A little history never hurt anyone.....The Battle of Athens Tenn. 1946

You didnt learn THIS In history class.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

The Battle of Athens (sometimes called the McMinn County War) was a rebellion led by citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the local government in August 1946. The citizens, including some World War II veterans, accused the local officials of political corruption and voter intimidation. The event is sometimes cited by firearms ownership advocates as an example of the value of the Second Amendment to bring fair elections.

--------------------------
After you digest the above and notice the name of the corrupt party is mentioned no where on the wiki article...

Read this article:

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1985/2/1985_2_72.shtml

Now do you wonder why all the sudden Democrats are so concered with "radicalised veterans"?

Why liberals lement a "red state army"?...

Quote from the article: "What's clear from the data is that a major national institution, the U.S. military, now has tighter connections to some regions of the country than others."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/14/AR200812...

You think maybe they realise that now over 150k soldiers are going to be returning from a succesful mission in Iraq and maybe remember who spent the last 6 years stabbing them in the back?

"This war is lost" Harry Reid
"They are killing civilians in cold blood" John Murtha
"Terrifying innocents in the middle of the night" John F'n Kerry ( served in vietman you know)
"If you cant read you end up stuck in Iraq" same vietnam HERO (formerly known by the left as "baby killers")
"Air raiding villages and killing civilians" commander and chief..

Or patriotic displays such as these:
http://www.capveterans.com/national_veterans_memorials_protection/id90.html

Gee...why would returning veterans make liberals nervous?

Reason # 1

They might form into political groups and vote the bums out through an honest election...

Reason #2

What happend when reason #1 failed.

No votes yet

Hmmm...wiki link didnt work you need to cut and paste it for some reason...:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

I do not think those numbers will make a lot of difference. It seems to me that around 8 million returned from World War II, and several hundred thousand from Southeast Asia. Most of us went to school or to work. Since we are in the midst of a recession a lot of these guys are probably going to stay in the service if there is room for them.

Of course, if they are not happy with the country as they find it, then they might rise in arms. Germany after World War I saw both the Right and the Left use veterans to beef up their goon squads. The Freikorps and the Communists both used men hardened in combat to advance their power. I would not be surprised to see among the small numbers of returning veterans those who would like to see things change.

Old South End Broadway

Oh I have no doubt...the number of returning veterans is very small compared to returning WW2 vets....and the vast majority went back to civilian life....whereas many current soldiers may in fact opt for a full career...

And there are very high numbers of national guard who will definately be returning to civilian life....

The number going to afganistan is small compared to those who will be comming home..Obama as only committed another 21,000....

I think what were going to find as the biggest danger of returning vets, something that went completey un addressed in the DHS report... recruitment by Urban gangs...

Some of these guys were gang bangers before they went in...and some wont make a clean break with that upon comming home...we may end up with our own "zeta" problem...

And No ..I dont think they will come home and take up arms... but I do think some will come home and venture into politics like the 46'ers...

And they have participated in both parties...

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

Let me tell you why you don't need to worry about veterans.

First using WWII as an example of returning veterans and why it doesn't fit today's mold is two parted. First their was a draft in place. Today there is none. It's an all volunteer force. Thus it's less likely that they would feel the wars "happened" to them.

Secondly, after WWII the services were greatly reduced. In fact my beloved Marine Corps was almost done away with as a service (which has almost happened multiple times to us).

It was done at such a speed and with such little regard that our nations defense was extremely vulnerable and when the North Koreans invaded South Korea even a sizable force of US troops in Japan with a battle tested leader couldn't prevent almost being totally beaten off the peninsula.

And the third reason is the young men and women who serve are selfless individuals. They are compensated very little as compared to their private counterparts. Even from 02-08 where our budgets were expanded and we were given more benefits we were behind the private sector.

They served because they more than most of our populace believe in the inherent goodness of America. They believe in a utilitarian outlook that their sacrifice for the benefit of society is noble. That is why you should not worry about returning veterans.

MikeyA

Great points mike...thanks for chiming in...

But then again...I didnt write the article lementing the "red state army"...

Appearently...there is some worry going around in certain quarters...

If someone who swears an oath to defend the constitution of the United states from enemies both foriegn and domestic makes one nervous ....maybe there's good reason eh...

Especially if you view it as a "document of negative rights"...

*grin*

I still think this is an interesting episode of American history that few people even know about...

Z

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

Articles like this make me wonder what our resident piece of shit, Marcy Kapturd thinks about all this?

There was once upon a time when she compared our founding fathers to terrorists:

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?SearchID=7312797032742...

I wonder if she'd take a stance to say where the example Z put out here also was pretty 'founding father-ish?

No, Im sure she'd take the other tack.

...and I am sure that the "loyalists" who maintained their allegiance to the "Crown" while their homes were burned might have felt they were dealing with terrorists. The great thing about America is that it should not matter what your grandparents did, but what you do. Washington and Jefferson both owned slaves. We still revere them even in a time when owning slaves is considered wrong. They were not bad men for their times, and maybe there are those among us who would welcome both them and their slaves to this time. I do not think I would.

Old South End Broadway

Ah yes..the founder were just a bunch of rich white guy slave owners.....

Here...this will really boil your tea...

The "Founding Fathers" were strong advocates of republican values, particularly Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, George Washington, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton.[5] For women, "republican motherhood" became the ideal, exemplified by Abigail Adams and Mercy Otis Warren; the first duty of the republican woman was to instill republican values in her children and to avoid luxury and ostentation. The commitment of most Americans to republican values and to their rights, helped bring about the American Revolution, for Britain was increasingly seen as hopelessly corrupt and hostile to American interests; it seemed to threaten to the established liberties that Americans enjoyed. The greatest threat to liberty was depicted as corruption—not just in London but at home as well. The colonists associated it with luxury and, especially, inherited aristocracy, which they condemned

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

...as long as it did not interfere with slavery in the South, and landed gentry in the North. We did not have popularly elected Senators until 1913. Until then it was considered okay for those with political power (usually the wealthiest) to determine who would be Senators from the comfort of the state legislatures.

