea Party with the John Birch Society. It has a few corresponding points with the John Birch Society. But it makes a whole lot more sense if the original doctrine for the TeaParty was actually followed. But it's no longer what it was. It's doctrine is officially the same on paper as it was when I was once a Tea Party Member. But the John Birchers jumped into it and it's been a mess every since. It's become untenable with all the obstructions it now has but has never been actually written down. Like I said, if the Teaparty were to follow it's own written doctrines it would be the best thing since peanut butter.
Now, let's look at the John Birch Society. One of the found fathers was the Koch Brothers father but his Sons are members. Joe McCarthy would have been a member , and so is Ted Cruz. Cruz claims to be from the Republicans and Tea Party but his support in Texas is for the John Birch Society. It isn't a coincidence that the John Birch Society was formed the year AFTER McCarthy died. McCarthy is infamous. He died in 1957. In 1958 the John Birch Society was formed and had many of the same ideals that McCarthy had. It's so right wing, it's off the scale. In 1860, it would be part of the Democratic Party except it would still be so off the scale that the 1860 Democratic Party wouldn't want it either. This is partly why the Republicans went from a loose handful of like minded people to a major party. If John D Rockefeller were alive today, he would be a John Bircher and the KOCH brothers would not have the power they have today but nothing else would change. One of the first things to get thrown out would the Sherman Antitrust act passed by a republican congress and signed into law by President Harris also a Republican in 1890. That was used to reign in the power grabs and more of Standard Oil and many of the Robber Barons for the railroads and Land Grabbers. Read up on John D. Rockefeller. It's an interesting read. Read up on President Harris as well to see the other side. If President Harris were alive today he would be a middle of the road Democrat like Teddy R and Eisenhower.
Now, are you really a conservative or a John Birch Society spy?
Nice effort and welcome to the USMB Daryl..
Your revisionist history lesson has failed miserably but luckily your reality based history lesson has arrived..
A Short History of Democrats, Republicans, and Racism
View attachment 150475
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
It's time for another History Lesson. My Crap Meter went off scale on this one.
When the Republican party was formed, it was dead set against slavery. It was also the Progressive Party. During that time the Dems were the conservatives in the way you use that word now. But starting in 1932, a shift happened. The Big Money and Corporations bailed out of the Democratic Party and changed to the Republican Party. They overthrew the Progressives and changed the party. That change was not completed until the 1970s. This should explain the changes that Eisenhower pushed for but Reagan didn't so much. The Dems gave the Progressives a place which changed the Dem Party since they lost any and all power in the Republican Party. This also why human rights are not real important to the Reps. The Republican Party is what the old Democratic Party was and vice versa. What caused this change was FDRs policies starting in 1929. The old Democratic Party went out of it's mind. They couldn't do a thing about FDR. His WPA and CCC camps were considered treasonous by the powers that thought they controlled the Democratic Party. What they couldn't fathom was the fact there were over 3 million people out of work, cold and hungry with children and they were ARMED. The US was very, very close to an armed revolution.
To give you and idea. If Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower were alive today they would be middle of the pack Democrats. And not leaning towards the center. The center has moved to the point that there are now 2 centers and they are far apart. Neither party represents that dead space but almost all Americans fall securely into that voided area. The Democratic party leans towards socialism (No, Dorathy, they aren't really socialists) and the Republican party lean towards Corporatocracy (no, cupcake, the Republican party is not really a Corporatocracy).
The Democrats know that they need to move towards old center but can't quite figure out how to get there with the controlling factions they have now. The Democrat leaders have more in common with the "Conservatives" than the majority of the Democrats. That brand of Democratic is a Corporatocracy just controlled by other corporations than the Conservatives.
On the Republic side, it's made up of not one but two parties. One calls itself "Conservatives" and the other side calls itself "GOP" The GOP far outnumbers the "Conservatives" and the "Conservatives call the "GOPers" RINOs (Republican in Name Only). The "Conservatives" aren't really conservatives. The GOPers are the real conservatives. Much like the ruling people in the Democratic party aren't really Democrats. The "Conservatives (in name only) has been losing power very quickly as the GOP starts to wake up. The real name for the "Conservatives" would be "The John Birch Society" that was welcomed into the GOP in the 80s. Really bad choice by the then leader of the Republican Party, George Walker Bush. Until then, the John Birch Society wasn't invited to ANY GOP ANYTHING.
