Actually, I should not say generally, but rather in most cases. This is a serious question, though.

* Fact: Lincoln (a Republican) led the freedom of the slaves.

* Fact: Lyndon B. Johnson (a Democrat) generated hundreds of social programs in the mid-60s. However, LBJ also was quoted as saying, "When we're done here, those n****** will be voting Democratic for the next 200 years".

So, what's the deal here?

Because they're ignorant. The "Black leaders" like to maintain power, and since the Democrats have given them such power for quite a while now, they will do whatever is necessary to further enforce the black community's dependence upon them (Welfare, basically).

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

Political Question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is a serious question, though.

Because the entire conservative movement is a scam to defend the status quo of land-owning white males. Take a look at the last Republican administration. They did a good job at proving how they don't support smaller government, how they don't support individual freedoms, and how they don't support fiscal responsibility, which are pretty much the cornerstones of conservative politics and rhetoric.

Instead they focus on taking advantage of the most ignorant and selfish elements of our society [tea party] by peddling fear, disinformation, and graft [fox news].

Maybe "black people in general" learned a historical lesson about that status quo of white, land-owning males.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Political Question Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > This is a serious question, though.
>
> Because the entire conservative movement is a scam
> to defend the status quo of land-owning white
> males. Take a look at the last Republican
> administration. They did a good job at proving
> how they don't support smaller government, how
> they don't support individual freedoms, and how
> they don't support fiscal responsibility, which
> are pretty much the cornerstones of conservative
> politics and rhetoric.
>
> Instead they focus on taking advantage of the most
> ignorant and selfish elements of our society by
> peddling fear, disinformation, and graft .


All propaganda. All applies equally to the Democrats. Just replace "Tea Party" with "Black People".

And just to set the record straight, Lincoln hated black people, used the N-word all the time to describe them, told lots of racial jokes, and cooked up a scheme to deport them all the Africa. He didn't start the Civil War to free black people, he did it to cement the power of the central government. And the Gettysburg Address came very late in the war when he needed a cause to rally political support. Lincoln was guilty of multiple war crimes and violations of the Constitution, but historians rate our presidents based on how many deaths they are responsible for; the more the better. Lincoln gets a two-fer, since all the people he killed were Americans, no foreigners required for that stupid war.

The Republican and Democrat Parties are basically the same, just two different wings of the Statist Party, a tag team of jackoffs.

RACIST NIGGER 'TheMeeper' wrote :
-----------------------------------------------
> "Because the entire conservative movement is a scam to
> defend the status quo of land-owning white males."

FIRST OF ALL, THE USE OF THE TERM 'STATUS QUO' DOES NOT MAKE YOU
SEEM SMART OR ANY MORE RELEVANT. OKAY YOU STUPID BABBOON?

EVEN IF IT WAS, JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE A LAZY MINORITY WITHOUT LAND,
IT DOESN'T MAKE THE PARTY BULLSHIT LIARS LIKE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS

> "Take a look at the last Republican administration.
> They did a good job at proving how they don't support smaller government,

GREAT LACK OF AN EXAMPLE

> "how they don't support individual freedoms,

YOU MEAN LIKE OBAMA CARE, OR "THE PUBLIC OPTION" YOU MORONS
TRIED SHOVING DOWN OUR THROATS? OBAMA CARE = "CHANGE" with NO "HOPE".

> "and how they don't support fiscal responsibility,

ANOTHER GREAT LACK OF AN EXAMPLE.
BUT WE ALL KNOW RESPONSIBILITY IS NOT BIG WITH THE DEMS BECAUSE
THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR REVERSE DISCRIMINIATION AKA "AFFIRMITIVE ACTION"

> which are pretty much the cornerstones of conservative politics and rhetoric.

THE CORNER STONE OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICS IS LYING ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL
-REMEMBER "HOPE AND CHANGE"

> "Instead they focus on taking advantage of the most ignorant
> and selfish elements of our society [tea party] by peddling fear,"

THE DEMOCRATS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ATTEMPTING TO DESTROY OUR ECONOMY
WITH OBAMA CARE/ PUBLIC OPTION
-THERE IS GOOD REASON TO FEAR THESE NUTCASES !

