It's all red today because the elite libs took the party ever leftward. They supported much higher taxes, much larger government with more power, they opposed the war, they supported the riots of the 60's, they became the party of drugs and free sex. Many, many reasons other than race. You're blinded by race.
Fake News. NY Times blames conservatives for campus riots, assaults and property destruction
- Thread starter WVPATX
- Start date
It's all red today because the elite libs took the party ever leftward. They supported much higher taxes, much larger government with more power, they opposed the war, they supported the riots of the 60's, they became the party of drugs and free sex. Many, many reasons other than race. You're blinded by race.
Really? Well if that was true, then how come those SAME POLICIES is what attracted the south to switch from Republican (1920's) to Democrat (1940's) to begin with?
Liberal vs Conservative certainly was in play......but trying to tie anti-civil rights to Republicans is absurd. There is NOT one civil rights bill vote that backs up your claim.
They are clueless.....your wasting your time. But they fooled a lot of people and are still doing it today.
Those weren't the same policies. The Viet Nam war happened in the 60's. So did the drugs and free sex. So did the riots. So did the anti-American, anti-troop sentiment. It turned off many southern Americans a great deal and they switched. Don't you remember the Dem Convention of 1968? Turned a huge number of Americans off in the South.
They just can't accept facts. It destroys all that they believe (GOP are all racists).
Government got BIG and the Republican voter in the south quickly switched Democrat in the 1930's and 1940's. FACT.
What about the other facts of the 60's that you conveniently ignore? Viet Nam tore this country apart or don't you remember? Many, many southerners deserted the Dems as a result. Moreover, LBJ's Great Society programs ushered in huge spending increases making government in control of even more of everyday American lives.
So you know nothing about anything prior to your balls dropping?.....wait, that did happen, right?
There's a difference between opposing segregation and opposing Integration. Nixon was all for the Brown decision, but did not want to enact any policies that sought to reverse the housing trends or busing problems that prevented intergration from occurring. This would impead southern communities from getting out of a "defacto" segregation of school districts, voting districts, and housing.Tell me when Nixon EVER opposed de-segregation.
I apologize about the being born in the 60's remark. I mistook who posted it. But the facts still remain.
My original point, prior to it getting churned up in your internal rhetoric, was that you cannot simply equate the term liberal and the democratic political party. Although the two more often than not overlap, there are conservative democrats and liberal republicans. Tying the two together is a large part of the problem in political discourse today. Liberal thinkers in terms of philosophical, social, and religious ideology can be a supporter of conservative financial and government policies. And vice versa.
You refer to a Wallace as a liberal, I disagree. He was a southern conservative democrat, he was pro-union, but his ideology towards social issues was far from liberal.
Boom, there are very, very few liberal Republicans left anymore just as there are very few conservative Dems. The country is splitting into their own tribes. We now see libs hating the First Amendment. I never thought I would ever see that.
Are you now going to apologize. I posted that Wallace was a Dem, which is a fact.
You're just interested in driving that division Paxxx, almost everything you post is in favor of it. Maybe you are getting addicted to your anger....I have no idea, but it just isn't that way. That's how the FOX -MSNBC and politics divide is painting the nation to be. Divided? Yes. But only in anger at each other, NOT in core principles.
This "hating free speech" thing is the latest talking points wedge. You swear you're not on someone's payroll?
Where is the apology Boom? And I am not the one dividing. Libs hate Trump, absolutely hate everything about him. Libs are rioting to stop free speech. These are facts, Boom. The media is corrupt, treating conservatives with utter disdain. It is they dividing the country, not me. I am simply reporting what they are doing.
Where's the apology Boom? Man enough to admit you misquoted me?
This was a post in response to someone saying:
I said you were lumping liberal and democrat together. You went off on trying to think I didn't know Wallace was a dem....even though I did.....and the point went right over your head.
But I tell you what Paxxx, I apologize for any confusion that seems to be preventing you from understanding the sequence of events
You posted this:
"You refer to a Wallace as a liberal, I disagree."
I made no such post. Looks like your not man enough to admit your mistake and apologize. I expected more from you Boom.
I did not reference Wallace as being a liberal. Stop lying. I posted that he was a Dem, which he was. You may not like that fact, but it is a fact.
Then why did you post: "it was the Dems that did that. Did you ever take any history in school? Ever hear of George Wallace, that good dem?" In response to someone referred to conservatives blaming those liberal hippies during the civil rights movement?
You're losing it Boom. I posted Wallace was a Dem. You don't like that fact. You try and deflect. Won't work. He was a Dem and he died a Dem.
Are you trolling right now? I could care less if Wallace was a dem (I'm registered independent btw). I was well aware of Wallace as well as Byrd being Democrats, mastermind. Why would you make the post you did then? The post you responded to never mentioned democrat or republican. Just liberal and conservative. I was trying to get you to see that making the reference to Wallace or the KKK in response to the post about liberals and conservatives in the civil rights era was irrelevant.
But you can't begin to see that can you Paxxx? Or can you? Otherwise.....what the **** are we talking about?
I'm convinced that "America" is the antithesis of everything that you desire. I hear Sweden is taking in refugees, maybe you should apply for asylum.
You lied. I caught you in a lie. I posted truthfully that the GOP did more to pass the Civil Rights Act than the Dems. I posted that the KKK was a Democrat institution. I posted that Southerners turned against the Dems because of many factors, chief among them was the war in Viet Nam and how the Dems treated that war and our veterans, the riots, free love and drug use, all turned off southern Dems. I posted factually that only one Senator switched parties, Strom Thurmond.
You can't stand these facts because it does not fit the narrative you want to portray.
No doubt in my mind he would be much, much happier in one of those democratic socialist countries.
It's probably a good thing that your in the last years of your life then, mister 60's. Cause the times they are a changin.
That's true. Libs trying to destroy the First Amendment. Libs rioting. Libs destroying property. Libs raising taxes. Libs giving hundreds of billions to Iran. Libs creating millions upon millions of migrants. Leading to Brexit. Leading to both major parties in France losing. Leading to calls throughout Europe of immigration changes. Libs for open borders. Libs for defying federal law to protect criminal aliens. I could go on and on. Times they are a changin.
Be careful....because it was actions like you described that founded our great nation. Remember the Sons of Liberty? Yeah, they didn't just "peacefully" march and protest, ya know. [winking]