Ted Cruz and wife harrassed

[*bfine32*]

(09-28-2018, 06:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The discussion was not limited to politicians.

Well I suppose if one ignores the title of the thread, and the discussion up to the point you interjected abortion Drs then you'd have a point. 

Any thoughts on Jim Crow? 

[Dill]

(09-28-2018, 06:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well I suppose if one ignores the title of the thread, and the discussion up to the point you interjected abortion Drs then you'd have a point. 

Any thoughts on Jim Crow? 

You want to segregate abortion drs.?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-28-2018, 10:48 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Abortion doctors WERE murdered.


My answer is "neither".  What is Vlad's and yours?

The same as it's always been, that neither side of the ideological spectrum has a monopoly on shitheads.

[fredtoast]

(09-25-2018, 10:07 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: It's ok now to harrass and intimidate someone who is different than you.

This is the left, this has always been the left.

I've lost all respect for every lefty on this forum.

Some one needs a history lesson.

The RIGHT opposed women's right to vote.

The RIGHT oppose the civil rights movement.

The RIGHT opposed interracial marriage.

The RIGHT opposed same sex marriage.

The RIGHT is the side that has historically hated on people different from them while the LEFT has fought for equality.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

(10-01-2018, 02:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Some one needs a history lesson.

The RIGHT opposed women's right to vote.

The RIGHT oppose the civil rights movement.

The RIGHT opposed interracial marriage.

The RIGHT opposed same sex marriage.

The RIGHT is the side that has historically hated on people different from them while the LEFT has fought for equality.

Rewriting history again?

The only thing the Right opposed is same sex marriage, everything else was opposed by the Left. I amazed you didn't throw in how it was the right who opposed freedom, lol.

I guess if you continue to say these lies, and you will because that's what the left does, the stupid in this country will believe it...eventually.

Yes, I'm calling you a liar Fred because that's what your post is, a big fat lie.

Oh, here comes the "Political Switch" after Civil Rights was passed...which is just another lie.

[Benton]

(10-01-2018, 02:59 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Rewriting history again?

The only thing the Right opposed is same sex marriage, everything else was opposed by the Left. I amazed you didn't throw in how it was the right who opposed freedom, lol.

I guess if you continue to say these lies, and you will because that's what the left does, the stupid in this country will believe it...eventually.

Yes, I'm calling you a liar Fred because that's what your post is, a big fat lie.

Oh, here comes the "Political Switch" after Civil Rights was passed...which is just another lie.

Well, no, but that's the meme, so people keep rolling with it.

For Civil Rights was roughly (averaging the houses) 67% Dems, 81% Republicans. It was a north/south thing, with about 90% in favor from northern states, considerably less from southern states. The Dems against it were — if I'm remembering right — mostly from the Dixiecrats, a minority of Dems in favor of segregation. They are all from states that after the civil rights vote flipped to Republican strongholds. Only four or five of the lawmakers became Republicans.

Fred's not lying, you're mistaken.

You're also mistaken on interracial marriage, if Pew is correct in polling (and they may not be).
http://americablog.com/2017/05/republicans-twice-likely-find-interracial-marriage-bad.html

Same sex and women's rights, that's pretty obviously been opposed or by Republicans throughout the years.

[*bfine32*]

(10-01-2018, 02:59 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Rewriting history again?

The only thing the Right opposed is same sex marriage, everything else was opposed by the Left. I amazed you didn't throw in how it was the right who opposed freedom, lol.

I guess if you continue to say these lies, and you will because that's what the left does, the stupid in this country will believe it...eventually.

Yes, I'm calling you a liar Fred because that's what your post is, a big fat lie.

Oh, here comes the "Political Switch" after Civil Rights was passed...which is just another lie.

You forget, the parties switched during the President Goldwater's terms. Even though members of my family have been Democrats and politically active for generation.

WTS, I'm not sure what it has to do with the OP.  

[fredtoast]

(10-01-2018, 02:59 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Oh, here comes the "Political Switch" after Civil Rights was passed...which is just another lie.

Want to make a sig bet?


You believe it strong enough to call me a liar then you believe it strong enough to make a sig bet don't you?

[Benton]

(10-01-2018, 04:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You forget, the parties switched during the President Goldwater's terms. Even though members of my family have been Democrats and politically active for generation.

WTS, I'm not sure what it has to do with the OP.  

The Emerging Republican Majority wasn't too far off. It wasn't completely spot on, but I don't think Phillips could account for global cultural changes that were coming, or technological changes. But either way, he pretty well picked the transition of several states to backing GOP candidates, much of it due to race.

