Republican Governor Rick Scott Against Marriage Equality. States' Rights Still Code For Bigotry.

[UncleBuck]

the democrats have always been a federalist party, arguing for the primacy of the federal bureaucracy over the republic and the union of states
the left has also long been involved in wacky leftist causes like socialism, abortion, opposition to tradition, and a distinct love of anything new, and vulnerable to exploitation or corruption.

wait wait wait.

so DEMOCRAT george wallace is for states rights, but DEMOCRATS have always argued for hte primacy of the federal government?

way to contradict yourself.

further, you also say democrats are for socialism?

explain this then.

you speak out of both sides of your mouth and doom your own arguments with your blatant historical revisionism.

after forced integration

those of us who are not adherents of "european cultural superiority" (like you) and white nationalism (like you) just call that desegregation.

your language gives you away.

the oft reported and never understood "southern strategy" of nixon was NOT to embrace racism to woo the disgruntled hard core racists of the south to the republican party, but rather, to show the southern electorate that if they discarded their racist tendencies, they would find themselves at home in the conservative, family and tradition oriented republican party, rather than the leftist dominated democrats, who's sole virtue in the eyes of southern society was their virulent racism and support for the confederacy.

you are an idiot.

nice attempt at historical denialism.

 

[UncleBuck]

assholes like you have propagated the "Republican = Racism" meme

lullers.

that meme sticks because it is true, as evidenced by white nationalist republicans like yourself.

 

[UncleBuck]

the dems have never been interested in the constitution, the republic or actual liberties. all their claims otherwise are disproved by their actions through history, and today.

says the guy who opposes civil fucking rights.

if i want to refuse service to some particular minority, then i should be able to.

i like how kynes tries to pain democrats as racist for their opposition to civil rights, when kynes himself is opposed to civil rights.

and here is another history lesson for you, princess: civil rights decided on geographic lines, not political lines.

Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

 

[Dr Kynes]

well that was a completely useless response..

it suits the OP perfectly, as it was also pointless reductio ad retardum.

 

[Dr Kynes]

wait wait wait.

so DEMOCRAT george wallace is for states rights, but DEMOCRATS have always argued for hte primacy of the federal government?

way to contradict yourself.

further, you also say democrats are for socialism?

explain this then.

you speak out of both sides of your mouth and doom your own arguments with your blatant historical revisionism.



those of us who are not adherents of "european cultural superiority" (like you) and white nationalism (like you) just call that desegregation.

your language gives you away.



you are an idiot.

nice attempt at historical denialism.

democrat george wallace USED the rhetoric of "states rights" to bolster his racism and desire to maintain the white democrat domination of the south.

he didnt actually give a squirt of piss over other federal intrusions into state affairs, just as you dont.

he was a racist, staring at the looming tide of civil rights which would destroy the white power structure in the south, but despite the "racism" of the republican party he had ZERO support from republicans, or even the dems in the northeast who had already accepted the inenviability of their party's doom and decided to go with the flow and adopt the trapping of "Anti-racism" despite their continued disdain for people of colour.

the republican party had black delegates all the way back to the early 1880's the dems didnt send a single negro to their conventions from ANY state, north south or west until 1964, when they threw them out of the hall, and had them hosed down and attacked by dogs in chicago.

first black congressman?
Joseph Rainey, Republican,1870

first black DEMOCRAT congressman
Arthur Mitchel 1935. thats 65 years with no black democrat congressmen.

first black senator:
Hiram Revels, Republican, 1870

first black DEMOCRAT senator
Carol Mosley Braun 1993. 123 years with no black senators from the dems.

the dems have done a great job convincing the black community that they were always on their side, but its all bullshit.

 

[Dr Kynes]

says the guy who opposes civil fucking rights.



i like how kynes tries to pain democrats as racist for their opposition to civil rights, when kynes himself is opposed to civil rights.

and here is another history lesson for you, princess: civil rights decided on geographic lines, not political lines.

Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

as if the 1968 bill was the first civil rights act ever proposed...

the dems in the north accepted their fate and concealed their racism long before those in the south, because unlike the south, there were OTHER voices besides the white democrat power structure in the argument.

that the other non-confederate dems surrendered sooner and jumped on the bandwagon, doesnt change the fact that they STILL opposed earlier civil rights measures as violently as the southern dems did in the 60's.

meanwhile the northern dems in chicago were eager to set dogs on the black delegates in 64.

try to use minor truths tho fabricate a grand lie till youre blue in the face, history tells the truth, and the democrat party is still as bigoted as ever, they just hide it better.