> "disinformation,"

YOU'VE GOT SOME NERVE MAKING A DISINFORMATIONAL POST LIKE THIS,
AND THEN TALKING ABOUT 'DISINFORMATION'.

> "and graft" [fox news].

YOU DON'T NEED A GRAFT, YOU NEED A BRAIN TRANSPLANT.

> "Maybe "black people in general" learned a historical lesson

TRUST ME, THEY REALISE HOW DUMB THEY LOOK FOR SUPPORTING
YOUR LIBERAL QUASI-PRESIDENT !

> about that status quo of white, land-owning males.

AWWWWWWW, WE ARE BACK TO THIS AGAIN.
IT REALLY HURTS AND BOTHERS YOU THAT A WHITE MAN IS ALLOWED
TO OWN LAND DOESN'T IT.

TSK TSK TSK.

'TheMeeper', YOU ARE JUST A TYPICAL RACSIT NIGGER.

+1,000,000

tomahawk Wrote:
>
> All propaganda. All applies equally to the
> Democrats. Just replace "Tea Party" with "Black
> People".
>
> And just to set the record straight, Lincoln hated
> black people, used the N-word all the time to
> describe them, told lots of racial jokes, and
> cooked up a scheme to deport them all the Africa.
> He didn't start the Civil War to free black
> people, he did it to cement the power of the
> central government. And the Gettysburg Address
> came very late in the war when he needed a cause
> to rally political support. Lincoln was guilty of
> multiple war crimes and violations of the
> Constitution, but historians rate our presidents
> based on how many deaths they are responsible for;
> the more the better. Lincoln gets a two-fer, since
> all the people he killed were Americans, no
> foreigners required for that stupid war.
>
> The Republican and Democrat Parties are basically
> the same, just two different wings of the Statist
> Party, a tag team of jackoffs.

All propaganda. All applies equally to the Democrats. Just replace "Tea Party" with "Black People".

> "And just to set the record straight,"

THIS IS FOR THE RECORD ?
ARE YOU WRITING A HISTORY BOOK FOR THE SCHOOL KIDS?
NO LINKS WHERE ARE YOUR SOURCES?

> "Lincoln hated black people,

HERESAY BULLSHIT.

> "used the N-word all the time to describe them,

YOU WERE THERE? HOW OLD ARE YOU?
THIS DOESN'T SOUND LIKE SOMETHING A MAN WHO SUPPOSEDLY HAD BLACK BLOOD RUNNING THROUGH HIS VEINS, BUT THEN AGAIN, YOU'D BE NIGGERING THIS AND NIGGERING THAT IF YOU WERE RAISED IN A SOCIETY WHERE THAT WAS THE NORM -WHETHER YOU ARE BRIGHT ENOUGH TO REALISE THAT AND ADMIT IT OR NOT.

> "told lots of racial jokes,"

AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE THE NORM FOR THE TIME PERIOD.
AND WHO DOESN'T TELL STUPID NIGGER JOKES?

> "and cooked up a scheme to deport them all the Africa."

YEAH THAT WORKED OUT REAL WELL HUH, TPO BAD IT IS BULLSHIT.

> "He didn't start the Civil War to free black people,

OH REALLY ABE, THANKS FOR LETTING US KNOW THAT AFTER ALL THESE YEARS
WE WILL START CALLING YOU 'Tomahawk' the FU Medium.

> "he did it to cement the power of the central government.

HOW MUCH CEMENT DID THIS TAKE ?
SOUNDS LIKE AN EXPENSIVE PROJECT.

> "And the Gettysburg Address came very late in the war
> when he needed a cause to rally political support.

AHHHHHHH, KINDA LIKE "HOPE and "CHANGE ?

> "Lincoln was guilty of multiple war crimes and
> violations of the Constitution,

WHY DIDN'T YOU PROSECUTE HIM THEN ?

> "but historians rate our presidents based on how
> many deaths they are responsible for; the more the better.
> Lincoln gets a two-fer, since all the people he killed
> were Americans, no foreigners required for that stupid war.

YEAH I AGREE, FREEING THE SLAVES WAS PRETTY STUPID.

The Republican and Democrat Parties are basically the same, just two different wings of the Statist Party, a tag team of jackoffs.

