|
Post by aboutwell on Jul 31, 2015 17:53:27 GMT -5
The Pubs are putting up a lot of wing candidates. Let the Dems do the same, and answer the question of which philosophy Americans truly want. The Democrats are much more united... they don't need 18 wings...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 1, 2015 12:34:18 GMT -5
The Pubs are putting up a lot of wing candidates. Let the Dems do the same, and answer the question of which philosophy Americans truly want. The Democrats are much more united... they don't need 18 wings... You're absolutely right. One tiny little, rigidly PC box is all Democrat intellect is able to fathom.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 1, 2015 13:07:31 GMT -5
The Democrats are much more united... they don't need 18 wings... You're absolutely right. One tiny little, rigidly PC box is all Democrat intellect is able to fathom. Exactly... you're either right or wrong... no big boxes... Size 18...
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 1, 2015 15:55:54 GMT -5
The Democrats are much more united... they don't need 18 wings... You're absolutely right. One tiny little, rigidly PC box is all Democrat intellect is able to fathom. It's all the Pubs are able to fathom, as well. Since Tom DeLay, at least. I posted an article not too long ago about how the Pubs stripped a chairmanship from one of their own for voting as his constituents asked him to instead of as the party leadership asked him too. Yeah, that's real diversity there! You folks who think the Pubs are the sum of all that is virtuous are kinda low-hanging fruit!
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 1, 2015 16:09:39 GMT -5
You're absolutely right. One tiny little, rigidly PC box is all Democrat intellect is able to fathom. It's all the Pubs are able to fathom, as well. Since Tom DeLay, at least. I posted an article not too long ago about how the Pubs stripped a chairmanship from one of their own for voting as his constituents asked him to instead of as the party leadership asked him too. Yeah, that's real diversity there! You folks who think the Pubs are the sum of all that is virtuous are kinda low-hanging fruit! Dude, there are 17 odd people running for the Republican ticket, ranging from the Libertarian Rand Paul, to the Religious Right Huckabee, to the Establishmentarian Jeb Bush, to the crony capitalist Trump. There are two Latinos, an African American, an Indian and a woman. The Democrats are offering a gaggle of old white socialists. If you think the GOP isn't diverse, you're not paying attention. In fact, even your example runs counter to your point. There are upstarts in the GOP challenging leadership in ways that no one dares or bothers to on the Democrat side. You really could have picked a better example of lock-steppery than someone that got punished for going against the grain.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 1, 2015 18:04:08 GMT -5
You really could have picked a better example of lock-steppery than someone that got punished for going against the grain.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 1, 2015 20:32:24 GMT -5
The Pubs are putting up a lot of wing candidates. Let the Dems do the same, and answer the question of which philosophy Americans truly want. The Democrats are much more united... they don't need 18 wings... Correct, they are running a criminal, who sold her office while Sec State, destroyed evidence after being subpoenaed, and got 4 Americans murdered, a Socialist loon, and a coward that can't even admit that all lives matter.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 1, 2015 20:35:35 GMT -5
You're absolutely right. One tiny little, rigidly PC box is all Democrat intellect is able to fathom. It's all the Pubs are able to fathom, as well. Since Tom DeLay, at least. I posted an article not too long ago about how the Pubs stripped a chairmanship from one of their own for voting as his constituents asked him to instead of as the party leadership asked him too. Yeah, that's real diversity there! You folks who think the Pubs are the sum of all that is virtuous are kinda low-hanging fruit! The current "leadership" is nothng more than Democrats. the Dems, however, not only are the Party of the KKK, but also support the murder and organ harvesting by the genocidal Planned Parenthood.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 1, 2015 20:56:27 GMT -5
The current "leadership" is nothng more than Democrats. the Dems, however, not only are the Party of the KKK, but also support the murder and organ harvesting by the genocidal Planned Parenthood. It's cute how you keep repeating this as if that will make it true.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 1, 2015 22:44:23 GMT -5
The Democrats are much more united... they don't need 18 wings... Correct, they are running a criminal, who sold her office while Sec State, destroyed evidence after being subpoenaed, and got 4 Americans murdered, a Socialist loon, and a coward that can't even admit that all lives matter. And one who is 2-1 odds to win a majority of the votes of the American voters... because they don't agree with you...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 2, 2015 5:41:51 GMT -5
The current "leadership" is nothng more than Democrats. the Dems, however, not only are the Party of the KKK, but also support the murder and organ harvesting by the genocidal Planned Parenthood. It's cute how you keep repeating this as if that will make it true. How is it not true? The last KKK figure in Congress was Robert Byrd. Who, at one point, early on in this administration was third or fourth in the line of succession should something happen to Obama. The KKK was started by Democrats, and through most of its existence was entirely composed of Democrats. Planned Parenthood was started by a believer in eugenics, who hoped to reduce the undesireable population - again, she was talking about blacks. Most Planned Parenthood clinics are conveniently located in minority communities, and the rates of abortion are higher in minority populations. They do harvest organs, and sell them for profit, otherwise their leadership would have been able to quote a firm price to the anti-abortion people who were filming them, because shipping and handling costs are known quantities that don't require negotiation.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 2, 2015 10:24:53 GMT -5
Because in both cases, redleg, and now you, are working from information that is decades out of date. I get that you conservatives think nothing ever changes, and like it that way, but geez!