 

[UncleBuck]

democrat george wallace USED the rhetoric of "states rights" to bolster his racism and desire to maintain the white democrat domination of the south.

he didnt actually give a squirt of piss over other federal intrusions into state affairs, just as you dont.

he was a racist, staring at the looming tide of civil rights which would destroy the white power structure in the south, but despite the "racism" of the republican party he had ZERO support from republicans, or even the dems in the northeast who had already accepted the inenviability of their party's doom and decided to go with the flow and adopt the trapping of "Anti-racism" despite their continued disdain for people of colour.

the republican party had black delegates all the way back to the early 1880's the dems didnt send a single negro to their conventions from ANY state, north south or west until 1964, when they threw them out of the hall, and had them hosed down and attacked by dogs in chicago.

first black congressman?
Joseph Rainey, Republican,1870

first black DEMOCRAT congressman
Arthur Mitchel 1935. thats 65 years with no black democrat congressmen.

first black senator:
Hiram Revels, Republican, 1870

first black DEMOCRAT senator
Carol Mosley Braun 1993. 123 years with no black senators from the dems.

the dems have done a great job convincing the black community that they were always on their side, but its all bullshit.

a pile of bullcrap that in no way clears up the contradictions inherent in your other pile of bullcrap post.

you can try to write off george wallace's love of states rights, but you can't write off all of known history. states rights used to be part of the democratic platform. the dixiecrats were a split off of the democrats who were gung ho on states rights.

and you can try to label the democrats of old as racist for their platform, and you would be right for once. the only problem is that you hold the same beliefs that democrats used to.

you can't sit there and call democrats racist for their opposition to civil rights and desegregation, and then go off and talk about how you are against civil rights and refer to desegregation as "forced integration" without also calling yourself racist.

watching you try to talk in circles to defend your bullshit is at least entertaining though.

 

[Dr Kynes]

a pile of bullcrap that in no way clears up the contradictions inherent in your other pile of bullcrap post.

you can try to write off george wallace's love of states rights, but you can't write off all of known history. states rights used to be part of the democratic platform. the dixiecrats were a split off of the democrats who were gung ho on states rights.

and you can try to label the democrats of old as racist for their platform, and you would be right for once. the only problem is that you hold the same beliefs that democrats used to.

you can't sit there and call democrats racist for their opposition to civil rights and desegregation, and then go off and talk about how you are against civil rights and refer to desegregation as "forced integration" without also calling yourself racist.

watching you try to talk in circles to defend your bullshit is at least entertaining though.

you have your head in the echo-chamber and no amount of evidence will convince you that your chosen masters are in fact your real enemies.

enjoy your blissful ignorance.

 

[UncleBuck]

democrat party is still as bigoted as ever, they just hide it better.

this started off with you trying to ignore 50 years of american political history, devolved into you trying to revise 50 years of american political history, descended into madness as you tried to deny 50 years of american political history, and has now come to the point where you are just lying wherever you can, as much as you can.

the fact is that the racist democrats of old converted to the republican party that catered to their racism.

this is evident in the way they vote every election.

your historical revisionism and denialism only inform us as to what a deluded fuckwit you are.

 

[UncleBuck]

you have your head in the echo-chamber and no amount of evidence will convince you that your chosen masters are in fact your real enemies.

enjoy your blissful ignorance.

that weak ass rebuttal in no way addresses the fact that the old democratic policies and stances that you rightly condemn as racist are now the very policies and stances that you personally endorse.

nor does it address the bare naked historical revisionism and denialism you are attempting to pull off.

but if i were you, i would scurry away from the actual subject at hand too, since american political history isn't gonna change to suit your failed and bogus internet argument.

 

[ginwilly]

So even a thread about Rick Scott turns into a "that's racist" thread here, shocking. Some people seem to spend every waking hour thinking about skin color...

My two cents on Rick Scott;
The fucker embezzled billions of dollars from medicare and instead of doing time, he sleeps in the governors mansion. Banks steal almost a trillion and give the execs bonuses...

If some of us get caught growing a weed our lives are ruined. Our society has some issues.

Breast feed in public and you can be arrested, do it next to a stripper pole and get paid. A noble peace prize winner is a murdering war mongerer. We fight for a woman's right over her body until it comes to whether or not she can buy an insurance policy that doesn't cover colonoscopes. We arm our enemies. Insider trading gets Martha Stewart locked up but makes politicians rich. We demand increased gun control laws while our police are killing citizens and becoming more militarized.

There's more, but I'm sure the topic will revert back to skin color, so carry on focusing on people's melanin content while calling people racists. It's gotten way past OCD entertaining.

FFS, state's rights is now a racist stance? wtf?

 

[schuylaar]

So even a thread about Rick Scott turns into a "that's racist" thread here, shocking. Some people seem to spend every waking hour thinking about skin color...

My two cents on Rick Scott;
The fucker embezzled billions of dollars from medicare and instead of doing time, he sleeps in the governors mansion. Banks steal almost a trillion and give the execs bonuses...

If some of us get caught growing a weed our lives are ruined. Our society has some issues.

Breast feed in public and you can be arrested, do it next to a stripper pole and get paid. A noble peace prize winner is a murdering war mongerer. We fight for a woman's right over her body until it comes to whether or not she can buy an insurance policy that doesn't cover colonoscopes. We arm our enemies. Insider trading gets Martha Stewart locked up but makes politicians rich. We demand increased gun control laws while our police are killing citizens and becoming more militarized.

There's more, but I'm sure the topic will revert back to skin color, so carry on focusing on people's melanin content while calling people racists. It's gotten way past OCD entertaining.

FFS, state's rights is now a racist stance? wtf?

+rep for half of your post.

 

[ginwilly]

+rep for half of your post.