Women had their place, but not in politics. Each step in political progress has been in spite of the "Founding Fathers", not because of them. They had their place, they started it all, but they would be appalled that men can vote without regard to property or station. They wanted freedom from the tyranny of Britain, not from the rule of men like themselves.

And the damn Democrats started it all. Their corrupt office-holders changed laws to allow their supporters (the poor) to vote. And now we have a country where men (and women) black or white, rich or poor, can vote. Ain't that a bitch.

Old South End Broadway

"We did not have popularly elected Senators until 1913. Until then it was considered okay for those with political power (usually the wealthiest) to determine who would be Senators from the comfort of the state legislatures."

Uh...yeah....what you mean is...up until 1913...the appointment of senators was within the original constitution...

"It was considered Ok" my stinkin but...it was following the LAW...and there was a reason for it...

Senators are supposed to represent the intrests of a Soveriegn STATE within a federalist system...

Once the 17th amendment was passed....this was no longer the case....and allowed the senate to creep into a party cast system which is a monkey wrench into the way it was set up...

For example...Dodd has raised about $4500 from his own state...and about $600,000 from outside the state....now who is he beholden to?
-----------------------------------------
Originally, each Senator was to be elected by his state legislature to represent his state, providing one of the many American governmental checks and balances. The delegates to the Convention also expected a Senator elected by his state's legislature would be able to concentrate on the governmental business at hand without direct, immediate pressure from the populace of his state, also aided by a longer term (six years) than the one afforded to members of the House of Representatives (two years).

This process worked without major problems through the mid-1850s, when the American Civil War was in the offing. Because of increasing partisanship and strife, many state legislatures failed to elect Senators for prolonged periods. For example, in Indiana the conflict between Democrats in the southern half of the state and the emerging Republican Party in the northern half prevented a Senate election for two years. The aforementioned partisanship led to contentious battles in the legislatures, as the struggle to elect Senators reflected the increasing regional tensions in the lead up to the Civil War.

After the Civil War, the problems multiplied. In one case in the mid-1860s, the election of Senator John P. Stockton from New Jersey was contested on the grounds that he had been elected by a plurality rather than a majority in the state legislature.[1] Stockton defended himself on the grounds that the exact method for elections was murky and varied from state to state. To keep this from happening again, Congress passed a law in 1866 regulating how and when Senators were to be elected from each state. This was the first change in the process of senatorial elections. While the law helped, there were still deadlocks in some legislatures and accusations of bribery, corruption, and suspicious dealings in some elections. Nine bribery cases were brought before the Senate between 1866 and 1906, and 45 deadlocks occurred in 20 states between 1891 and 1905, resulting in numerous delays in seating Senators. Beginning in 1899, Delaware did not send a senator to Washington for four years.

Reform efforts began as early as 1826, when direct election was first proposed. In the 1870s, voters sent a petition to the House of Representatives for popular election. From 1893 to 1902, the popularity of this idea increased considerably. Each year during that period, a constitutional amendment to elect Senators by popular vote was proposed in Congress, but the Senate resisted greatly. In the mid-1890s, the Populist Party incorporated the direct election of Senators into its platform, although neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party paid much notice at the time. Direct election was also part of the Wisconsin Idea championed by the Republican progressive Robert M. La Follette, Sr. and the Nebraskan Republican reformer George W. Norris. In the early 1900s, Oregon pioneered direct election of Senators, and it experimented with different measures over several years until success in 1907. Soon thereafter, Nebraska followed suit, and it laid the foundation for other states to adopt measures for direct election of Senators.

After the turn of the century, support of Senatorial election reform grew rapidly. William Randolph Hearst expanded his publishing empire with Cosmopolitan, which became a respected general-interest magazine at that time, and which championed the cause of direct election with muckraking articles and strong advocacy of reform. Hearst hired a veteran reporter, David Graham Phillips, who wrote scathing pieces on Senators, portraying them as corrupt pawns of industrialists and financiers. The pieces became a series titled "The Treason of the Senate," which appeared in several monthly issues of the magazine in 1906.[2]

Increasingly, Senators were elected based on state referenda, similar to the means developed by Oregon. By 1912, as many as 29 states elected Senators either as nominees of party primaries, or in conjunction with a general election. As representatives of a direct election process, the new Senators supported measures that argued for new legislation, but in order to achieve total election reform, a constitutional amendment was required. In 1911, Senator Joseph L. Bristow from Kansas offered a resolution, proposing an amendment. The notion enjoyed strong support from Senator William Borah of Idaho, himself a product of direct election. Eight Southern Senators and all of the Republican Senators from New England, New York and Pennsylvania opposed Bristow's resolution. Nevertheless, the Senate approved the resolution largely because of the Senators who had been elected by state-initiated reforms, many of whom were serving their first terms, and therefore were more willing to support direct election. After the Senate passed the Amendment resolution, the measure moved to the House of Representatives.

The House initially had fared no better than the Senate in its early discussions of the proposed Amendment. During the summer of 1912, the House finally passed the amendment and sent it to the States for ratification. The campaign for public support was aided by Senators such as Senator Borah and the political scientist George H. Haynes, whose scholarly work on the Senate contributed to passage of the amendment.[1]

On April 8, 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment was adopted, upon its ratification by Connecticut, a year and a half prior to the 1914 Senate election.

------------------------------------
This also means that senators are generally from the most populated cities...rather than being appointed by state representatives...

There are pluses and minus' as listed above...and it looks to me like you should be thanking the hearst paper company rather than democrats and was more a result of the civil war and monkey shines by several states rather than a hue and cry for a popular vote......

-------------------------------------------

Women had their place, but not in politics. Each step in political progress has been in spite of the "Founding Fathers", not because of them. They had their place, they started it all, but they would be appalled that men can vote without regard to property or station. They wanted freedom from the tyranny of Britain, not from the rule of men like themselves.

------------------------------------------

Welp...you can thank men without property or station for passing stuff like the COSI bail out, ...

When people find out they can vote to take things from people rather than earn them...it was a boon for people who would rather that YOU pay for THEM...

I wont dip my toe into the scummy pond of Misogyny other then to address this...you cannot place today's norms upon the reality and custom of the past...we've come along way baby...

I'm sure if they came back to life today..they would take a much bigger issue of how Govt functions rather than who votes for it....

