Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on August 11, 2012, 01:08:19 PM
No need to bluff superior knowledge, kramarat; you already conceded the argument:

Who says it's superior knowledge?

It's just facts. The modern democrat party saw themselves in a position in which they were going to disappear.

They recruited people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to give them credence, and morphed into the all loving, all accepting, tolerant piece of shit that they are today. Bribing people with entitlements, lying to people, voter fraud, etc., is nothing more than the games they play to get votes.

They couldn't give a rat's ass about the people that vote for them, or the country. It's all about power.

Quote from: kramarat on August 11, 2012, 01:39:26 PM
Who says it's superior knowledge?

It's just facts. The modern democrat party saw themselves in a position in which they were going to disappear.

You yourself stated that southern democrats were conservatives who opposed civil rights.  Ergo, we can conclude that conservatives generally opposed racial equality, while liberals supported it. 

Quote
They recruited people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to give them credence, and morphed into the all loving, all accepting, tolerant piece of shit that they are today. Bribing people with entitlements, lying to people, voter fraud, etc., is nothing more than the games they play to get votes.

What's your point, kramarat?  By your own admission, the civil rights movement was primarily opposed by the conservative base, which implies that it was primarily driven by the left.  The democrats would never have been able to gain votes by turning anti-racist, regardless of the party's true motives, if their liberal base were not agreeable to such measures!  And if the conservative base were agreeable to civil rights, the conservative politicians would have adopted a civil rights platform, but they did not.

You seem to think that stating blindly proving that democratic politicians adopted an anti-racist platform merely to receive votes proves your point.  It doesn't.

Quote
They couldn't give a rat's ass about the people that vote for them, or the country. It's all about power.

Right.  And the conservatives constantly giving bailouts to and deregulating big banks and corporations, while coincidentally receiving massive campaign dollars from them, were acting with the best interests of the common man at heart.   

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on August 11, 2012, 01:54:35 PM
You yourself stated that southern democrats were conservatives who opposed civil rights.  Ergo, we can conclude that conservatives generally opposed racial equality, while liberals supported it. 

What's your point, kramarat?  By your own admission, the civil rights movement was primarily opposed by the conservative base, which implies that it was primarily driven by the left.  The democrats would never have been able to gain votes by turning anti-racist, regardless of the party's true motives, if their liberal base were not agreeable to such measures!  And if the conservative base were agreeable to civil rights, the conservative politicians would have adopted a civil rights platform, but they did not.

You seem to think that stating blindly proving that democratic politicians adopted an anti-racist platform merely to receive votes proves your point.  It doesn't.


Right.  And the conservatives constantly giving bailouts to and deregulating big banks and corporations, while coincidentally receiving massive campaign dollars from them, were acting with the best interests of the common man at heart.   

Please read up on some history.

You are blending threads. We simply cannot use the words conservative and liberal, when comparing slavery days to modern times.

If you refuse to do some basic research, I really can't continue to deal with you.

Quote from: kramarat on August 11, 2012, 02:10:26 PM
Please read up on some history.

Actually, I really don't.  Not only because I know more than enough to draw conclusions related to the topic, but your own statements already prove my case.  You admit that the driving force behind the opposition to the civil rights movement was conservative.  Notice how your lazy blanket statement that I need to study up on my history doesn't work?

Quote
You are blending threads. We simply cannot use the words conservative and liberal, when comparing slavery days to modern times.

Nobody said the ideologies translate perfectly into every era.  But give me any stretch in American - or world history, and I can easily list the agreed upon "good guys" of the era, and demonstrate that they were on the left.  Once you conclude that in almost every era in history, the left ended up on the right side, claiming that the conservatives are in the right this time around is nothing more than blind denial.

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on August 11, 2012, 01:54:35 PM
You yourself stated that southern democrats were conservatives who opposed civil rights.  Ergo, we can conclude that conservatives generally opposed racial equality, while liberals supported it.

Why pointing out that a particular group of conservatives hold a particular opinion, doesn't necessarily mean that all conservatives hold the same opinion. You're making the assumption that conservatives are like Liberals who do tend to march in lockstep.

QuoteWhat's your point, kramarat?  By your own admission, the civil rights movement was primarily opposed by the conservative base, which implies that it was primarily driven by the left.

Uh no. Saying that one side or the other doesn't care for the manner in which The Civil Rights movement was advanced doesn't necessarily follow that the conservative side of the political spectrum was against Civil Rights. Think for a moment, many people were against the war in Vietnam, that doesn't mean they were in favor of blowing up college buildings. And many of the people supported the war, that doesn't mean they were in favor of shooting college students. Much of the conservative argument against Civil Rights has to do with its advancement through the courts. Perhaps because they remember who much of Jim Crow was advanced in the first place - through the courts. Not to mention that there is always the point that the electorate is more likely to embrace a political outcome they've had a say in.

QuoteThe democrats would never have been able to gain votes by turning anti-racist, regardless of the party's true motives, if their liberal base were not agreeable to such measures!  And if the conservative base were agreeable to civil rights, the conservative politicians would have adopted a civil rights platform, but they did not.

On the contrary the conservative Republican Party had been pushing the cause of Civil Rights for years, while the Democrats had been fighting it tooth and nail. The Democratic party was quite willing to pay off Southern racist using Federal money, simply to maintain power. As the South became less dependent on federal dollars the Democrats faced a problem. As they became the one paying the taxes, white Southerners became less, and less, willing to support the high tax Dems. So the northern Liberal Dems ditched them, and replaced them with a dependent class of black Democrats.