Tea Party Patriots Foundation
Don't confuse the Tea Party with the John Birch Society. It has a few corresponding points with the John Birch Society. But it makes a whole lot more sense if the original doctrine for the TeaParty was actually followed. But it's no longer what it was. It's doctrine is officially the same on paper as it was when I was once a Tea Party Member. But the John Birchers jumped into it and it's been a mess every since. It's become untenable with all the obstructions it now has but has never been actually written down. Like I said, if the Teaparty were to follow it's own written doctrines it would be the best thing since peanut butter.
Now, let's look at the John Birch Society. One of the found fathers was the Koch Brothers father but his Sons are members. Joe McCarthy would have been a member , and so is Ted Cruz. Cruz claims to be from the Republicans and Tea Party but his support in Texas is for the John Birch Society. It isn't a coincidence that the John Birch Society was formed the year AFTER McCarthy died. McCarthy is infamous. He died in 1957. In 1958 the John Birch Society was formed and had many of the same ideals that McCarthy had. It's so right wing, it's off the scale. In 1860, it would be part of the Democratic Party except it would still be so off the scale that the 1860 Democratic Party wouldn't want it either. This is partly why the Republicans went from a loose handful of like minded people to a major party. If John D Rockefeller were alive today, he would be a John Bircher and the KOCH brothers would not have the power they have today but nothing else would change. One of the first things to get thrown out would the Sherman Antitrust act passed by a republican congress and signed into law by President Harris also a Republican in 1890. That was used to reign in the power grabs and more of Standard Oil and many of the Robber Barons for the railroads and Land Grabbers. Read up on John D. Rockefeller. It's an interesting read. Read up on President Harris as well to see the other side. If President Harris were alive today he would be a middle of the road Democrat like Teddy R and Eisenhower.
Now, are you really a conservative or a John Birch Society spy?
Nice effort and welcome to the USMB Daryl..
Your revisionist history lesson has failed miserably but luckily your reality based history lesson has arrived..
A Short History of Democrats, Republicans, and Racism
View attachment 150475
Your cite is correct. But it leaves out the whys and the hows. I filled it in. Just how did it get where it is now? History is a wonderful thing and shouldn't be cherry picked.
Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
It's time for another History Lesson. My Crap Meter went off scale on this one.
When the Republican party was formed, it was dead set against slavery. It was also the Progressive Party. During that time the Dems were the conservatives in the way you use that word now. But starting in 1932, a shift happened. The Big Money and Corporations bailed out of the Democratic Party and changed to the Republican Party. They overthrew the Progressives and changed the party. That change was not completed until the 1970s. This should explain the changes that Eisenhower pushed for but Reagan didn't so much. The Dems gave the Progressives a place which changed the Dem Party since they lost any and all power in the Republican Party. This also why human rights are not real important to the Reps. The Republican Party is what the old Democratic Party was and vice versa. What caused this change was FDRs policies starting in 1929. The old Democratic Party went out of it's mind. They couldn't do a thing about FDR. His WPA and CCC camps were considered treasonous by the powers that thought they controlled the Democratic Party. What they couldn't fathom was the fact there were over 3 million people out of work, cold and hungry with children and they were ARMED. The US was very, very close to an armed revolution.
To give you and idea. If Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower were alive today they would be middle of the pack Democrats. And not leaning towards the center. The center has moved to the point that there are now 2 centers and they are far apart. Neither party represents that dead space but almost all Americans fall securely into that voided area. The Democratic party leans towards socialism (No, Dorathy, they aren't really socialists) and the Republican party lean towards Corporatocracy (no, cupcake, the Republican party is not really a Corporatocracy).
The Democrats know that they need to move towards old center but can't quite figure out how to get there with the controlling factions they have now. The Democrat leaders have more in common with the "Conservatives" than the majority of the Democrats. That brand of Democratic is a Corporatocracy just controlled by other corporations than the Conservatives.
On the Republic side, it's made up of not one but two parties. One calls itself "Conservatives" and the other side calls itself "GOP" The GOP far outnumbers the "Conservatives" and the "Conservatives call the "GOPers" RINOs (Republican in Name Only). The "Conservatives" aren't really conservatives. The GOPers are the real conservatives. Much like the ruling people in the Democratic party aren't really Democrats. The "Conservatives (in name only) has been losing power very quickly as the GOP starts to wake up. The real name for the "Conservatives" would be "The John Birch Society" that was welcomed into the GOP in the 80s. Really bad choice by the then leader of the Republican Party, George Walker Bush. Until then, the John Birch Society wasn't invited to ANY GOP ANYTHING.