--------------------------------------------------------

And the damn Democrats started it all. Their corrupt office-holders changed laws to allow their supporters (the poor) to vote. And now we have a country where men (and women) black or white, rich or poor, can vote. Ain't that a bitch.

---------------------------------------------------

LMAO...you dont get out much do you...

Amazing...

The prohibition on sex discrimination was added by Howard W. Smith, a powerful Virginian Democrat who chaired the House Rules Committee and who had strongly opposed the Civil Rights Act.

Smith knew Republicans, who had included equal rights for women in their party's platform since 1944, would vote for the amendment along with southern Democrats and get it in the final bill. Smith thought that northern Democrats would not vote for the bill due to the inclusion of gender, because the clause was opposed by labor unions which the northern Democrats aligned themselves with. Representative Carl Elliott of Alabama later claimed, "Smith didn't give a damn about women's rights...he was trying to knock off votes either then or down the line because there was always a hard core of men who didn't favor women's rights," and the Congressional Record records that Smith was greeted by laughter when he introduced the amendment.

Kennedy's Civil Rights bill was still being debated by Congress when he was assassinated in November, 1963. The new president, Lyndon Baines Johnson, who had a poor record on civil rights issues, took up the cause. His main opponent was his long-time friend and mentor, Richard B. Russell, who told the Senate: "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states." Russell organized 18 Southern Democratic senators in filibustering this bill.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act was an update of Republican Senator Charles Sumner's 1875 Civil Rights Act. In striking down that law in 1883, the Supreme Court had ruled that the 14th amendment was not sufficient constitutional authorization, so the 1964 version had to be written in such a way as to rely instead on the interstate commerce clause for its constitutional underpinning.

Mindful of how Democrat opposition had forced the Republicans to weaken their 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts, President Johnson warned Democrats in Congress that this time it was all or nothing. To ensure support from Republicans, he had to promise them that he would not accept any weakening of the bill and also that he would publicly credit our Party for its role in securing congressional approval. Johnson played no direct role in the legislative fight, so that it would not be perceived as a partisan struggle. There was no doubt that the House of Representatives would pass the bill.

In the Senate, Minority Leader Everett Dirksen had little trouble rounding up the votes of most Republicans, and former presidential candidate Richard Nixon also lobbied hard for the bill. Senate Majority Leader Michael Mansfield and Senator Hubert Humphrey led the Democrat drive for passage, while the chief opponents were Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, of later Watergate fame, Albert Gore Sr., and Robert Byrd. Senator Byrd, a former Klansman whom Democrats still call "the conscience of the Senate", filibustered against the civil rights bill for fourteen straight hours before the final vote. The House of Representatives passed the bill by 289 to 126, a vote in which 79% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats voted yes. The Senate vote was 73 to 27, with 21 Democrats and only 6 Republicans voting no. President Johnson signed the new Civil Rights Act into law on July 2, 1964.

Overall, there was little overt resistance to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The struggle was not yet over, however, as most southern state governments remained under the control of segregationist Democrats. It was a Republican federal judge who desegregated many public facilities in the South. Appointed by President Eisenhower in 1955, Frank Johnson had overturned Montgomery, Alabama's infamous "blacks in the back of the bus" law in his very first decision. During the 1960s, Judge Johnson continued to advance civil rights despite opposition from George Wallace, Lester Maddox, and other Democrat Governors.

------------------------------------

History is cool.....

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

it's generally considered proper ettiquette to at least link to your souce(s)....unless you came up with this all by your little own self.

In point of fact, what you should have focused on was not the 'party' labels of Republicans and Dems, but 'philisophical' labels like conservative vs. progressive/liberal.

As you correctly note, many of the southern Democrats in fact were against rights pertaining to minorities, but they were advocating the conservative viewpoint of the day whereas many Republicans (correctly) took a more progressive or even liberal (for it's time) approach to the topic at hand.

Can you see better now with the new glasses?

.

Hey, where'd ya go? You were here a minute ago...

Monkey on meth?

LMAO...cute....like a 5th grade joke is cute...

Wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

I'm getting a bit tired of having to do your research for you...

Ah yes...the "republicans where all liberal and the democrats where all conservative" myth...

So al gore's dad was a filthy conservative racist?

Al Gore was raised by a racist bastard?

Robert Byrd was a grand dragon of the KKK and he's STILL a sitting US DEMOCRAT senator? who STILL uses racial slurs?

Care to nail down the exact year this great transformation took place?

Maybe the decade?

Got a link??????????????????????

nevermind..I'll do it for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Republican_Party

Realignment: The South becomes Republican

In the century after Reconstruction, the white South identified with the Democratic Party. The Democrats' lock on power was so strong, the region was called the Solid South. The Republicans controlled certain parts of the Appalachian mountains, and they sometimes did compete for statewide office in the border states. Before 1948, the southern Democrats saw their party as the defender of the southern way of life, which included a respect for states' rights and an appreciation for traditional southern values. They repeatedly warned against the aggressive designs of Northern liberals and Republicans, as well as the civil rights activists they denounced as "outside agitators." Thus there was a serious barrier to becoming a Republican.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic Party, but supported segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican Party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just as Martin Luther King had promised. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

The South's transition to a Republican stronghold took decades. First the states started voting Republican in presidential elections—the Democrats countered that by nominating Southerners who could carry some states in the region, such as Jimmy Carter in 1976, and Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996; however, the strategy did not work with Al Gore in 2000. Then the states began electing Republican senators to fill open seats caused by retirements, and finally governors and state legislatures changed sides. Georgia was the last state to fall, with Sonny Perdue taking the governorship in 2002. Republicans aided the process with redistricting that protected the African American and Hispanic vote (as required by the Civil Rights laws), but split up the remaining white Democrats so that Republicans mostly would win. In 2006 the Supreme Court endorsed nearly all of the gerrymandering engineered by Tom DeLay that swung the Texas Congressional delegation to the GOP in 2004.