African Americans have statistically been Democratic since the Civil Rights movement, during a time in which the status quo Republican defended segregation. Before that, during the 19th century, African Americans supported the Republican party, due largely to Lincoln's actions.

Pick up a history book and learn for yourself, the comments like "black people are ignorant so they vote democratic" and "Lincoln hated black people" are just idiotic.

What?!Were you born yesterday?! They vote Democrat because Jesse Jackson is a Democrat and he is the Supreme Tribal leader who helped Martin Luther King free us from the planet of the Apes and shoot Abraham Lincoln because he took away our free room and board. Pick up a BLACK History book and read it sometime! . And food!He took away free food too! Typical mofo honky republican. yo Abraham Lincoln was dats wuhd I be talkin bout

If it wasn't for those 'republican honkeys' you niggers would
be plowing the fields right about now, instead of of hunting and
pecking here on the internet.

Das whut o'm say'n yo.

Eesh, Lincoln basically held the typical racist attitudes of the time. He did encourage repatriation of blacks to Liberia.

The civil rights bills were opposed by southern dems and were passed with more repub support, the exception being opposition from Barry Goldwater who had a similar constitutional issue with the act as Rand Paul addressed recently- ie "your property is yours to rent or sell to whoever you feel". I don't believe there was the level of dem opposition to Jim Crow as there was from the rwpubs, but I don't know the actual numbers.

Don't forget also that while Nixon was pushing for affirmative action, he was opposed by dem George Wallace who ran on a platform of maintaining segregation.

The Southern Strategy we hear of has never been repub endorsement of segregation or discrimination, but appeal to those disaffected white voters who feel the party too northern or liberal or who oppose forced school bussing or even ironically the quotas and affirmative action prograns Nixon himself initiated.

Have the dems or repubs ever truly helped a specific racial group? No, it's all a charade for fundraising and voter turnout.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

http://illinoisissues.uis.edu/features/2004Feb/lincoln.html

It all has to do with their interpretation of the constitution. Jefferson was for a decentralized federal government with the states having the majority of the control but the federalists are generally for big government, businesses, and binding federal policies. So, I guess, in general republicans are for the country (businesses), and democrats are for the state (which in this case the minority).

... the "minority" in this case would be the Democrats who fought freeing the slaves.

yea fuck them niggers

I don't buy the rewrite that the Civil War was about federalism and states rights more than slavery. I also don't buy that primary goal of freeing the slaves was based on a belief in equality and altruism.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

I rarely get annoyed....but seriously.

Enough with the N***** word comments. Its really rather rude.

Yea, sorry. I don't even mean anything by it ...It's just that the internet is so personal that it hurts.

ITRADE wrote :
-----------------------------
> "Enough with the N***** word comments.
> Its really rather rude."

TOO BAD. GO HOME.

With policies like cap and trade, guaranteed to raise energy prices across the board, it is a wonder.

Obama Administration Digs in Heels on Energy Regulations as American People Hope Their Heat Will Last All Winter
http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21PR-Heat_121310.html
Washington, D.C. – As winter weather already grips portions of the United States, the need for cheap and efficient power for heat and light is essential. Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the Project 21 black leadership network, points out that the Obama Administration's continued war on fossil fuels that is making the guarantee of a comfortable winter increasingly bleak for the nation's poorest citizens.

"With millions of Americans unemployed and struggling to keep their homes warm, the need for government assistance will only increase. Heavy demand and higher prices due to the Obama Administration's assault on the fossil fuels we rely upon are going to stretch charities to their limits and beyond," noted Project 21's Borelli. "It's disgraceful that the first black president and the first black EPA administrator are advancing policies that will preferentially harm blacks who overwhelmingly supported Obama."

In a speech in late November to the Aspen Institute, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson demonized the private sector and strongly defended the Obama Administration's decision to regulate "greenhouse gas" emissions without having specific Congressional authority to regulate these emissions...

Amazing...