Tea Party Patriots Foundation
Don't confuse the Tea Party with the John Birch Society. It has a few corresponding points with the John Birch Society. But it makes a whole lot more sense if the original doctrine for the TeaParty was actually followed. But it's no longer what it was. It's doctrine is officially the same on paper as it was when I was once a Tea Party Member. But the John Birchers jumped into it and it's been a mess every since. It's become untenable with all the obstructions it now has but has never been actually written down. Like I said, if the Teaparty were to follow it's own written doctrines it would be the best thing since peanut butter.
Now, let's look at the John Birch Society. One of the found fathers was the Koch Brothers father but his Sons are members. Joe McCarthy would have been a member , and so is Ted Cruz. Cruz claims to be from the Republicans and Tea Party but his support in Texas is for the John Birch Society. It isn't a coincidence that the John Birch Society was formed the year AFTER McCarthy died. McCarthy is infamous. He died in 1957. In 1958 the John Birch Society was formed and had many of the same ideals that McCarthy had. It's so right wing, it's off the scale. In 1860, it would be part of the Democratic Party except it would still be so off the scale that the 1860 Democratic Party wouldn't want it either. This is partly why the Republicans went from a loose handful of like minded people to a major party. If John D Rockefeller were alive today, he would be a John Bircher and the KOCH brothers would not have the power they have today but nothing else would change. One of the first things to get thrown out would the Sherman Antitrust act passed by a republican congress and signed into law by President Harris also a Republican in 1890. That was used to reign in the power grabs and more of Standard Oil and many of the Robber Barons for the railroads and Land Grabbers. Read up on John D. Rockefeller. It's an interesting read. Read up on President Harris as well to see the other side. If President Harris were alive today he would be a middle of the road Democrat like Teddy R and Eisenhower.
Now, are you really a conservative or a John Birch Society spy?
Nice effort and welcome to the USMB Daryl..
Your revisionist history lesson has failed miserably but luckily your reality based history lesson has arrived..
A Short History of Democrats, Republicans, and Racism
View attachment 150475
Your cite is correct. But it leaves out the whys and the hows. I filled it in. Just how did it get where it is now? History is a wonderful thing and shouldn't be cherry picked.
Eh, I'm not really in the mood to do a lot of research on your chosen .. opinion mostly/facts not so much ..
Maybe some other time when I'm not posting on several threads...
Bottom line it's the Democratic Party that have always promoted slavery and oppression of minorities in America, they should be banned considering all their inner city ghetto plantations and human baby (especially minority) extermination centers across America.
It's time for another History Lesson. My Crap Meter went off scale on this one.
When the Republican party was formed, it was dead set against slavery. It was also the Progressive Party. During that time the Dems were the conservatives in the way you use that word now. But starting in 1932, a shift happened. The Big Money and Corporations bailed out of the Democratic Party and changed to the Republican Party. They overthrew the Progressives and changed the party. That change was not completed until the 1970s. This should explain the changes that Eisenhower pushed for but Reagan didn't so much. The Dems gave the Progressives a place which changed the Dem Party since they lost any and all power in the Republican Party. This also why human rights are not real important to the Reps. The Republican Party is what the old Democratic Party was and vice versa. What caused this change was FDRs policies starting in 1929. The old Democratic Party went out of it's mind. They couldn't do a thing about FDR. His WPA and CCC camps were considered treasonous by the powers that thought they controlled the Democratic Party. What they couldn't fathom was the fact there were over 3 million people out of work, cold and hungry with children and they were ARMED. The US was very, very close to an armed revolution.
To give you and idea. If Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower were alive today they would be middle of the pack Democrats. And not leaning towards the center. The center has moved to the point that there are now 2 centers and they are far apart. Neither party represents that dead space but almost all Americans fall securely into that voided area. The Democratic party leans towards socialism (No, Dorathy, they aren't really socialists) and the Republican party lean towards Corporatocracy (no, cupcake, the Republican party is not really a Corporatocracy).