In addition to its white middle class base, Republicans attracted strong majorities from the evangelical Christian vote, which had been nonpolitical before 1980. The national Democratic Party's support for liberal social stances such as abortion drove many former Democrats into a Republican Party that was embracing the conservative views on these issues. Conversely, liberal Republicans in the northeast began to join the Democratic Party. In 1969 in The Emerging Republican Majority, Kevin Phillips, argued that support from Southern whites and growth in the Sun Belt, among other factors, was driving an enduring Republican electoral realignment. Today, the South is again solid, but the reliable support is for Republican presidential candidates. Exit polls in 2004 showed that Bush led Kerry by 70-30% among whites, who comprised 71% of the Southern voters. Kerry had a 90-9% lead among the 18% of the voters who were black. One third of the Southerners said they were white evangelicals; they voted for Bush by 80-20%.[13]

Here...this will really blow your mind...heh heh

http://www.trustedpartner.com/docs/library/000143/Alveda%20King%20articl...

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

your recent cut 'n paste underscores what I've already said. It's peppered all over your own comment:

'Before 1948, the southern Democrats saw their party as the defender of the southern way of life, which included a respect for states' rights and an appreciation for traditional southern values. They repeatedly warned against the aggressive designs of Northern liberals and Republicans, as well as the civil rights activists they denounced as "outside agitators."

'When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic Party, but supported segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican Party.'

Let's try this again, Zoltan. Southern democrats were conservative. They resisted change and they resisted what they felt was federal intrusion into their states' rights. Any Republican who helped push through civil rights' legislation was enlightened/progessive/liberal and we could use a few more of those today.

LMAO...excepting your premis for one second...

What about the northern democrats????

You are acting as if the democrat party as a whole didnt exist for some reason...why would northern democrats put up with racists in the south being part of the party?

Eh?

"Smith knew Republicans, who had included equal rights for women in their party's platform since 1944, would vote for the amendment along with southern Democrats and get it in the final bill. Smith thought that northern Democrats would not vote for the bill due to the inclusion of gender, because the clause was opposed by labor unions which the northern Democrats aligned themselves with. Representative Carl Elliott of Alabama later claimed, "Smith didn't give a damn about women's rights...he was trying to knock off votes either then or down the line because there was always a hard core of men who didn't favor women's rights," and the Congressional Record records that Smith was greeted by laughter when he introduced the amendment."

And yet you havent named the year this great transformation took place...or even the decade...

And why would these new democrats stay democrats?

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5465

Didnt the dems get the memo in West virginia or kentucky?

Souldnt they allready be republicans since the 60's according to you?

So you tap dance around the facts..refuse to address them...cherry pick and bold two sentences out of the whole article...then say you disproved Democrat racism?

What about the northern "copperheads" aka "peace democrats" in Ohio?...when did they switch parties???

Did they all move south?

See...this is a nice myth...it serves a purpose...the purpose is to keep blacks on the democrat plantation...

Which modern party thinks People of color are equal to anyone else and should stand or fall on their own merits like freemen?

And which modern party treats people of color like children who need their help to acomplish anything in life...

I used to believe it....hell..it was drummed into our heads....

I had never even heard of copperheads until I stumbled on it looking something up on the internet...not one of my history teachers ever mentioned their existance..not one text book...

Yet they were an important part of the history of the civil war...how do you teach the civil war and not mention it at all?

Oh...it's embarrasing...that's why...

This op-ed peice nails it pretty well...

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110011033

Blacks "are inferior to the whites in the endowments of both of body and mind."

--Thomas Jefferson, 1787
Co-founder of the Democratic Party (along with Andrew Jackson)
President, 1801-09

"I hold that the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding states between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good--a positive good."

--Sen. John C. Calhoun (D., S.C.), 1837
Vice President, 1825-32
His statue stands in the U.S. Capitol.

If blacks were given the right to vote, that would "place every splay-footed, bandy-shanked, hump-backed, thick-lipped, flat-nosed, woolly-headed, ebon-colored Negro in the country upon an equality with the poor white man."

--Rep. Andrew Johnson, (D., Tenn.), 1844
President, 1865-69

"Resolved, That the Democratic Party will resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or out of it, the agitation of the slavery question, under whatever shape or color the attempt may be made."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1852

Blacks are "a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race."

--Chief Justice Roger Taney, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1856
Appointed Attorney General by Andrew Jackson in 1831
Appointed Secretary of the Treasury by Andrew Jackson in 1833
Appointed to the Supreme Court by Andrew Jackson in 1836

"Resolved, That claiming fellowship with, and desiring the co-operation of all who regard the preservation of the Union under the Constitution as the paramount issue--and repudiating all sectional parties and platforms concerning domestic slavery, which seek to embroil the States and incite to treason and armed resistance to law in the Territories; and whose avowed purposes, if consummated, must end in civil war and disunion, the American Democracy recognize and adopt the principles contained in the organic laws establishing the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska as embodying the only sound and safe solution of the 'slavery question' upon which the great national idea of the people of this whole country can repose in its determined conservatism of the Union--NON-INTERFERENCE BY CONGRESS WITH SLAVERY IN STATE AND TERRITORY, OR IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA" (emphasis in original).

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1856

"I hold that a Negro is not and never ought to be a citizen of the United States. I hold that this government was made on the white basis; made by the white men, for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and should be administered by white men and none others."

--Sen. Stephen A. Douglas (D., Ill.), 1858
Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, 1860

"Resolved, That the enactments of the State Legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1860

"The Almighty has fixed the distinction of the races; the Almighty has made the black man inferior, and, sir, by no legislation, by no military power, can you wipe out this distinction."

--Rep. Fernando Wood (D., N.Y.), 1865
Mayor of New York City, 1855-58, 1860-62

"My fellow citizens, I have said that the contest before us was one for the restoration of our government; it is also one for the restoration of our race. It is to prevent the people of our race from being exiled from their homes--exiled from the government which they formed and created for themselves and for their children, and to prevent them from being driven out of the country or trodden under foot by an inferior and barbarous race."

--Francis P. Blair Jr., accepting the Democratic nomination for Vice President, 1868
Democratic Senator from Missouri, 1869-72
His statue stands in the U.S. Capitol.

"Instead of restoring the Union, it [the Republican Party] has, so far as in its power, dissolved it, and subjected ten states, in time of profound peace, to military despotism and Negro supremacy."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1868

"While the tendency of the white race is upward, the tendency of the colored race is downward."