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

*NIGGER WORD LOVER* Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ITRADE wrote :
> -----------------------------
> > "Enough with the N***** word comments.
> > Its really rather rude."
>
> TOO BAD. GO HOME.


my my aren't we just a 'gifted kindergartner'

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With policies like cap and trade, guaranteed to
> raise energy prices across the board, it is a
> wonder.
>
> Obama Administration Digs in Heels on Energy
> Regulations as American People Hope Their Heat
> Will Last All Winter
> http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21PR-Heat_121310.ht
> ml
> Washington, D.C. – As winter weather already
> grips portions of the United States, the need for
> cheap and efficient power for heat and light is
> essential. Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the
> Project 21 black leadership network, points out
> that the Obama Administration's continued war on
> fossil fuels that is making the guarantee of a
> comfortable winter increasingly bleak for the
> nation's poorest citizens.
>
> "With millions of Americans unemployed and
> struggling to keep their homes warm, the need for
> government assistance will only increase. Heavy
> demand and higher prices due to the Obama
> Administration's assault on the fossil fuels we
> rely upon are going to stretch charities to their
> limits and beyond," noted Project 21's Borelli.
> "It's disgraceful that the first black president
> and the first black EPA administrator are
> advancing policies that will preferentially harm
> blacks who overwhelmingly supported Obama."
>
> In a speech in late November to the Aspen
> Institute, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson
> demonized the private sector and strongly defended
> the Obama Administration's decision to regulate
> "greenhouse gas" emissions without having specific
> Congressional authority to regulate these
> emissions...
>
> Amazing...


that is ridiculous. The price of energy has nothing to do with Cap and trade or the administration. It has to do with what the free markets are trading at. IE whatever OPEC decides to maintain levels of output or stocks of crude in emerging countries as well as the US or whatever the price of oil is bought and sold at depending on the strength of the dollar. Its the commodities traders that set the prices of OIL and fuel. NOT the administration. Goldman Sachs the recovery has been led by emerging market countries, with the U.S. oil market lagging," Goldman said in a report. "Inventories outside the U.S. have largely returned to more normal levels while U.S. oil inventories have only recently begun to draw."

Goldman expects crude to average $100 next year and $110 in 2012.

"World oil demand came roaring back in 2010," Goldman said. "The world oil market recovery will be increasingly evident in the United States in 2011, giving the market a recovery it can see and believe in."

pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> that is ridiculous. The price of energy has
> nothing to do with Cap and trade or the
> administration. It has to do with what the free
> markets are trading at.

...

> Goldman expects crude to average $100 next year
> and $110 in 2012.
>
> "World oil demand came roaring back in 2010,"
> Goldman said. "The world oil market recovery will
> be increasingly evident in the United States in
> 2011, giving the market a recovery it can see and
> believe in."

Hey dickwad - when you make it so coal is no longer affordable to use for power plants - the main point of cap and trade - then oil use will have to go up as well. We don't have a large solar array or huge wind farms (and we won't any time within the next 50 years). So cap and trade will cause huge up-spikes in energy costs that have little to do with oil, and everything to do with COAL. But of course, your enlightened, too stupid to understand anything "which is why you retired brain" would not pick up on that.

The market fluctuations on oil prices certainly have some impact, but nothing like what will happen if cap and trade is enacted - and nothing to do with the previous link I posted.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

and your post has nothing to do with my african americans overwhelmingly vote democrat. You are just for some bizarre reason welding your political economic views onto a discussion that Cap and trade have nothing to do with. You yourself JUST SAID "IF cap and trade is enacted" how would that IF translate into something that is happening NOW? It would NOT. So go back to the conservative think tank from where you came and come up with a better argument than Cap and trade and try again. By the way I am not retired. Far from it. I dont know where you got that from either.

*NIGGER WORD LOVER* Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ITRADE wrote :
> -----------------------------
> > "Enough with the N***** word comments.
> > Its really rather rude."
>
> TOO BAD. GO HOME.


Anon-user 'justgayin' wrote :
------------------------------------------------
> "my my aren't we just a 'gifted kindergartner'"

NICE NAME FAGGOT!
THAT WAS A GREAT COMMENT !
YOU EVEN SPELLED "KINDERGARTNER" CORRECTLY !
THAT'S SO FUNNY CUZ LIKE KINDERGARTNERS ARE FUNNY
AND STUFF LIKE BECAUSE THEY ARE FUNNY, HOW.
HOW ARE YOU DOING TODAY ?
TELL YOUR MOTHER I SAID HI : -)

I asked several of my black friends why the vote democrat and the answer was almost always the same because they do some much for the black community. If you ask a union worker the same question you get the same answer. Also they say that the big fat cat republican are always taken there money. Read what you want into these statement. I think it has alot to do with education. The public schools paint a cloudy picture when it comes to which party did what.