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 2, 2015 10:38:42 GMT -5
Because in both cases, redleg, and now you, are working from information that is decades out of date. I get that you conservatives think nothing ever changes, and like it that way, but geez! No wonder you deleted the rest of my post in your response. It makes it a touch easier to hide the fact that you're just flat out WRONG. Byrd was President Pro-Tem of the Senate when Obama was elected. I wonder if Planned Parenthood solicits donations from racists who believe it's doing God's work by ending some crazy high percentage of black pregnancies.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 2, 2015 11:21:15 GMT -5
Because in both cases, redleg, and now you, are working from information that is decades out of date. I get that you conservatives think nothing ever changes, and like it that way, but geez! No wonder you deleted the rest of my post in your response. It makes it a touch easier to hide the fact that you're just flat out WRONG. Byrd was President Pro-Tem of the Senate when Obama was elected. I wonder if Planned Parenthood solicits donations from racists who believe it's doing God's work by ending some crazy high percentage of black pregnancies. No deception intended. The "decades out of date" refers to Byrd's having ended his KKK association decades ago. Around the time he went into politics and perhaps for that reason. Whereas the Pubs had racists who stayed racists until their retired: Helms, Lott and Thurmond come to mind. As for whether there are racists donating to PP, you'd have to ask them!
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 2, 2015 11:44:30 GMT -5
No wonder you deleted the rest of my post in your response. It makes it a touch easier to hide the fact that you're just flat out WRONG. Byrd was President Pro-Tem of the Senate when Obama was elected. I wonder if Planned Parenthood solicits donations from racists who believe it's doing God's work by ending some crazy high percentage of black pregnancies. No deception intended. The "decades out of date" refers to Byrd's having ended his KKK association decades ago. Around the time he went into politics and perhaps for that reason. Whereas the Pubs had racists who stayed racists until their retired: Helms, Lott and Thurmond come to mind. As for whether there are racists donating to PP, you'd have to ask them! Well, if you're going to define racist as someone who doesn't belong to the Democrat party, I suppose you're right, and Byrd stopped being a racist the moment he went into politics. But this notion is patently absurd to anyone who thinks beyond what the 'Crats tell them. Don't worry though, it's a common logic error that many people fall victim to today. As I recall, Helms, Thurmond and Lott all retired before Byrd, and the sum total of Lott's racism was some poorly thought out praise for Thurmond on the occasion of the latter's 100th birthday, regarding something Thrumond had done when he was a Democrat.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 2, 2015 11:56:35 GMT -5
Well, if you're going to define racist as someone who doesn't belong to the Democrat party, I suppose you're right, and Byrd stopped being a racist the moment he went into politics. But this notion is patently absurd to anyone who thinks beyond what the 'Crats tell them. Don't worry though, it's a common logic error that many people fall victim to today. As I recall, Helms, Thurmond and Lott all retired before Byrd, and the sum total of Lott's racism was some poorly thought out praise for Thurmond on the occasion of the latter's 100th birthday, regarding something Thrumond had done when he was a Democrat. It looks like you're implying, in one post, that Byrd did not stop being a racist when he entered politics. Could be, who knows. But then you claim that Lott wasn't racist, just someone who made a politically maladroit comment. What???