--Sen. Thomas Hendricks (D., Ind.), 1869
Democratic nominee for Vice President, 1876
Vice President, 1885

"We, the delegates of the Democratic party of the United States . . . demand such modification of the treaty with the Chinese Empire, or such legislation within constitutional limitations, as shall prevent further importation or immigration of the Mongolian race."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1876

"No more Chinese immigration, except for travel, education, and foreign commerce, and that even carefully guarded."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1880

"American civilization demands that against the immigration or importation of Mongolians to these shores our gates be closed."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1884

"We favor the continuance and strict enforcement of the Chinese exclusion law, and its application to the same classes of all Asiatic races."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1900

"The repeal of the fifteenth amendment, one of the greatest blunders and therefore one of the greatest crimes in political history, is a consummation to be devoutly wished for."

--Rep. John Sharpe Williams (D., Miss.), 1903
House Minority Leader, 1903-08

"Republicanism means Negro equality, while the Democratic Party means that the white man is supreme. That is why we Southerners are all Democrats."

--Sen. Ben Tillman (D., S.C.), 1906
Chairman, Committee on Naval Affairs, 1913-19

"We are opposed to the admission of Asiatic immigrants who can not be amalgamated with our population, or whose presence among us would raise a race issue and involve us in diplomatic controversies with Oriental powers."

--Platform of the Democratic Party, 1908
"I am opposed to the practice of having colored policemen in the District [of Columbia]. It is a source of danger by constantly engendering racial friction, and is offensive to thousands of Southern white people who make their homes here."

--Sen. Hoke Smith (D., Ga.), 1912
Appointed Secretary of the Interior by Grover Cleveland in 1893

"The South is serious with regard to its attitude to the Negro in politics. The South understands this subject, and its policy is unalterable and uncompromising. We desire no concessions. We seek no sops. We grasp no shadows on this subject. We take no risks. We abhor a Northern policy of catering to the Negro in politics just as we abhor a Northern policy of social equality."

--Josephus Daniels, editor, Raleigh News & Observer, 1912
Appointed Secretary of the Navy by Woodrow Wilson in 1913
Appointed Ambassador to Mexico by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933
USS Josephus Daniels named for him by the Johnson Administration in 1965

"The Negro as a race, in all the ages of the world, has never shown sustained power of self-development. He is not endowed with the creative faculty. . . . He has never created for himself any civilization. . . . He has never had any civilization except that which has been inculcated by a superior race. And it is a lamentable fact that his civilization lasts only so long as he is in the hands of the white man who inculcates it. When left to himself he has universally gone back to the barbarism of the jungle."

--Sen. James Vardaman (D., Miss.), 1914
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, 1913-19
"This is a white man's country, and will always remain a white man's country."

--Rep. James F. Byrnes (D., S.C.), 1919
Appointed to the Supreme Court by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941
Appointed Secretary of State by Harry S. Truman in 1945

"Slavery among the whites was an improvement over independence in Africa. The very progress that the blacks have made, when--and only when--brought into contact with the whites, ought to be a sufficient argument in support of white supremacy--it ought to be sufficient to convince even the blacks themselves."

--William Jennings Bryan, 1923
Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, 1896, 1900 and 1908
Appointed Secretary of State by Woodrow Wilson in 1913
His statue stands in the U.S. Capitol.

"Anyone who has traveled to the Far East knows that the mingling of Asiatic blood with European or American blood produces, in nine cases out of ten, the most unfortunate results. . . . The argument works both ways. I know a great many cultivated, highly educated and delightful Japanese. They have all told me that they would feel the same repugnance and objection to have thousands of Americans settle in Japan and intermarry with the Japanese as I would feel in having large numbers of Japanese coming over here and intermarry with the American population. In this question, then, of Japanese exclusion from the United States it is necessary only to advance the true reason--the undesirability of mixing the blood of the two peoples. . . . The Japanese people and the American people are both opposed to intermarriage of the two races--there can be no quarrel there."

--Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1925
President, 1933-45
"This passport which you have given me is a symbol to me of the passport which you have given me before. I do not feel that it would be out of place to state to you here on this occasion that I know that without the support of the members of this organization I would not have been called, even by my enemies, the 'Junior Senator from Alabama.' "

--Hugo Black, accepting a life membership in the Ku Klux Klan upon his election to the U.S. Senate as a Democrat from Alabama, 1926
Appointed to the Supreme Court by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937

"Mr. President, the crime of lynching . . . is not of sufficient importance to justify this legislation."

--Sen. Claude Pepper (D., Fla.), 1938

Spoken while engaged in a six-hour speech against the antilynching bill

"I am a former Kleagle [recruiter] of the Ku Klux Klan in Raleigh County. . . . The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia. It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state in the union."

--Robert C. Byrd, 1946
Democratic Senator from West Virginia, 1959-present
Senate Majority Leader, 1977-80 and 1987-88
Senate President Pro Tempore, 1989-95, 2001-03, 2007-present
His portrait stands in the U.S. Capitol.

President Truman's civil rights program "is a farce and a sham--an effort to set up a police state in the guise of liberty. I am opposed to that program. I have voted against the so-called poll tax repeal bill. . .. I have voted against the so-called anti-lynching bill."

--Rep. Lyndon B. Johnson (D., Texas), 1948
U.S. Senator, 1949-61
Senate Majority Leader, 1955-61
President, 1963-69
"There is no warrant for the curious notion that Christianity favors the involuntary commingling of the races in social institutions. Although He knew both Jews and Samaritans and the relations existing between them, Christ did not advocate that courts or legislative bodies should compel them to mix socially against their will."

--Sen. Sam Ervin (D., N.C.), 1955
Chairman, Committee on Government Operations, 1971-75
"The decline and fall of the Roman empire came after years of intermarriage with other races. Spain was toppled as a world power as a result of the amalgamation of the races. . . . Certainly history shows that nations composed of a mongrel race lose their strength and become weak, lazy and indifferent."

--Herman E. Talmadge, 1955
Democratic Senator from Georgia, 1957-81
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, 1971-81
"These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don't move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there'll be no way of stopping them, we'll lose the filibuster and there'll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It'll be Reconstruction all over again."

--Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson (D., Texas), 1957
"I have never seen very many white people who felt they were being imposed upon or being subjected to any second-class citizenship if they were directed to a waiting room or to any other public facility to wait or to eat with other white people. Only the Negroes, of all the races which are in this land, publicly proclaim they are being mistreated, imposed upon, and declared second-class citizens because they must go to public facilities with members of their own race."

--Sen. Richard B. Russell Jr. (D., Ga.), 1961
The Russell Senate Office Building is named for him.
"I did not lie awake at night worrying about the problems of Negroes."

--Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, 1961
Kennedy later authorized wiretapping the phones and bugging the hotel rooms of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

.
"I'm not going to use the federal government's authority deliberately to circumvent the natural inclination of people to live in ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods. . . . I have nothing against a community that's made up of people who are Polish or Czechoslovakian or French-Canadian or blacks who are trying to maintain the ethnic purity of their neighborhoods."

--Jimmy Carter, 1976
President, 1977-81
Winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, 2002

"The Confederate Memorial has had a special place in my life for many years. . . . There were many, many times that I found myself drawn to this deeply inspiring memorial, to contemplate the sacrifices of others, several of whom were my ancestors, whose enormous suffering and collective gallantry are to this day still misunderstood by most Americans."

--James Webb, 1990 Now a Democratic Senator from Virginia

"Everybody likes to go to Geneva. I used to do it for the Law of the Sea conferences and you'd find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva."

--Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D., S.C.) 1993
Chairman, Commerce Committee, 1987-95 and 2001-03

Candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, 1984

"I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia [Sen. Robert C. Byrd, a former Ku Klux Klan recruiter] that he would have been a great senator at any moment. . . . He would have been right during the great conflict of civil war in this nation."

--Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), 2004
Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
Candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, 2008

"You cannot go into a Dunkin' Donuts or a 7-Eleven unless you have a slight Indian accent."

"My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state has the eighth largest black population in the country. My state is anything [but] a Northeastern liberal state."

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African American [Barack Obama] who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice looking guy."

"There's less than 1% of the population of Iowa that is African American. There is probably less than 4% or 5% that is, are minorities. What is it in Washington? So look, it goes back to what you start off with, what you're dealing with."
Sen. Joseph Biden Jr., (D., Del.), 2006-07
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, 1987-95
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations
Candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, 2008

Bonus quote:
"It has of late become the custom of the men of the South to speak with entire candor of the settled and deliberate policy of suppressing the negro vote. They have been forced to choose between a policy of manifest injustice toward the blacks and the horrors of negro rule. They chose to disfranchise the negroes. That was manifestly the lesser of two evils. . . . The Republican Party committed a great public crime when it gave the right of suffrage to the blacks. . . . So long as the Fifteenth Amendment stands, the menace of the rule of the blacks will impend, and the safeguards against it must be maintained."

--Editorial, "The Political Future of the South," New York Times, May 10, 1900)

-------------------------------------

In other words...your claim that only southern democrats were racist is ludicrous as evidenced by these quotes.

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

a tenth of an inch deep.

You really don't even read what you post, do you?

For beginners, after all this drivel, specifically point out where I used the word 'racist' in in anything i posted.

Oh I read it...or I wouldnt have posted it...and I read the rest at the link...did you?

Got anything other than a "no comment"?

"For beginners, after all this drivel, specifically point out where I used the word 'racist' in in anything i posted."

LMAO...very carefully worded....did you use the word "racist"?

Nope.....

Did you post this?

--------------------------
when cuttin' and pastin' like a monkey on meth
Submitted by McCaskey on Mon, 2009-04-20 00:46.
it's generally considered proper ettiquette to at least link to your souce(s)....unless you came up with this all by your little own self.

In point of fact, what you should have focused on was not the 'party' labels of Republicans and Dems, but 'philisophical' labels like conservative vs. progressive/liberal.

As you correctly note, many of the southern Democrats in fact were against rights pertaining to minorities, but they were advocating the conservative viewpoint of the day whereas many Republicans (correctly) took a more progressive or even liberal (for it's time) approach to the topic at hand.

Can you see better now with the new glasses?

.

Hey, where'd ya go? You were here a minute ago...

______________________

Yep...you sure did....now you can play word games all you want...but what you are saying is quite clear...

Conservative = racist

And the consevatives that where all southern democrats became republicans so they could still be racists...and appearently...the other side of the equation is that all the "liberal" republicans became Liberal democrats...

But for your little fantasy to be true...you have to ingore a shitload of quotes from "northern" democrats and well documented northern democrat activities...like you just did...

So when did the new york times do the switch from racist conservative to liberal democrat?

Bah...never mind...appearently easy questions based on your own assertions is beyond your limited capabilties...

A "drive by" forum poster...who would have guessed....

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats

'After losing control of their party and territory in the American Civil War, and during the Republican-led Reconstruction that followed, Southern Democrats regrouped into various vigilante organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and the White League'

'As the New Deal began to liberalize Democrats as a whole, Southern Democrats largely stayed as conservative as they had always been, with some even breaking off to form farther right-wing splinters like the Dixiecrats.'

At that point, most Southern Democrats defected to the Republican Party, and helped accelerate the latter's transformation into a more conservative organization.

'After World War II, during the civil rights movement, Democrats in the South initially still voted loyally with their party. The signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, however, was the last straw for many Southern Democrats, who began voting against Democratic incumbents for GOP candidates. The Republicans carried many Southern states for the first time since before the Great Depression'

http://www.holycross.edu/departments/economics/vmatheso/edit8.htm

'careful analysis of the Civil Rights Act voting record shows a distinct split between Northern and Southern politicians. Among the southern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia), Senate Democrats voted 1-21 against the bill (5%) while Republicans voted 0-1 (0%). In the House, southern Democrats voted 7-87 (7%) while southern Republicans voted 0-10 (0%). Among the remaining states, Democrats voted 145-9 in favor of the bill (94%) while Republicans voted 138-24 for the bill (85%). In both the North and the South, Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act at a higher rate than the Republicans.