Perception is reality in politics.

Politics, markets and relationships are rarely rational.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> and your post has nothing to do with my african
> americans overwhelmingly vote democrat. You are
> just for some bizarre reason welding your
> political economic views onto a discussion that
> Cap and trade have nothing to do with.

The point, again beyond your comprehension evidently, is that Democrats policies (other then the 'concept' of welfare) rarely have anything to do with the health and well being of the poor. They make a grand show of how they will play like robin hood to take from the rich to fund their incessant spending - but the reality is, their policies are generally NOT for the health and well being of poor people. Who, by the way, are disproportionately represented by black people. Cap and trade WILL hurt the poor, no doubt, much more then folks with money.

Again, it begs into question why Democrats do get so much support, and one of the main reasons falls back to the welfare state. Bill Clinton was the 'first black president'... right up until Obama was elected - and if you ever looked into what Clinton ever did for blacks that got him so much endearment, no one could ever really enumerate anything substantial. Just that he 'cared'.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pas'ion Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > and your post has nothing to do with my african
> > americans overwhelmingly vote democrat. You
> are
> > just for some bizarre reason welding your
> > political economic views onto a discussion that
> > Cap and trade have nothing to do with.
>
> The point, again beyond your comprehension
> evidently, is that Democrats policies (other then
> the 'concept' of welfare) rarely have anything to
> do with the health and well being of the poor.
> They make a grand show of how they will play like
> robin hood to take from the rich to fund their
> incessant spending - but the reality is, their
> policies are generally NOT for the health and well
> being of poor people. Who, by the way, are
> disproportionately represented by black people.
> Cap and trade WILL hurt the poor, no doubt, much
> more then folks with money.
>
> Again, it begs into question why Democrats do get
> so much support, and one of the main reasons falls
> back to the welfare state. Bill Clinton was the
> 'first black president'... right up until Obama
> was elected - and if you ever looked into what
> Clinton ever did for blacks that got him so much
> endearment, no one could ever really enumerate
> anything substantial. Just that he 'cared'.


Other than the health and well being of the poor? Are you kidding me? Support of the Unions, Support for tax breaks for working class and middle class and raising taxes on the rich, proper regulation of markets and have you heard of Health care reform? Large corporations cannot deny a patient health care because of pre-existing conditions? That is not socialized medicine. Its Health care REFORM. The republican/conservative stance is social stasis, to keep the rich and elite in power and let the wealth "trickle down" is ludicrous. The democratic party stands for social equality not some class based elite. The economic stasis that funnels ALL the profits to the rich and keeps it that way is the basis for the Republican policies.

Whats the diiference between health care and health insurance?

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Wingnut, before Registered Voter derailed the thread, you were talking about southern Democrats being against civil rights. I think you are referring to Dixiecrats, which didn't last long back in the day.

Let face it the media has been telling the people that republican are going to take away your welfare, social security and any other handout.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wingnut, before Registered Voter derailed the
> thread, you were talking about southern Democrats
> being against civil rights. I think you are
> referring to Dixiecrats, which didn't last long
> back in the day.

STFU eesh, you are the biggest derailers of threads other than Misery on the board.

When Democrats enact policies that are inimical to poor people (and sorry, but Unions do not represent poor people, they represent their upper management) it makes little sense, OTHER than hand-out programs, for blacks to support Democrats.

The likelihood is, if you follow the money you will find the answers to why. Such as folks like Jesse Jackson and others who get their pockets lined, while they line up the masses to follow the party line.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

"pas'ion" aka NEO-Vince(1) wrote :
----------------------------------------------
> "Large corporations cannot deny a patient health care because
> of pre-existing conditions? That is not socialized medicine.

YES IT IS.
AND IT IS ALSO A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO BANKRUPT OUR PRIVATELY
RUN HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY, LEAD BY OUR LIBERAL AFRICAN PRESIDENT.

> "Its Health care REFORM."