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 2, 2015 12:08:29 GMT -5
Well, if you're going to define racist as someone who doesn't belong to the Democrat party, I suppose you're right, and Byrd stopped being a racist the moment he went into politics. But this notion is patently absurd to anyone who thinks beyond what the 'Crats tell them. Don't worry though, it's a common logic error that many people fall victim to today. As I recall, Helms, Thurmond and Lott all retired before Byrd, and the sum total of Lott's racism was some poorly thought out praise for Thurmond on the occasion of the latter's 100th birthday, regarding something Thrumond had done when he was a Democrat. It looks like you're implying, in one post, that Byrd did not stop being a racist when he entered politics. Could be, who knows. But then you claim that Lott wasn't racist, just someone who made a politically maladroit comment. What??? Lott, unlike Byrd, received the benefit of the doubt provided to people who were never in the Klan. Beyond that aforementioned comment, where is your evidence of Lott's racism? Or is that just something you take for granted when it comes to Republicans?
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Aug 2, 2015 12:20:31 GMT -5
It looks like you're implying, in one post, that Byrd did not stop being a racist when he entered politics. Could be, who knows. But then you claim that Lott wasn't racist, just someone who made a politically maladroit comment. What??? Lott, unlike Byrd, received the benefit of the doubt provided to people who were never in the Klan. Beyond that aforementioned comment, where is your evidence of Lott's racism? Or is that just something you take for granted when it comes to Republicans? No. Only the ones who make racist comments. Your position appears to be that racist stink never washes off Byrd, but never sticks to Lott. That's contradictory.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 2, 2015 12:46:42 GMT -5
As I recall.....the sum total of Lott's racism was some poorly thought out praise for Thurmond on the occasion of the latter's 100th birthday, regarding something Thrumond had done when he was a Democrat. You wish... and you are dead wrong... I've known Trent Lott for at least 30 years... (even supported him at one time... been with him in private homes here in South Mississippi)... and you know next to nothing about him...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 2, 2015 12:49:58 GMT -5
Lott, unlike Byrd, received the benefit of the doubt provided to people who were never in the Klan. Beyond that aforementioned comment, where is your evidence of Lott's racism? Or is that just something you take for granted when it comes to Republicans? No. Only the ones who make racist comments. Your position appears to be that racist stink never washes off Byrd, but never sticks to Lott. That's contradictory. Never mind all the "White Citizens Council" meetings Lott attended and spoke at... among other things... too numerous to go into here... which RJ wouldn't believe anyway... a waste of my time...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 2, 2015 14:40:49 GMT -5
Lott, unlike Byrd, received the benefit of the doubt provided to people who were never in the Klan. Beyond that aforementioned comment, where is your evidence of Lott's racism? Or is that just something you take for granted when it comes to Republicans? No. Only the ones who make racist comments. Your position appears to be that racist stink never washes off Byrd, but never sticks to Lott. That's contradictory. No. My position is that being a Grand Cyclops in the KKK is proof of racism. Alternatively, saying something nice about a 100 year old former colleague (perhaps without carefully thinking about all of the potential implications of the statement) is proof of not being as thoughtful as one might hope; but makes for very weak evidence of actual racism. It certainly doesn't rise to the level of proof. Meanwhile, your theory seems to be that making a thoughtless statement is the equivalent of being an Exalted Cyclops in the KKK. And that, frankly, is a truly bizarre theory.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 2, 2015 14:50:37 GMT -5
No. Only the ones who make racist comments. Your position appears to be that racist stink never washes off Byrd, but never sticks to Lott. That's contradictory. Never mind all the "White Citizens Council" meetings Lott attended and spoke at... among other things... too numerous to go into here... which RJ wouldn't believe anyway... a waste of my time... Not at all. I think we all expected you know about all the "white citizens council" meetings Lott was at from being at them.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 2, 2015 15:26:33 GMT -5
Never mind all the "White Citizens Council" meetings Lott attended and spoke at... among other things... too numerous to go into here... which RJ wouldn't believe anyway... a waste of my time... Not at all. I think we all expected you know about all the "white citizens council" meetings Lott was at from being at them. Close, but no cigar... I know he did... but I never attended one myself...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 2, 2015 16:13:36 GMT -5
Not at all. I think we all expected you know about all the "white citizens council" meetings Lott was at from being at them. Close, but no cigar... I know he did... but I never attended one myself... SUUURRRE. Whatever.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 2, 2015 20:06:31 GMT -5
Like I said...
|
|