- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
They seem to believe that creating hundreds of social programs is the equivalent of allowing people to be free and independent.
It wouldn't be a full day if you didn't call at least one person a racist.
But which party's policies have led to the blacks poverty and high unemployment and generational welfare ?
Depends on who you ask. Most people though would point to the GOP. I think the fact that over 90% of Blacks vote against that party would be a good indicator on that.
Depends on who you ask. Most people though would point to the GOP. I think the fact that over 90% of Blacks vote against that party would be a good indicator on that.
Ah. So all Blacks who vote D are on food stamps. Got it.Why would they think that when there is no such evidence? You only need look at the Food Stamp President, and government funded advertising for people to take advantage of food stamps, to discover otherwise.
That was obvious. The bigots in the South squealed like stuck pigs for years when LBJ rammed that legislation through. In fact, they squealed so much, the GOP found an opportunity and implemented the "Southern Strategy".
Thanks for making my case.
They seem to believe that creating hundreds of social programs is the equivalent of allowing people to be free and independent.
:lamo....Yeah, or it could be a solid indicator of just how vested in propaganda, and inter generational dependency the demo's have kept blacks mired in, resulting in Stockholm syndrome.
So, let me get this right. According to some here, it was the Confederates who opposed slavery, and segregation was about to end with no need for any pesky government intervention. Laws like the Civil Rights Act were just a way to make Blacks dependent on Democrats.:lamo....Yeah, or it could be a solid indicator of just how vested in propaganda, and inter generational dependency the demo's have kept blacks mired in, resulting in Stockholm syndrome.
Ah. So all Blacks who vote D are on food stamps. Got it.
Many of those social programs gave them the opportunity to be free and independent.
So, let me get this right. According to some here, it was the Confederates who opposed slavery, and segregation was about to end with no need for any pesky government intervention. Laws like the Civil Rights Act were just a way to make Blacks dependent on Democrats.
In the end, it is the Republican Party--a party composed mostly of White males--which stands against racism, while the Democrats are the racists, fostering dependency and enslaving millions of Blacks, as a result. In fact, if left to their own devices, the Southern Whites would have long ago allowed Blacks to participate equally in business and at the voting booth, but because of meddling by the Yankees, Jim Crow laws were enacted to protect Whites (from what I do not know).
The bubble, it is strong.
Maybe you guys should try making sense. Everything I wrote in that post was said at least once by one of you all.You seem to be guessing at what others are saying and aren't having much success. Maybe you should respond to what is actually being said, or go back to school.
Maybe you guys should try making sense. Everything I wrote in that post was said at least once by one of you all.
Oh, so you are trying 'a one post fits all' strategy. This has been tried before but never with any success.
Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean the shoe don't fit. Most of the Conservative posts are in concert.
It wouldn't be a full day if you didn't call at least one person a racist.
But which party's policies have led to the blacks poverty and high unemployment and generational welfare ?
You have a wonderful way of white washing history, and making up things that only are in your mind. The history is clear, and when the black community wakes up to the fact that mostly white demo politicians are furthering policy that doom them to less opportunity, lower educational standards, and over all plantation mentality keeping them down, demo's will see no more loyalty from the black community.
Ahh, the old familiar right wing refrain. Blacks don't vote for us because they are stupid. As soon as they realize how stupid they are, they'll vote for us because we know what's best for them.
It's a winning strategy. Keep it up.
You're being obtuse or purposely taking what i said out of context. I clearly meant a majority of Southerners who fought against the Confederates were non-slaveholders.
This was a direct response to your post, arguing that slaveholders were the ones fighting for the union.
The alternative universe, I guess taking statements out of context helps solidify the delusions.
Ahh, the old familiar right wing refrain. Blacks don't vote for us because they are stupid. As soon as they realize how stupid they are, they'll vote for us because we know what's best for them.
It's a winning strategy. Keep it up.
The GOP's. I thought everybody knew that. Ya gotta quit reading those Texas Board of Education approved schoolbooks.
Actually I did write that when taken in context of a reply to what you wrote. No one here would argue that the Union army consisted mostly of Southerners. Get real.That's not what you wrote.
And, I sad, the majority of Southerners fighting in the union army were non-slaveholders.I never said that. I said, that there were slave owners fighting in the Federal army.
Actually I did write that when taken in context of a reply to what you wrote. No one here would argue that the Union army consisted mostly of Southerners. Get real.
And, I sad, the majority of Southerners fighting in the union army were non-slaveholders.
No. You read it as that.Except, you did argue exactly that.
Some of the above I agree with: like the fact that the EP did not free slaves in Union states, and that the problem of remnants of the Confederate Army heading to the hills to carry on a guerrilla war was a significant risk. But, much of the rest I do not buy, like the concept that the war was not the result of the South's insistence to keep slavery alive and well.Not all of them.Just like there were northerners who fought for the Confederates, that weren't slave owners and even opposed slavery. John Pemberton, commander of the Vicksburg garrison was a Pennsylvanian and opposed slavery. Pat Cleburne, an Irish immigrant; he opposed slavery. General Cleburne and 13 of his officers petitioned the Confederate government to abolish slavery in 1862. James Longstreet had pushed the agenda of freeing the slaves, then declaring war on The United States.
The opposite side of that coin, Mary Todd Lincoln's family were slave owners. The Emancipation Proclamation exempted slaves that were held in Union states.
There were more freedmen living in the south than in the north. Before the end of Reconstruction, freedmen had the right to vote in the south, but not in the north. There were freedmen in the south that owned slaves. Jim Crow was a result of Reconstruction. If Reconstruction hadn't been so brutal, Jim Crow probably wouldn't have happened.
Earlier, you said that former COnfederates were lucky they weren't exterminated; well, everyone knew that would be a bad idea, because it would have launched a guerilla war that would have lasted for decades. It's the reason that Lee was allowed so much lee-way at Appomattox: Grant was afraid that one mistep in the surrender process would send the Army of Northern Virginia into the mountains to carry on the war. Grant knew that his only single advantage over the COnfederates was is nearly unlimited source of warm bodies to use as cannon fodder, but also knew that that source wasn't infinite. There were more Federals dieing in battle than Confederates and hew knew that public opinion wouldn't stand for that, for long.
You say that the war was fought over slavery, but the historical facts tell a much different story.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?