Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by g8orbill, Apr 28, 2019.
You threw out the number to Burton, I was just asking if that was the right number.
Wallace led democrats in the primary when he was shot in Maryland
Just won Michigan so even up North they voted for Wallace
Knowing the names of assassins doesn’t change their party
Great society gave unmarried women money for their kids and got the intended results along with the draft cut the size and strength from black communities
LBj was a Dixiecrat and held no love for blacks and thinking he did anything good is naive at best
Calling me a liar when it looks like you skipped history class
Giving people fish never teaching them how to fish is the Democrats way
They have to have pets to take care of so they are importing more
Please come to Chicago for the help you can bring
We can change the world
Democratic convention and proteststers wanted change from LBj and we got Nixon
So many falsehoods and half-truths:
It wasn't the Great Society that provided welfare to unmarried women with children. It was an unintended effect of the AFDC program which was created by Title IV of the Social Security Act of 1935. The provision was based on prior state programs and was originally intended to provide assistance to widows and their children. It also had effect of denying assistance to households in which there was an unemployed able-bodied male and actually encouraged fathers to abandon their children LBJ may very well have been a racist on a personal level and he was originally a Dixiecrat, but he changed long before he assumed the presidency. As Senate Majority Leader he broke a filibuster by Dixiecrats trying to block the Civil Rights Act of 1957.
The filibuster that almost killed the Civil Rights Act - National Constitution Center
(The article is more about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but it also mentions Johnson's position on the 1957 Act)
And yes the Southern Democratic Party was originally the party of segregation and racism. That role is now filled by the Southern Republican Party, a trend that began in 1964 when Strom Thurmond flipped from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party in response to Johnson's support of the Civil Rights Act. In fact, Jeff Sessions and Roy Moore, two prominent very conservative Southern Republicans were originally Democrats. As far as the last statement referencing teaching people to fish is concerned Democrats have been far more likely to support training programs than Republicans.
"It’s far too easy to self-righteously condemn your political enemies when they step (or leap) over the line to bigotry and violence. It’s far more difficult to condemn those who share your wing, whether left or right, but who go too far. But that is what morality and decency require, as Buckley taught us.
So President Trump must stop being even handed in his condemnations [Charlottesville "You also had some very fine people on both sides"]. He should focus his condemnation on extreme right-wing bigots who speak and act in his name, and leave it to those of us on the left to focus our condemnation on left-wing extremists and bigots." Alan Dershowitz
Farrakhan, 1984: “The Jews don’t like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that’s a good name. Hitler was a very great man.”
Let us know when you find a picture of Trump with David Duke.
Also 1984: ''Now that nation called Israel never has had any peace in 40 years and she will never have any peace because there can be no peace structured on injustice, thievery, lying and deceit and using the name of God to shield your gutter religion under His holy and righteous name.''
“Them Jews ain’t going to let him [Obama, running for president at the time] talk to me. I told my baby daughter that he’ll talk to me in five years when he’s a lame duck or in eight years when he’s out of office. They will not let him talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. I said that from the beginning. He’s a politician; I’m a pastor. He’s got to do what politicians do.” Jeremiah Wright.
Another gem from Wright (2007): Italians “looked down their garlic noses at Galileans.”
Unless I missed it, I never saw a statement like this from Trump on David Duke
Obama Denounces Farrakhan Endorsement
I do recall this.
Donald Trump Refuses to Condemn Ku Klux Klan
Donald Trump denounces David Duke, KKK - CNNPolitics
Here you go....
I stand corrected. Trump did disavow David Duke four days after equivocating on David Duke's endorsement and claiming that he didn't know who David Duke was.
This came first (February 28, 2016)
Donald Trump Refuses to Condemn Ku Klux Klan
This came four days later (March 3, 2016)
Donald Trump denounces David Duke, KKK - CNNPolitics
The reversal was almost certainly in response to negative reaction to Trump's original statement.
Equivocating violent racists with protesters of violent racists is not being even handed. It is being a supporter of violent racists. There aren't very fine people on that side.
Obama should have removed himself from association with Wright as soon as any of that racist crap came out from him. Very poor form on Obama's fault. VA highlighted that he did specifically refuse the endorsement of Farrakhan.
Aside from his association with Wright, there is nothing even vaguely similar between Obama and Trump wrt his treatment of people. Obama isn't a racist or a misogynist or generally insulting and demeaning to anyone who disagrees or is viewed as a threat. Nor did he kiss ass to despotic dictators. No similarity at all.
And FWIW you seem to assume I'm an Obama fan. I'm not. He was a mediocre President IMO.
Obama had to disavow both Farrakhan and Wright while running for president. Wright discusses why this is so. Barack agreed with him and suggested the coming perfidy toward his 'mentor' this way: April 2008. Obama, speaking to Wright: ‘You know what your problem is?’ I said, ‘What is that?’ He said, ‘You have to tell the truth.’ I said, ‘That’s a good problem. That’s a good problem.’ Per Wright, “When he was elected to the United States Senate I was asked what advice I would have for Sen. Obama,” Wright said. “I said, ‘Please don’t change who you are, because of where you are.’ Who he was before he got to that position is a very different Barack"
Obama attended Wright's church for 18+ years, Wright baptized his children. In response to Wright's rants, Obama: “I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother.”. Later, Obama needed to mitigate out of political expediency. He said he was trying to "construct something positive" out of the controversy. 'I may not know him as well as I thought'. CBS News: 'After days of largely ignoring the media blitz his former pastor has waged, Barack Obama reversed course and denounced the Rev. Jeremiah Wright in the strongest and most direct terms yet on Tuesday...'