So that's like half rep? I'll take it!

The resident village idiot will make it about race and then call me racist for it though.

 

[Dr Kynes]

that weak ass rebuttal in no way addresses the fact that the old democratic policies and stances that you rightly condemn as racist are now the very policies and stances that you personally endorse.

nor does it address the bare naked historical revisionism and denialism you are attempting to pull off.

but if i were you, i would scurry away from the actual subject at hand too, since american political history isn't gonna change to suit your failed and bogus internet argument.

you manipulate and falsify historical facts in the same way Al Gore does when he claims his daddy lost his seat in the senate for his stauch support for civil rights when in fact Al Gore Sr threatened a filibuster to end all filibusters to stop that evil '64 civil rights bill.

youre as full of shit as gore ever was.

 

[UncleBuck]

So even a thread about Rick Scott turns into a "that's racist" thread here, shocking. Some people seem to spend every waking hour thinking about skin color...

in case you missed it, dumbshit, go back and check the title of the thread and the content of the posts.

and then go take a large, blunt object and smash your face with it. repeat.

 

[UncleBuck]

you manipulate and falsify historical facts

claims the guy who said that states rights meant nothing to george wallace, whose entire platform was predicated upon states rights.

 

[Dr Kynes]

that weak ass rebuttal in no way addresses the fact that the old democratic policies and stances that you rightly condemn as racist are now the very policies and stances that you personally endorse.

nor does it address the bare naked historical revisionism and denialism you are attempting to pull off.

but if i were you, i would scurry away from the actual subject at hand too, since american political history isn't gonna change to suit your failed and bogus internet argument.

feel free to declare victory, im tired of trying to explain this shit to your ignorant ass.

who is running stop n' frisk operations in NYC?

Democrats

who still makes up the backbone of the KKK?

Democrats

who uses "That's Racist!!" as their first last and only tool to try and stifle debate?

Democrats

who calls Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice "Uncle Toms"?

Democrats

who were the party of the confederacy, jim crow and segregation?

Democrats

who crafted the Great Society which has put generations of blacks back in chains?

Democrats

who promise the moon and stars in exchange for their support, yet have done NOTHING to uplift the black community in the 60 years when they had almost total control of the federal govt?

Democrats

Nuff Said.

 

[UncleBuck]

who crafted the Great Society which has put generations of blacks back in chains?

the left now uses The Soft Bigotry Of Lowered Expectations and the welfare state to ensure that their new constituency remains an ignorant and easily manipulated rabble, more concerned with spinnin rims and twerking than whats going on in washington.

as opposed to the HARD BIGOTRY of believing that welfare and the war on poverty are solely for the benefit of black people, followed up with the confirmatory racial stereotypes to remove all doubt about what kynes is implying.

let's see if we can reconcile kynes positions:

1) the dixiecrats' opposition to civil rights was racist
2) kynes personally opposes civil rights
3) kynes claims to somehow not be racist

kynes, care to tell me why your opposition to civil rights is special and different and totally not racist?

 

[MidwesternGro]

as opposed to the HARD BIGOTRY of believing that welfare and the war on poverty are solely for the benefit of black people, followed up with the confirmatory racial stereotypes to remove all doubt about what kynes is implying.

let's see if we can reconcile kynes positions:

1) the dixiecrats' opposition to civil rights was racist
2) kynes personally opposes civil rights
3) kynes claims to somehow not be racist

kynes, care to tell me why your opposition to civil rights is special and different and totally not racist?

No wonder the guy has a clown for an avatar.

 

[UncleBuck]

who still makes up the backbone of the KKK?

Democrats

really?

https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t923577/

stormfront seems to prefer mitt romney or a libertarian/third party.

the few votes that came in for obama were explained in the comments as a hope to more quickly incite a race war.

who uses "That's Racist!!" as their first last and only tool to try and stifle debate?

Democrats

i use it to label racists when i see them, and am more than happy to debate about it.

but the racists like you and red1966 put me on ignore instead.

so much for democrats wanting to stifle debate.

who were the party of the confederacy, jim crow and segregation?

Democrats

"were" is the correct tense.

the current people carrying the banner of the confederacy, segregation, and jim crow are republicans.

if you're going to condemn the decades removed policies of the democrat party as racist, you might want to make sure that you don't hold those same policies near and dear today, dumbass.

who promise the moon and stars in exchange for their support, yet have done NOTHING to uplift the black community in the 60 years when they had almost total control of the federal govt?

Democrats

that must be why you guys are in such an uproar about affirmative action.

that attempt to uplift the black community is opposed on sharp party lines by republicans.

and it's especially hilarious when you lend your voice to the opposition, since you are so especially sensitive about what you feel to be anti-white persecution.

you like to frame tolerance or encouragement of multiculturalism as some sort of sinister plot to wipe out the white man, a spirit of white racial solidarity that is generally only witnessed in white nationalists (which you are). yet you are happy to turn around and say that denial of service to blacks based on race for centuries caused NO HARM whatsoever to them.

do you not see the total contradiction and double standards you apply based solely on race?

because the rest of us all see it, and that's why everyone knows you to be a racist.