Whattyaknow, genius, looks like you were right after all---your words, remember--conservative=racist.

Thanks for everything; and now, I'm done with 'ya.

See...was it so hard to admit your mind set?

Conservative equals racist...

So now that we've established a set of parameters...finally....

Lets look at the info at your provided link a litle closer shall we?

remember..according to you...conservative equals racist:

When Richard Nixon courted voters with his Southern Strategy, many Democrats became Republicans and the South became fertile ground for the GOP,

Well...Gee...Nixon was NOT a conservative...he was a moderate...a rockfeller republican

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Republican

which conversely was becoming more conservative as the Democrats were becoming more liberal.

yeah yeah...except for the conservative democrats STILL in the party..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Democrat

"In American politics, a conservative Democrat is a Democratic Party member with conservative political views, or with views relatively conservative with respect to those of the national party. While such members of the Democratic Party can be found throughout the nation, actual elected officials are disproportionately found within the Southern states, and to a lesser extent within rural regions of the several states generally, more commonly in the West."

Where did all the conservative democrats go?...oh...they are still there...they didnt go anywhere...except for a few dixiecrats who bolted DECADES ago...

Jim Webb is one of them in fact...( a dirty conservative racist)

"The Confederate Memorial has had a special place in my life for many years. . . . There were many, many times that I found myself drawn to this deeply inspiring memorial, to contemplate the sacrifices of others, several of whom were my ancestors, whose enormous suffering and collective gallantry are to this day still misunderstood by most Americans."

--James Webb, 1990 Now a Democratic Senator from Virginia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Democrat

" However, Democratic incumbents still held sway over voters in many states, especially those of the Deep South. In fact, until the 1980s, Democrats still had much control over Southern politics. It wasn't until the 1990s that Democratic control collapsed, starting with the elections of 1994, in which Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress, through the rest of the decade. Southern Democrats of today who vote the Democratic ticket are mostly urban liberals. Rural residents tend to vote the Republican ticket, although there are a sizable number of conservative Democrats.

Remember YOUR perameters:

Conservative equals racist

So when did this great migration take place?

Oh...it didnt....

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109846/Conservative-Democrats-Peeling-Away-Fr...

Gee...that's kinda embarassing....still so many many conservative democrats in the south and west.....

Looks like you got some purging to do...as it's now 2008...and you still have conservative racist democrats in your ranks...

Once again...reality bites myth right in the ass.....

Or maybe you should reappraise your opinion that conservative= racist

When in fact it's as simple as racist=racist....

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

will recall that Kaptur introduced a bill into the House and then re-introduced it three more times after it wasn't voted upon to construct a memorial to WWII veterans.

Then that other 'commie pinko' Bill Clinton picked a board to select a site, design it and raise money for the project, then signed the measure into law and it was completed in 2004.

Conservatives apparently believe they and only they own the 'veterans' issue. Quite the side-splitter.

First off...I fully supported the monument and it was WELL past the time for it...that being said...

You post leaves out a few "details" while you are busy bashing the evil conservatives...

100th Congress (1987-1989). Majority Party: Democrat
101st Congress (1989-1991). Majority Party: Democrat
102nd Congress (1991-1993).Majority Party Democrat

Hmmm.....doesnt quite jive with the tone of your post...does it...

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

my reply was to the one concerning Kaptur specifically.

There's hardly an need to 'bash' conservatives these days, is there? Are they even relevant? How'd the last couple elections go for y'all?

Look, hoot and holler and have your little Tea Parties and such and let the folks in power now do the real work to at least try to fix all the f*ckin'-up that's been going around the last eight years.

At some point, the pendelum will swing back your way; it always does. In the meantime, try to keep your pants dry from all the pissin' in the wind you do on here.

I gave you a little homework assignment some days back to figure out if El Rushbo, Hannity and the other bag of wind actually own and drive American vehicles or are just 'spokesmen' for such. Report back after recess.

my reply was to the one concerning Kaptur specifically.

Sorry...I have a bad habit of whipping out facts when I see retoric that runs counter to them....

The point remains...EVERYTIME marcy introduced the bill...Democrats had majority power...they could have passed it easily if they had the political will...

There's hardly an need to 'bash' conservatives these days, is there? Are they even relevant? How'd the last couple elections go for y'all?

Neener neener?...really?

I'd have to agree..why bother bashing conservatives when the press has clearly chosen sides years ago...

With years worth of negative press on Conservatives while time pretending Democrats are pure as the driven snow...it's a shock McCain got as close as he did...

And next time a conservative runs...let me know....McCain was no conservative....

Look, hoot and holler and have your little Tea Parties and such and let the folks in power now do the real work to at least try to fix all the f*ckin'-up that's been going around the last eight years.

Dissmisive arent we...

*snicker*......yeah...8 years minus the last two...

Dems took majority control of congress in 06'

But at least you admit that Dems are NOW in control...

At some point, the pendelum will swing back your way; it always does.

Perhaps...we'll see wont we...

In the meantime, try to keep your pants dry from all the pissin' in the wind you do on here.

Why do most liberal analogies involve bodily functions?

I gave you a little homework assignment some days back to figure out if El Rushbo, Hannity and the other bag of wind actually own and drive American vehicles or are just 'spokesmen' for such. Report back after recess.

Well...doing a short amount of research...this is close as I can get...maybe you can get wolfy to stalk him and tell us exactly what he drives...

" The Dodge RAM SRT-10 is the meanest. The Lamborghini Murciélago is the next meanest. The Bentley Arnage, the Dodge Durango, the Dodge Ram 1500 and the Maybach 57-S are all tied in the next position here as the third meanest. The Hummer H2O and the Ferrari F-99 GTB Fiorano and the Ford F-250 Super Duty 5.4 V8 four-wheel drive. The GMC Yukon, the Volkswagen Touareg and the Chevy Suburban all come in tied at the next stop. Now the vehicle I drive, I'm not going to identify it, but is somewhere on that list." Rush

He has stated it weighs 6000 lbs and has twin turbos...so scuttlebutt is that it's the bently...

But I bet it's actually a twin turbo diesel...which would make it one of the trucks or SUV's...probably a suburban.....and maybe even bullet proof...(crazy libs you know)...