Here's Trump circa 2000 discussing David Duke:
Trump during 2016 campaign: "I didn't even know he endorsed me. David Duke endorsed me?" he asked.
"All right, I disavow, OK." Weak? yes!, Trump is not an articulate man, and a neophyte as a politician, like Barack was is 2008.
Duke: “If he disavows me fine," Duke told the Daily Beast. "Let him do whatever he thinks he needs to do to become president of the United States."
As far as I'm aware, Trump has never attended a Duke function or rally, has never grinned into the camera with his arm around Duke. Obama wrote that Wright was instrumental in attracting him to the church he joined and has said he titled his book, "The Audacity of Hope," after one of Wright's sermons. You can't tell me that Obama was unaware of Wright's church's association with Black Liberation Theology and the Black Power Statement that BLT emerged from, or that Wright suddenly became a Jew-baiting racist after Barack left the church in 2008.
I provide Obama as the nearest comparable. In all the people who protested removal of Robert E. Lee's statue in Charlottesville, and other monuments to Confederate dead, there are those who are not racists, but include those older southerners who within their parents memory are grandfathers and ancestors who fought for and died for the south...they decried the assault on history, and their heritage seeing those monuments pulled down. We can debate what that heritage might be from a modern perspective, that's fair game. But it's reasonable to assume there are those who still hate General Sherman and also wish the monuments would continue standing, but are not racist. Of course racists can agree to that too, but not all who do are racist. Broad brushes can be smears.
I'm not a southerner and have no sympathies for the cause, I'm a yankee from Western NY living in the south. I have two ancestors who died at Andersonville. My g-g-grandfather was in the first charge (51st NY Vol Reg) over Burnside's Bridge at Antietam in the face of withering Rebel fire from the bluffs above. I don't think we should be eradicating history. We should tell young people what the statues stood for, and why the South was destined to lose that conflict. They should know that 600,000 Americans died within 4 years (out of a population of 30 million +/-) to right the wrong of slavery. If the statues should come down, they should be relocated to museums where the history can be told. It's wrong to link Trump and the vast majority of his supporters with those violent racists at Charlottesville, just as it would be unjust call Obama an anti-semite because of those elements existing in the underbelly of the Democrat base.
As I've said many times: No living person can truthfully claim the moral high-ground when it comes to politics. There are bad elements on both sides of the spectrum. They need to be condemned in the strongest possible terms, but they will always be there. Saying it originates at the top is wrong. Predictably, a thread to discuss the size of Trump rallies became a smear involving white nationalists.
As to similarities, they are eerily alike.
I posted this earlier: Does the size of the Trump MAGA rallies give those on the left any pause for thought | Page 3 | Swamp Gas Forums
You state your case well as far as it being possible there are people fighting to keep Confederate Monuments up who are not racist.
I believe that. But it is a fact that those people are ignorant of the primary driving force behind those Confederate Monuments. Most were erected in the early 20th century and they were erected specifically as monuments to white supremacy. Many even have dedications to that effect.
You can't honestly support a racist legacy and not be racist in the process. If you understand the purpose of these monuments your choice is clear.
Museums are a reasonable outlet for some of these monuments and relevant Civil War history.
Public settings is not the place for monuments to white supremacy.
I'm no fan of Rev. Jeremiah Wright however what originally attracted Obama to Wright and his church, Trinity United Church of Christ, was its gospel of ministry to the poor and community involvement. While the congregation is predominately black it also has a significant number of white parishioners. Although virtually every one of Jeremiah Wright's sermons, totaling hundreds of hours, was recorded going back over 20 years prior to Obama's presidential campaign, around 15 seconds of a single sermon was replayed ad infinitum, especially on the Fox News Network and as well as elsewhere by the right wing media and that 15 second segment of that single sermon was portrayed as being representative of Wright's philosophy and by implication Obama's. Again not a fan of the good reverend but I considered that tactic an intellectually dishonest strategy intended to promote a specific agenda.
The sad part is this statement can get agrees and likes!
Well there is still hope. I'm still optimistic enough people feel the way I do that we will rid our country of Trump in 2020. I'm still optimistic that the good guys will win.
And this is what Bret Stephens, one of the Times' own writers, said about that cartoon.
A Despicable Cartoon in The Times
That depends partially on who the Dems nominate. Has to be somebody who motivates the Dem base and provides a realistic alternative to independents and moderate Pubs who feel as we do, and has to have a team that monitors the electoral map effectively and isn't satisfied to take national polls as a good indicator.
It’s the economy stupid
When you bring in thousands and put them on welfare and try to give them a vote no reason to expect any help for the nation and down right hostile to whites
Gotta have cry baby issues instead of action
If they fix something they lose control so they hand out other people’s money but only enough to keep their pets under the porch
Now that they have jobs the black community may break out of poverty thus the need to import more pets for the Democrats
This post is a bit difficult for me to follow. Must need more coffee.
How about starting with clarifying who is being brought in, put on welfare, given the vote and acting hostile to whites.
Really pumping that race baiting the closer we're getting to the election....got another 18 months so I'm curious just how racist YOU'RE going to be