The Democrats know that they need to move towards old center but can't quite figure out how to get there with the controlling factions they have now. The Democrat leaders have more in common with the "Conservatives" than the majority of the Democrats. That brand of Democratic is a Corporatocracy just controlled by other corporations than the Conservatives.
On the Republic side, it's made up of not one but two parties. One calls itself "Conservatives" and the other side calls itself "GOP" The GOP far outnumbers the "Conservatives" and the "Conservatives call the "GOPers" RINOs (Republican in Name Only). The "Conservatives" aren't really conservatives. The GOPers are the real conservatives. Much like the ruling people in the Democratic party aren't really Democrats. The "Conservatives (in name only) has been losing power very quickly as the GOP starts to wake up. The real name for the "Conservatives" would be "The John Birch Society" that was welcomed into the GOP in the 80s. Really bad choice by the then leader of the Republican Party, George Walker Bush. Until then, the John Birch Society wasn't invited to ANY GOP ANYTHING.
Tea Party Patriots Foundation
Don't confuse the Tea Party with the John Birch Society. It has a few corresponding points with the John Birch Society. But it makes a whole lot more sense if the original doctrine for the TeaParty was actually followed. But it's no longer what it was. It's doctrine is officially the same on paper as it was when I was once a Tea Party Member. But the John Birchers jumped into it and it's been a mess every since. It's become untenable with all the obstructions it now has but has never been actually written down. Like I said, if the Teaparty were to follow it's own written doctrines it would be the best thing since peanut butter.
Now, let's look at the John Birch Society. One of the found fathers was the Koch Brothers father but his Sons are members. Joe McCarthy would have been a member , and so is Ted Cruz. Cruz claims to be from the Republicans and Tea Party but his support in Texas is for the John Birch Society. It isn't a coincidence that the John Birch Society was formed the year AFTER McCarthy died. McCarthy is infamous. He died in 1957. In 1958 the John Birch Society was formed and had many of the same ideals that McCarthy had. It's so right wing, it's off the scale. In 1860, it would be part of the Democratic Party except it would still be so off the scale that the 1860 Democratic Party wouldn't want it either. This is partly why the Republicans went from a loose handful of like minded people to a major party. If John D Rockefeller were alive today, he would be a John Bircher and the KOCH brothers would not have the power they have today but nothing else would change. One of the first things to get thrown out would the Sherman Antitrust act passed by a republican congress and signed into law by President Harris also a Republican in 1890. That was used to reign in the power grabs and more of Standard Oil and many of the Robber Barons for the railroads and Land Grabbers. Read up on John D. Rockefeller. It's an interesting read. Read up on President Harris as well to see the other side. If President Harris were alive today he would be a middle of the road Democrat like Teddy R and Eisenhower.
Now, are you really a conservative or a John Birch Society spy?
Nice effort and welcome to the USMB Daryl..
Your revisionist history lesson has failed miserably but luckily your reality based history lesson has arrived..
A Short History of Democrats, Republicans, and Racism
View attachment 150475
Your cite is correct. But it leaves out the whys and the hows. I filled it in. Just how did it get where it is now? History is a wonderful thing and shouldn't be cherry picked.
Eh, I'm not really in the mood to do a lot of research on your chosen .. opinion mostly/facts not so much ..
Maybe some other time when I'm not posting on several threads...
Then I guess you will just have to take my word on it since I bothered to do the research. I will admit that what I wrote was from a few years of research. And I omitted the sites that were pretty well biased or just plain untrue. When you get the time, take bits of what I wrote and search for it. As I said, it's taken me a couple of years to get to that point. Especially with all the garbage that's out there.
However that's not the con-federate flag....this is:
Why do we care if you wave your silly flag around?Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Because of that pesky Liberal First Amendment. But don't worry --- that's under review.
So sad you equate Liberal in the sense it was used when the 1st Amendment was written and the bastardized version of it Leftists have created.
The leftists meaning of "under review" means if we don't like it, no one should be able to do it. I thought you lefties claimed to be for freedom. I guess that only applies when someone is exercising it in a manner in which you approve.
I fly several flags of the Confederacy. Interested is trying to take them down?
No. I don't believe in fetishes and idolatry. That shit is for losers.
I use the original-and-still-standing definition of "Liberal". Interested in trying to take it down?
The modern day use of Liberal isn't anywhere close to the original.