YOU ARE RETARDED.

> "The republican/conservative stance is social stasis,"

NOT THIS SHIT AGAIN.
YOU SIMPLE FUCKS ARE LIKE BROKEN RECORDS.

> "to keep the rich and elite in power and let the wealth
> "trickle down" is ludicrous."

YOUR GETTING SIDE TRACKED, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HEALTHCARE.
BESIDES, IF IT WASN'T FOR THOSE RICH PEOPLE RUNNING
PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES WE COULD ONLY HOPE FOR
SOME SHITTY GOVERENT RUN HEALTHCARE PROGRAM.
TALK ABOUT DISASTERS YOU UNGRATEFUL LAZY VOUCHER BABY.

> "The democratic party stands for social equality
> not some class based elite."

YOU ARE A LIAR!
NOT ONLY DOES IT STAND FOR IN-EQUALITY
[ex. reverse racism affirmitive action]
IT HAS NO MORALS AND LIES *ALL* THE TIME TO PEOPLE LIKE
YOU ARE DOING NOW.

CLASS BASED ELITE ?
YOU ARE SUCH A SIMPLE ONE TRACK MINDED FUCK.

****REMEMBER, WE ARE DISCUSSING HEALTHCARE,
NOT SOCIAL STATUS OR TAXES.

> "The economic stasis that funnels ALL the profits to the rich
> and keeps it that way is the basis for the Republican policies.

SOUNDS TO ME LIKE YOU ARE JUST SOME LAZY MINORITY
THAT WANTS A COLOR OR ETHNICITY BASED HANDOUT.

GET BACK ON TRACK BOZO, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HEALTHCARE HERE!

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The likelihood is, if you follow the money you
> will find the answers to why. Such as folks like
> Jesse Jackson and others who get their pockets
> lined, while they line up the masses to follow the
> party line.






Yeah, kinda like health insurance executives are some of the biggest supporters of the Tea Party movement. Indeed, let's follow the money and see who is being led blind.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > The likelihood is, if you follow the money you
> > will find the answers to why. Such as folks
> like
> > Jesse Jackson and others who get their pockets
> > lined, while they line up the masses to follow
> the
> > party line.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yeah, kinda like health insurance executives are
> some of the biggest supporters of the Tea Party
> movement. Indeed, let's follow the money and see
> who is being led blind.

You mean, the same guys that actually WROTE the health care changes for the Democrats. Um yeah, it will probably lead you right to the folks who are pushing this BS on us - most of them sitting in the lawyers lobby and the health insurance industry.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

The majority of Americans who have health insurance pay a higher price because of our broken system. Every insured family pays an average of $1,000 more a year in premiums to cover the care of those who have no insurance

.... have no insurance like ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS !

See how the system is not the problem and the ILLEGALS are ?

Dumbass Libs like yourself also like blame the bullet or
gun manufacturer and not the trigger man.

YOU'RE A MORON !

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wingnut, before Registered Voter derailed the
> thread, you were talking about southern Democrats
> being against civil rights. I think you are
> referring to Dixiecrats, which didn't last long
> back in the day.

The Dixiecrats were post WWII. The dem opposition in 1964 was pretty wide, this is the breakdown of the votes party by party--

By party
The original House version:
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%–34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)

There was probably more repub opposition than I thought, but percentage wise, the dems voting agains the legislation was substantial, repubs approved the legislation by at least 80% on all votes, house and senate, dems never broke 70% support, which is pretty pathetic.

Don't believe any of the often stated bullshit that the dems are the party of the working man and the minority. Their promises are as shallow and empty as those made by the repubs to the religious right. Neither party really does shit for either of these groups but they will continue to bamboozle and court these voting groups as if they do.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Black people generally vote democratic because they'll be guaranteed government

programs that will help them out. They hear that,,,and they vote democratic.

also of note
"It is interesting to note that Democrats from
northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while
Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill,
92 to 11."

pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> also of note
> "It is interesting to note that Democrats from
> northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill,
> 141 to 4, while
> Democrats from southern states voted
> overwhelmingly against the bill,
> 92 to 11."


What bill pas'ion??

1964 civil rights bill

Wingnut, you're a goddamn genius. Thank you.