Kids Protest thier own Graduation

[Dill]

(05-22-2017, 04:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: AAAHHHH, the old "We switched sides" fallacy. And that has zero to do with your saying every political party thinking they were right.

The Republican party was on the side of freeing slaves and the CRA. Pretty sure the Democratic President that signed the CRA did it begrudgingly. But it makes folks sound more awesome if they can say Well, if I'd been alive back then; I'd be on the other side because they were more awesome.

My family has been involved in local politics for over 100 years and they've always been Democrat; there was no "switch". It just reads good.

Lol, the old "switched topics" ploy, made famous by Ann Coulter and Dinesh D'souza. I start talking about liberals and conservatives. You start talking about Republicans and Democrats "back then," as if there were some eternal correspondence between parties and party ideals, as if each party has always been wholly liberal or conservative.

To maintain that correspondence you have to say liberals supported segregation and conservatives fought to end it. I don't think even you will go that far, but if you do I have the history ready for you.

Maybe you better explain what you think the "switched sides fallacy" is. I think it is only a "fallacy" in the bubble, and I think it refers to the post-1965 US, when Republicans began courting the segregation vote, the first major step in creating the reactionary, conservative populist Republican party of today--a long ways from the party of progressives like Lincoln and T Roosevelt. For the last decade conservatives have been working overtime to prove what happened didn't. They have convinced a lot of other conservatives.

A generation of historians, sociologists and political scientists will be so alarmed to hear that ONE Democrat FAMILY never changed sides.

PS Also are you saying there is a political party somewhere which believes its policies and ideals aren't the right ones, the ones which should prevail in law and the courts? If not, then what are you on about?