Interested in trying to take my flags down? Do you have the guts big mouth? I've heard more times than I can count that those flags shouldn't be able to fly yet I've had no one attempt to do so. I'll fly it in the middle of the public street where you live and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
You still crying about that?Those that call themselves Liberals today aren't anything like the classical Liberals of the late 1700. Those that call themselves Liberals today are actually Leftists and they're the ones that demand acceptance of their social aberrations.Liberal as defined in the 1700's meant almost the same as Anarchist (no government control). Liberal now means using government to liberally enforce the acceptance of THEIR social aberrations.
The difference between a Liberal of today and a classical Liberal is the level of government involvement one thinks should exist. Leftists aren't about government involvement, they're about government controlling the people.
You have a strange definition of Liberal. Another word for Liberal might be "Loose". The problem with all this is the fruitcakes are the ones making the label and anyone not thinking exactly the way they think they should is something bad. So they have to place a label on it.
More than 2 people that gather together starts to know they need to make rules to get along. Fist fights might determine it between just 2 people but that will only allow the winner to make the rules. Even so, with 2 people that just got finished the knock down and dragout, at least one rule will be made and that is that the winner makes all the rules until the next mud and guts blowout.
These rules can also be called "Regulations". Or to regulate. Too few and you have way too many knock down and drag outs. To many and you end up with too many down in the blood and the guts sooner or later. The ideal is to find the sweet spot. But that sweet spot seems to change from time to time and the "Regulations" need to be adjusted to prevent things from getting out of hand one way or the other.
The USA is just too large and complicated to not regulate almost anything that crosses state lines or affects the majority of the population. We NEED regulations to prevent the knock down and drag outs that would result without them. Too few and the Biggest and Baddest will pretty much run havoc over the weaker ones. Too many and the masses start to look for a big and baddy to represent them.
So, all you fruitcakes, you need to stop with the labeling and get off your dead asses and find that sweet spot. Your way probably isn't going to prevent too many rough and tumbles.
A liberal of today is someone that wants the government to play a greater role in society. A leftist is someone that wants to use that government involvement to CONTROL society.
Nnnnnnnnnope. Once again the intellectual sloth is yours.
Those that call themselves Liberals today aren't anything like the classical Liberals of the late 1700. Those that call themselves Liberals today are actually Leftists and they're the ones that demand acceptance of their social aberrations.Liberal as defined in the 1700's meant almost the same as Anarchist (no government control). Liberal now means using government to liberally enforce the acceptance of THEIR social aberrations.
The difference between a Liberal of today and a classical Liberal is the level of government involvement one thinks should exist. Leftists aren't about government involvement, they're about government controlling the people.
Again, there's no such thing as "classical Liberal". Liberal is Liberal is Liberal. Appending "classical" is nothing but a bullshit Doublethink adjective strapped on to try to make a term you find inconvenient into the opposite of itself. You can't do that. Get off your synaptic ass and quit misusing the term.
You after all are the same wag who keeps dropping the term "NL" can can't explain what it means either.
Ignoring classical makes one think that the view of the level of federal government involvement promoted by the founding fathers is the same as promoted by the Liberals of today.
I don't need to explain what NL means. I believe you already know because it's what you are. I have explained it. The USMB filter refuses to allow it.
I love the color red------and am especially fond of the combination ----red and blue
of course, it is all a matter of individual taste
Why do we care if you wave your silly flag around?Isn't that Confedarate flag supporting racism, white supremecy and another completely different state ?
Because of that pesky Liberal First Amendment. But don't worry --- that's under review.
So sad you equate Liberal in the sense it was used when the 1st Amendment was written and the bastardized version of it Leftists have created.
The leftists meaning of "under review" means if we don't like it, no one should be able to do it. I thought you lefties claimed to be for freedom. I guess that only applies when someone is exercising it in a manner in which you approve.
I fly several flags of the Confederacy. Interested is trying to take them down?
No. I don't believe in fetishes and idolatry. That shit is for losers.
I use the original-and-still-standing definition of "Liberal". Interested in trying to take it down?
The modern day use of Liberal isn't anywhere close to the original.
Interested in trying to take my flags down? Do you have the guts big mouth? I've heard more times than I can count that those flags shouldn't be able to fly yet I've had no one attempt to do so. I'll fly it in the middle of the public street where you live and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
You still crying about that?Those that call themselves Liberals today aren't anything like the classical Liberals of the late 1700. Those that call themselves Liberals today are actually Leftists and they're the ones that demand acceptance of their social aberrations.
