06-16-2015, 03:56 PM
Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise
›
Off Topic Forums
›
Politics & Religion 2.0
›
P & R Archive
Jeb Bush Wants to govern like LBJ
Jeb Bush Wants to govern like LBJ
Thread Rating:
|
Jeb Bush Wants to govern like LBJ
|
06-16-2015, 03:59 PM
and a master of getting shit done. Did you even read the ***** article before you posted it? Even Breitbart acknowledges he's referring to his style of handling Congress, not his policies.
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg) ![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png) 
06-16-2015, 04:35 PM
What, go to war for profit, and have his political adversaries killed?
"Better send those refunds..." 
06-16-2015, 05:03 PM
I also heard he planned to approach campaign finance reform as if he were Taft!
06-16-2015, 06:27 PM
(06-16-2015, 03:59 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: and a master of getting shit done. Did you even read the ***** article before you posted it? Even Breitbart acknowledges he's referring to his style of handling Congress, not his policies. "Getting stuff done" isn't always a good recipe. It's gotta be the right stuff and you gotta know what to not do... 
06-16-2015, 06:33 PM
(06-16-2015, 06:27 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: "Getting stuff done" isn't always a good recipe. It's gotta be the right stuff and you gotta know what to not do... Like the Civil Rights Act and stuff like that... 
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif) Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
06-16-2015, 06:44 PM
06-16-2015, 07:05 PM
(06-16-2015, 06:44 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He was forced to sign that... He would have gotten his veto overridden. I thought you said he was a progressive. CRA is a progressive piece of legislation.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
06-16-2015, 09:24 PM
(06-16-2015, 06:44 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He was forced to sign that... He would have gotten his veto overridden.  http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2004/summer/civil-rights-act-1.html Just five days after John F. Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, Lyndon B. Johnson went before Congress and spoke to a nation still stunned from the events in Dallas that had shocked the world. Johnson made it clear he would pursue the slain President's legislative agenda—especially a particular bill that Kennedy had sought but that faced strong and vehement opposition from powerful southern Democrats. "No memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy's memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long," Johnson told the lawmakers. Then, serving notice on his fellow southern Democrats that they were in for a fight, he said: "We have talked long enough in this country about equal rights. We have talked for one hundred years or more. It is time now to write the next chapter, and to write it in the books of law." That chapter became the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Forty years ago, Johnson set out to do what he had done in 1957 and 1960 as Senate majority leader—steer a civil rights bill through a Congress controlled to a great extent by southern Democrats who so strongly opposed it. But he was no longer majority leader and could not buttonhole wavering members in the cloakroom or do horse-trading with them to get what he wanted or promise rewards or punishments. This is the story of how Lyndon Johnson set the stage for this legislation years before and how he choreographed passage of this historic measure in 1964—a year when the civil rights movement was rapidly gaining strength and when racial unrest was playing a role in the presidential campaign. The story is often told, but this account is supplemented with details discovered in recent years with the opening of Johnson's White House telephone recordings and with excerpts from the oral history collection at the Lyndon B. Johnson Library in Austin, Texas. (06-16-2015, 07:05 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I thought you said he was a progressive. CRA is a progressive piece of legislation. He also said Paul was a libertarian.... Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
06-17-2015, 01:56 PM
06-17-2015, 02:33 PM
06-17-2015, 04:13 PM
(06-17-2015, 01:56 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: civil rights act was good but not all of it.... Not all progressive policies are bad.... Just the ones that take away individual freedoms. Just about every law out there infringes on the individual liberties of someone.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
06-17-2015, 09:12 PM
06-17-2015, 09:23 PM
(06-17-2015, 02:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What was the bad part? I know your going to take this the wrong way... But I am going to try and see if I am wrong.... I think the part about public accomodation for private business is an issue. I know we needed it at the time .... But I think a business owner should be able to deny service to anyone without them crying foul. So maybe that needed to be tweaked to give some owners protections they have if they wanna deny service to white people.
06-17-2015, 10:19 PM
(06-17-2015, 09:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I know your going to take this the wrong way... But I am going to try and see if I am wrong.... How could I possibly take this the wrong way? If we needed it then we still need it now.
06-17-2015, 10:34 PM
(06-17-2015, 10:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How could I possibly take this the wrong way? No we don't .... Back then we had whites trying to keep blacks in a seperate world. Now we have whites "identifying" as black. There is no need to oppress business owners anymore. 
06-18-2015, 06:15 AM
(06-17-2015, 10:34 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No we don't .... Back then we had whites trying to keep blacks in a seperate world. Now we have whites "identifying" as black. There is no need to oppress business owners anymore. Since when does treating all paying customers the same qualify as oppression? I'd be curious to hear any examples of this so called "oppression" and how it tangibly hurt business owners who were treating people equally.
06-18-2015, 07:36 AM
(06-17-2015, 10:34 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No we don't .... Back then we had whites trying to keep blacks in a seperate world. Now we have whites "identifying" as black. There is no need to oppress business owners anymore. It's only oppression to a business owner if a business owner wants to be one of those keeping blacks in a separate world, making the law necessary.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
06-18-2015, 07:41 AM
(06-17-2015, 09:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You know what we are talking about there. Honestly, I don't. I'm trying to figure out where you draw the line from "good" progressivism to "bad".
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
06-18-2015, 09:38 AM
(06-18-2015, 07:41 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Honestly, I don't. I'm trying to figure out where you draw the line from "good" progressivism to "bad". Does it cost (or potentially cost) Lucy money or not allow him to discriminate against any group he sees fit as an individual? Progressive. Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)