From a 1970’s article on how the GOP was going to turn things around.

https://www.nytimes.com/1970/05/17/archives/nixons-southern-strategy-its-all-in-the-charts.html

Quote:Phillips had one conspicuous campaign success—the urging of an Outer South Strategy aimed at capturing Florida, Tennessee, North Carolina and Virginia, as opposed to the Deep South Strategy that had carried Wallace territory for Goldwater in 1964, but at the cost of frightening away mil lions of potential voters else where.

“My argument was this: Your outer Southerners who live in the Ozark and Appala chian mountain ranges and in the Piedmont upcountry—and now in urban‐suburban Florida and Texas—have always had different interests than the Negrophobe plantation owners of the Black Belt. This is a less extreme conservative group. It adheres with other Republican constituen cies across the country and can be appealed to without fragmenting the coalition. When you are after political converts, start with the less extreme and wait for the extremists to come into line when their alternatives collapse.”

…

But it was a Janus‐like ma jority, Phillips asserts, and the side facing left developed a liberal over‐thrust dispropor tionate to the ethnic and geo graphic realities that under lay the coalition. A new ethnic disturbance—the emergence of the Negro‐Latino—finally shattered it. The Democratic party, veteran accumulator of minorities that it was, tried to accumulate by rote the Negro minority and trumpeted its cause through the tried formulae of patronage for its spokesmen, government aid, social planning and bureau cratic intervention. But since the grievances of the colored minorities were caused in part by the exploitation and exclu sion practiced against them by older Democratic consti tuencies, something had to give, and did. The two bul warks of the old coalition, working‐class Catholics and the descendants of the Con federacy, began to defect from of its identification with the newcomers.
These defectors have not yet lodged permanently in the suspect G.O.P. Many of them are in way stations—the Con servative party of New York, the Wallace movement. But they have left the Democrats and Phillips feels they have no place to go in the end but the Republican party. Hence, the emerging Republican ma jority that will dominate American politics until the year 2004.

[Dill]

(10-01-2018, 02:59 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Rewriting history again?

The only thing the Right opposed is same sex marriage, everything else was opposed by the Left. I amazed you didn't throw in how it was the right who opposed freedom, lol.

I guess if you continue to say these lies, and you will because that's what the left does, the stupid in this country will believe it...eventually.

Yes, I'm calling you a liar Fred because that's what your post is, a big fat lie.

Oh, here comes the "Political Switch" after Civil Rights was passed...which is just another lie.

Very surprising claims here. You speak of "rewriting," but I wonder where you are getting your history.

Why would "the left," with its advocacy of equality, oppose the women's vote or equal rights for black Americans? Why would the right, with its advocacy of tradition, the status quo, and various forms of racial and gender inequality, support such rights? 

And what "political switch" are you referring to?  Perhaps the shift in party composition which occurred when the Democratic party came down hard on the side of civil rights for blacks in 1964-65?  Some conservatives (e.g., Ann Coulter) like to say "the Democrats supported segregation while we are the party of Lincoln" and such like.  (Dinesh D'Souza has even written a book linking the Democratic party to Nazis and Lincoln to Trump--The Big Lie--perhaps you have been reading that?)

But there was a time when the Democratic party was chock full of conservatives and the Republican party included many liberals.  Once you switch the terms from party labels to "liberals" or "conservatives"  or "left" and "right," the confusion disappears quickly. "Conservatives" have consistently opposed civil rights whenever they have been a matter of legislation. Since 1965, conservatives have concentrated themselves in the Republican party and kicked out the liberals. Over the last 20 years, the ultra-conservatives have even been pushing out traditional conservatives.  It is now the party of Trump--of border walls and Muslim bans and acceptance of misogyny in its leaders.

The question of who opposed what and when is an empirical question which can be answered by determining, for example, who marched with King in 1963 and who called him a Communist?  What were the stated beliefs of people who supported women's rights in 1919 and the beliefs of those who did not?  Was it "leftists" who said women were not intellectually equal to men, or that a woman's place was in the home?

I remember, back in the 50s and 60s, when fringe anti-communists like Billy James Hargis insisted that Nazis were really "leftists." That could work now,  given that contemporary Americans' sense of history is much weakened compared to the 50s and 60s. We live now in a post-truth era in which all one has to do is present "alternative facts" and people can chose the version of history which confirms their ideological leanings. LOL like all facts are equal, and so alternative facts of Regnery Press books are equal to whatever an international community of professional researchers (who cross-examine each other's work) has agreed on for decades.

[*bfine32*]

Anytime you want a Dem to go into full spin mode remind them the GOP is the party of civil rights and the Dems were the party of the Jim Crow South. The Dems still try to enslave minorities, they do it to get their votes.