The difference between a Liberal of today and a classical Liberal is the level of government involvement one thinks should exist. Leftists aren't about government involvement, they're about government controlling the people.
You have a strange definition of Liberal. Another word for Liberal might be "Loose". The problem with all this is the fruitcakes are the ones making the label and anyone not thinking exactly the way they think they should is something bad. So they have to place a label on it.
More than 2 people that gather together starts to know they need to make rules to get along. Fist fights might determine it between just 2 people but that will only allow the winner to make the rules. Even so, with 2 people that just got finished the knock down and dragout, at least one rule will be made and that is that the winner makes all the rules until the next mud and guts blowout.
These rules can also be called "Regulations". Or to regulate. Too few and you have way too many knock down and drag outs. To many and you end up with too many down in the blood and the guts sooner or later. The ideal is to find the sweet spot. But that sweet spot seems to change from time to time and the "Regulations" need to be adjusted to prevent things from getting out of hand one way or the other.
The USA is just too large and complicated to not regulate almost anything that crosses state lines or affects the majority of the population. We NEED regulations to prevent the knock down and drag outs that would result without them. Too few and the Biggest and Baddest will pretty much run havoc over the weaker ones. Too many and the masses start to look for a big and baddy to represent them.
So, all you fruitcakes, you need to stop with the labeling and get off your dead asses and find that sweet spot. Your way probably isn't going to prevent too many rough and tumbles.
A liberal of today is someone that wants the government to play a greater role in society. A leftist is someone that wants to use that government involvement to CONTROL society.
Nnnnnnnnnope. Once again the intellectual sloth is yours.
Those that call themselves Liberals today aren't anything like the classical Liberals of the late 1700. Those that call themselves Liberals today are actually Leftists and they're the ones that demand acceptance of their social aberrations.Liberal as defined in the 1700's meant almost the same as Anarchist (no government control). Liberal now means using government to liberally enforce the acceptance of THEIR social aberrations.
The difference between a Liberal of today and a classical Liberal is the level of government involvement one thinks should exist. Leftists aren't about government involvement, they're about government controlling the people.
Again, there's no such thing as "classical Liberal". Liberal is Liberal is Liberal. Appending "classical" is nothing but a bullshit Doublethink adjective strapped on to try to make a term you find inconvenient into the opposite of itself. You can't do that. Get off your synaptic ass and quit misusing the term.
You after all are the same wag who keeps dropping the term "NL" can can't explain what it means either.
Ignoring classical makes one think that the view of the level of federal government involvement promoted by the founding fathers is the same as promoted by the Liberals of today.
I don't need to explain what NL means. I believe you already know because it's what you are. I have explained it. The USMB filter refuses to allow it.
I am sure all my history teacher are dead by now.
If you think that is the Confederate Flag then your History Teacher should be fired.
That is the Flag Robert E. Lee flew and even though it was incorporated into the Confederate Flag it itself is not the actual Confederate Flag!
I am sure all my history teacher are dead by now.
If you think that is the Confederate Flag then your History Teacher should be fired.
That is the Flag Robert E. Lee flew and even though it was incorporated into the Confederate Flag it itself is not the actual Confederate Flag!
It's time for another History Lesson. My Crap Meter went off scale on this one.
When the Republican party was formed, it was dead set against slavery. It was also the Progressive Party. During that time the Dems were the conservatives in the way you use that word now. But starting in 1932, a shift happened. The Big Money and Corporations bailed out of the Democratic Party and changed to the Republican Party. They overthrew the Progressives and changed the party. That change was not completed until the 1970s. This should explain the changes that Eisenhower pushed for but Reagan didn't so much. The Dems gave the Progressives a place which changed the Dem Party since they lost any and all power in the Republican Party. This also why human rights are not real important to the Reps. The Republican Party is what the old Democratic Party was and vice versa. What caused this change was FDRs policies starting in 1929. The old Democratic Party went out of it's mind. They couldn't do a thing about FDR. His WPA and CCC camps were considered treasonous by the powers that thought they controlled the Democratic Party. What they couldn't fathom was the fact there were over 3 million people out of work, cold and hungry with children and they were ARMED. The US was very, very close to an armed revolution.