And the fact remains he does advertise GM products...

And he owns a union made plane too...

Sean Hannity drives a Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid

And damn if there arent liberals bithcing about it and swearing off ever buying a GM product because of it...way to suport those unions...

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/rush-limbaugh-and-sean-hannity-are-gms-...

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/29/hannity-gm/

Here;s acouple of choice "progressive" comments:

Jay Randal Says:
Oh brother who would want to buy a GM car now with Hannity pushing it?
Only far-right toothless religious freaks will buy GM cars now > lol.

theswan Says:

That’s a turn off. Suddenly I think I look at Toyota.

Beck?...here...see for yourself...

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f19/glenn-beck-gm-car-ambassador-76432/

Is that good enough for you?

Now...something YOU never addressed...what kind of car does turbo tax timmy drive again?

Obama's "auto team"?

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090223/AUTO01/902230327

Bueller?

So...taking issue with What fred drives...and not taking issue with what the president own auto teams drives is what?...

hy·poc·ri·sy
Pronunciation: \hi-ˈpä-krə-sē also hī-\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural hy·poc·ri·sies
Etymology: Middle English ypocrisie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrisis, from Greek hypokrisis act of playing a part on the stage, hypocrisy, from hypokrinesthai to answer, act on the stage, from hypo- + krinein to decide — more at certain
Date: 13th century
1: a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not ; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion
2: an act or instance of hypocrisy

Maybe next time...take five minutes and look it up yourself..and save face...

One thing about me you CAN assume....When I state something as a fact......I allready looked it up.....

Might try it sometime...

I dont leave the house unarmed...and I dont enter Internet forums unarmed either.....

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

Again, I talk Kaptur pushing a veterans' memorial bill, you talk Dems in congress. Must be the deflection trick you learned soph. year debating class.

With years worth of negative press on Conservatives while time pretending Democrats are pure as the driven snow...it's a shock McCain got as close as he did...

LOL, the tried and true crying-game card played by every failed conservative voter of recent vintage. Sorry toots, your team made the ace decision to trot out and focus the sportlight on a pair who couldn't get past the second round of 'smarter than a 5th-grader.' You needed a platform and a game-plan; you ended up with the TV sitcom 'Sarah and the Plumber.' Put the Kleenex away; I thought you were armed and dangerous??

What else...I don't care what Fredo drives, (that was some other poster, Clint). Rush like alot of cars but won't say what he drives. Thanks, very insightful. Good for Beck, nice cars he has, now he can buy some jeans that don't show off knobby knees. What is he, 17?

You know what, yeah, Obama's auto 'team' should be driving American. Absofrigginglutely. Shame on them. There ya go champ, threw ya a bone.

It's been fun. Keep plugging away, Beav.

Again, I talk Kaptur pushing a veterans' memorial bill, you talk Dems in congress. Must be the deflection trick you learned soph. year debating class.

Hrm...last I checked...Marcy was a congress person...

And you are the one who made this statement:

maybe all these so-called 'red-state veterans'
Submitted by McCaskey on Sun, 2009-04-19 17:28.
will recall that Kaptur introduced a bill into the House and then re-introduced it three more times after it wasn't voted upon to construct a memorial to WWII veterans.

Then that other 'commie pinko' Bill Clinton picked a board to select a site, design it and raise money for the project, then signed the measure into law and it was completed in 2004.

Conservatives apparently believe they and only they own the 'veterans' issue. Quite the side-splitter.

Once again..Democrats held a controlling majority in the house the ENTIRE time...very easily documented as fact...

They could have easily passed it when they didnt even let it on the floor...( and was way too late IMHO...it should have been built much sooner)


With years worth of negative press on Conservatives while time pretending Democrats are pure as the driven snow...it's a shock McCain got as close as he did...

LOL, the tried and true crying-game card played by every failed conservative voter of recent vintage.

yeah..McCain was all mavricky and independent and loved by the press ....until he ran...

Republicans for choice loved him...
Log cabin republicans loved him...
Moderate republicans loved him...

The rest of us?...not so much...

I would have stayed home myself if it wasnt for Palin ( she can see russia from her house you know)

Romney is smarmy
Huckabee is a huckster..the anti-clinton from arkansas
McCain is a RINO
Rudy is a creep
Paul is a LOON
Barr went soft
Cheney didnt run

Thomson was the policy wonk...but had no personality

Wanna know how obama won?Can you handle the truth?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8

In fact..that about deserves it's own thread...media malpractice....spreading political ignorance through omission...

frankly...after watching that...I'd be embarrased to admit voting for Obama if I had...

Sorry toots, your team made the ace decision to trot out and focus the sportlight on a pair who couldn't get past the second round of 'smarter than a 5th-grader.'
You needed a platform and a game-plan; you ended up with the TV sitcom 'Sarah and the Plumber.' Put the Kleenex away; I thought you were armed and dangerous??

See above....Palin was the only one of the four who actually had executive experience...and she STILL has more experience than Obama...

She was absolutely villfied by the major liberal media....

So bad even a couple liberals noticed and decryed it...

What else...I don't care what Fredo drives,(that was some other poster, Clint).

My mistake....

I apologise for getting you confused with wolfy for sec there...you were active in the discussion...

But see...we DO agree on something...

Rush like alot of cars but won't say what he drives. Thanks, very insightful.

I know it didnt help much...but he did say what he drives is on that list..and I shared my hunch....

Good for Beck, nice cars he has, now he can buy some jeans that don't show off knobby knees. What is he, 17?

That;s three things.....watch it...you'll be a neo-con soon...oh and you forgot hannity...

You know what, yeah, Obama's auto 'team' should be driving American. Absofrigginglutely. Shame on them. There ya go champ, threw ya a bone.

That's four......woohoo.....

A couple more months I will have you all straightend out...*grin*

( I am a former liberal myself)

It's been fun. Keep plugging away, champ.

Giving up is not in my nature...it's a charactor flaw...

And yes...this IS fun...I love this stuff...it's alot like playing chess...

Thanks for the reply....

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

Read this and remember... the military are the ones who are the "possible" terrorists according to the report.

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/03/berkeley-marine-recruiting-station...

MikeyA

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.