[Dill]

(10-01-2018, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Anytime you want a Dem to go into full spin mode remind them the GOP is the party of civil rights and the Dems were the party of the Jim Crow South. The Dems still try to enslave minorities, they do it to get their votes.

Ha ha, now vetted, professionally researched history is "spin" and a D'souza movie is--what exactly--proof that Dems still enslave minorities?

Or perhaps a way of ignoring troubling details in well researched history?   Both?

LOL the Party of border walls and Muslim bans, lead by the groper in chief, is the party of civil rights?

MUST BE if Lincoln freed the slaves in 1863!!!

[fredtoast]

(10-01-2018, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  The Dems still try to enslave minorities, they do it to get their votes. 

I'd accuse you of extremism if you hadn't already told me what a "fair and balanced" centrist you are.

[Dill]

(10-01-2018, 06:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I'd accuse you of extremism if you hadn't already told me what a "fair and balanced" centrist you are.

Jackson and the Klan.  "LEFTISTS" every one.

[Benton]

(10-01-2018, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Anytime you want a Dem to go into full spin mode remind them the GOP is the party of civil rights and the Dems were the party of the Jim Crow South. 

Mostly because it's untrue. The right's re-write of history is one of the most disturbing things that's come about in the last 25ish years. 

Like when Armey touted that Jamestown failed because of socialism, and it almost destroyed the country. (Which is utter crap as it was a corporate venture with the goal of making profit for England). Or when the GOP took on took on AP History material because they made American history "too negative" for not showing only the high points. Hell, in this instance Strom Thurmond was famous for his filibuster, and leaving the Democrats because they weren't pro-segregation enough and the party he joined still touts him as one of its best members... while glossing over the racism.

[*bfine32*]

(10-01-2018, 06:20 PM)Dill Wrote: Ha ha, now vetted, professionally researched history is "spin" and a D'souza movie is--what exactly--proof that Dems still enslave minorities?

Or perhaps a way of ignoring troubling details in well researched history?   Both?

LOL the Party of border walls and Muslim bans, lead by the groper in chief, is the party of civil rights?  

MUST BE if Lincoln freed the slaves in 1863!!!

(10-01-2018, 06:40 PM)Benton Wrote: Mostly because it's untrue. The right's re-write of history is one of the most disturbing things that's come about in the last 25ish years. 

Like when Armey touted that Jamestown failed because of socialism, and it almost destroyed the country. (Which is utter crap as it was a corporate venture with the goal of making profit for England). Or when the GOP took on took on AP History material because they made American history "too negative" for not showing only the high points. Hell, in this instance Strom Thurmond was famous for his filibuster, and leaving the Democrats because they weren't pro-segregation enough and the party he joined still touts him as one of its best members... while glossing over the racism.

I don't blame you guys, roll with it.

I can see in about 40 years folks will be asking was it really the Democratic party that enslaved the poor by keeping them dependent on the government; there will be a good heated lefty saying; "Yeah, well that was before we traded sides". 

[Benton]

(10-01-2018, 07:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I don't blame you guys, roll with it.

Thanks. It's good you're supportive of advocating what really happened and not that false narrative the right keeps trying to spread. There's hope ffor you yet.

[*bfine32*]

(10-01-2018, 09:41 PM)Benton Wrote: Thanks. It's good you're supportive of advocating what really happened and not that false narrative the right keeps trying to spread. There's hope ffor you yet.

Nah,  just trying to make your day a little brighter by enabling your believe that it's "false narrative" that the Dems were the policy makers of segregation and the Jim Crow South.  It's also false that the GOP was the party of the civil rights movement. 

Folks are allowed their own opinions; unfortunately, they are not allowed their own facts. 

[Benton]

(10-01-2018, 09:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nah,  just trying to make your day a little brighter by enabling your believe that it's "false narrative" that the Dems were the policy makers of segregation and the Jim Crow South.  It's also false that the GOP was the party of the civil rights movement. 

Folks are allowed their own opinions; unfortunately, they are not allowed their own facts. 

Well, it was introduced by a dem, signed by a dem president, and passed by a majority from each party. The whole "Democrats are trying to repress blacks and the gop tried to save them" is, historically, a crock of crap. 

 But the gop keeps rewriting history, so there are a few who buy into it. 

[*bfine32*]

(10-01-2018, 09:56 PM)Benton Wrote: Well, it was introduced by a dem, signed by a dem president, and passed by a majority from each party. The whole "Democrats are trying to repress blacks and the gop tried to save them" is, historically, a crock of crap. 

 But the gop keeps rewriting history, so there are a few who buy into it. 

See, you're feeling better already.


BTW, anybody have any thoughts on Cruz and his wife getting harrassed?