To give you and idea. If Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower were alive today they would be middle of the pack Democrats. And not leaning towards the center. The center has moved to the point that there are now 2 centers and they are far apart. Neither party represents that dead space but almost all Americans fall securely into that voided area. The Democratic party leans towards socialism (No, Dorathy, they aren't really socialists) and the Republican party lean towards Corporatocracy (no, cupcake, the Republican party is not really a Corporatocracy).
The Democrats know that they need to move towards old center but can't quite figure out how to get there with the controlling factions they have now. The Democrat leaders have more in common with the "Conservatives" than the majority of the Democrats. That brand of Democratic is a Corporatocracy just controlled by other corporations than the Conservatives.
On the Republic side, it's made up of not one but two parties. One calls itself "Conservatives" and the other side calls itself "GOP" The GOP far outnumbers the "Conservatives" and the "Conservatives call the "GOPers" RINOs (Republican in Name Only). The "Conservatives" aren't really conservatives. The GOPers are the real conservatives. Much like the ruling people in the Democratic party aren't really Democrats. The "Conservatives (in name only) has been losing power very quickly as the GOP starts to wake up. The real name for the "Conservatives" would be "The John Birch Society" that was welcomed into the GOP in the 80s. Really bad choice by the then leader of the Republican Party, George Walker Bush. Until then, the John Birch Society wasn't invited to ANY GOP ANYTHING.
Tea Party Patriots Foundation
Don't confuse the Tea Party with the John Birch Society. It has a few corresponding points with the John Birch Society. But it makes a whole lot more sense if the original doctrine for the TeaParty was actually followed. But it's no longer what it was. It's doctrine is officially the same on paper as it was when I was once a Tea Party Member. But the John Birchers jumped into it and it's been a mess every since. It's become untenable with all the obstructions it now has but has never been actually written down. Like I said, if the Teaparty were to follow it's own written doctrines it would be the best thing since peanut butter.
Now, let's look at the John Birch Society. One of the found fathers was the Koch Brothers father but his Sons are members. Joe McCarthy would have been a member , and so is Ted Cruz. Cruz claims to be from the Republicans and Tea Party but his support in Texas is for the John Birch Society. It isn't a coincidence that the John Birch Society was formed the year AFTER McCarthy died. McCarthy is infamous. He died in 1957. In 1958 the John Birch Society was formed and had many of the same ideals that McCarthy had. It's so right wing, it's off the scale. In 1860, it would be part of the Democratic Party except it would still be so off the scale that the 1860 Democratic Party wouldn't want it either. This is partly why the Republicans went from a loose handful of like minded people to a major party. If John D Rockefeller were alive today, he would be a John Bircher and the KOCH brothers would not have the power they have today but nothing else would change. One of the first things to get thrown out would the Sherman Antitrust act passed by a republican congress and signed into law by President Harris also a Republican in 1890. That was used to reign in the power grabs and more of Standard Oil and many of the Robber Barons for the railroads and Land Grabbers. Read up on John D. Rockefeller. It's an interesting read. Read up on President Harris as well to see the other side. If President Harris were alive today he would be a middle of the road Democrat like Teddy R and Eisenhower.
Now, are you really a conservative or a John Birch Society spy?
Nice effort and welcome to the USMB Daryl..
Your revisionist history lesson has failed miserably but luckily your reality based history lesson has arrived..
A Short History of Democrats, Republicans, and Racism
View attachment 150475
Your cite is correct. But it leaves out the whys and the hows. I filled it in. Just how did it get where it is now? History is a wonderful thing and shouldn't be cherry picked.
Eh, I'm not really in the mood to do a lot of research on your chosen .. opinion mostly/facts not so much ..
Maybe some other time when I'm not posting on several threads...
Then I guess you will just have to take my word on it since I bothered to do the research. I will admit that what I wrote was from a few years of research. And I omitted the sites that were pretty well biased or just plain untrue. When you get the time, take bits of what I wrote and search for it. As I said, it's taken me a couple of years to get to that point. Especially with all the garbage that's out there.
You seem like a reasonable fellow, I'm thinkin I'll take you up on that.
The problem with multifaceted posts is that they require too much dedication of time. There are areas around here for that kinda intensity but for most forums it's quick and to the point unless you plan on being disappointed...
Just giving you my opinion and pleased to meet you...