QuoteYou seem to think that stating blindly proving that democratic politicians adopted an anti-racist platform merely to receive votes proves your point.  It doesn't.

And the fact that until that point they had be quite content to support the racist wing of the party?

QuoteRight.  And the conservatives constantly giving bailouts to and deregulating big banks and corporations, while coincidentally receiving massive campaign dollars from them, were acting with the best interests of the common man at heart.   

Why - as usual - are you accusing the conservatives of doing what the democraps have been doing?
Who's donating to Schumer again:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2012&cid=n00001093&type=I
And what party does Corzine belong to?

Mdgiles, nobody is arguing here that literally all liberals supported civil rights, and all conservatives opposed it.

To take your analogy, it is true that not all conservatives who supported the war supported shooting student protestors.  But [almost literally] all who supported shooting student protestors supported the war and were conservatives.  The same applies to anti-war protestors and blowing up college buildings.

Ergo, you are merely comparing different extremes of the political spectrum, and erroneously concluding that this means that the two were fundamentally different "types" of conservatives, for example.  The war hawks and those who supported shooting hippies were not fundamentally different; both were conservatives, just to different degrees.

The primary opposition to the civil rights movement came from the right.  Did some conservatives support it?  Sure.  Did some liberals oppose it?  Sure.  You can always find exceptions to trends.  Doesn't mean the trends do not exist.

---------

For example, I can think of conservative politicians who supported civil rights.  But few did so as fervently as liberals such as MLK or even JFK.  Partially because they knew their base opposed it, and also partially because they themselves were not feeling it.  Similarly, the most fervent opposition to the movement came from the south.

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on August 11, 2012, 02:27:29 PM
Actually, I really don't.  Not only because I know more than enough to draw conclusions related to the topic, but your own statements already prove my case.  You admit that the driving force behind the opposition to the civil rights movement was conservative.  Notice how your lazy blanket statement that I need to study up on my history doesn't work?

Nobody said the ideologies translate perfectly into every era.  But give me any stretch in American - or world history, and I can easily list the agreed upon "good guys" of the era, and demonstrate that they were on the left.  Once you conclude that in almost every era in history, the left ended up on the right side, claiming that the conservatives are in the right this time around is nothing more than blind denial.

Here dummy. I put this link up once, and I guess you missed it.

Yes, the racist southern democrats were conservatives. They believed in the Constitution and the limits on the federal government. There was one problem. When it came to the words We The People, the racist democrats didn't believe that blacks, were people. It led to a lot of problems.

Now be a good boy, and read through this site. There are many facts there for you to review.

http://www.black-and-right.com/the-democrat-race-lie/

Democrat racism and segregationist ideals, ran well into the 20th century. It really wasn't until Martin Luther King came along, and the racial turmoil of the 60s, that democrats realized that they needed to change their message......................quickly. That's when they started embracing liberals of all stripes. They remade themselves into the party of the victim. Another neat trick that they employed, was to inject liberals into our public school system. From there, they were able to essentially erase the racist democrat history from being taught, and paint the rosy picture that lib/dems think of themselves today. By the way, once they got into the schools, the schools have been sliding into the shitter ever since. But, teachers are another subset of victims, of course.................they just need more money.

Hey moron: I don't give a shit about the history of the democratic party or the republican party.  I only care about the history of the two respective sides of the political spectrum.  Conservative democrats opposed civil rights.  That is my case in point.  I don't give a damn that they belonged to an arbitrary political party; they were conservative.

It's not as though the above is a carefully concealed viewpoint I conveniently pull out of my ass at the last minute, either.  I've been repeating the point to you again and again.  You all are incapable of reading.

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on August 11, 2012, 04:47:29 PM
Hey moron: I don't give a shit about the history of the democratic party or the republican party.  I only care about the history of the two respective sides of the political spectrum.  Conservative democrats opposed civil rights.  That is my case in point.  I don't give a damn that they belonged to an arbitrary political party; they were conservative.

It's not as though the above is a carefully concealed viewpoint I conveniently pull out of my ass at the last minute, either.  I've been repeating the point to you again and again.  You all are incapable of reading.

You're trying to equate conservative democrat racists from the 1800s, with today's Tea Party conservatives. It doesn't fit dipshit. Not even if you stretch it.

I would say that you can't possibly be that dumb. But you've already proven otherwise.

Yes the democrat party is a racist party.............always have been. Yes, a long, long time ago, there were conservative democrats. They were racists that believed in the constitution. Today's democrats, now embrace liberalism and shun the constitution in favor of socialism.............................with them in charge.

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on August 11, 2012, 04:47:29 PM
Hey moron: I don't give a shit about the history of the democratic party or the republican party.  I only care about the history of the two respective sides of the political spectrum.  Conservative democrats opposed civil rights.  That is my case in point.  I don't give a damn that they belonged to an arbitrary political party; they were conservative.

It's not as though the above is a carefully concealed viewpoint I conveniently pull out of my ass at the last minute, either.  I've been repeating the point to you again and again.  You all are incapable of reading.

There goes the wide brush you liberals like to use.

Entertaining to watch.

Quote from: kramarat on August 11, 2012, 04:54:52 PM
You're trying to equate conservative democrat racists from the 1800s, with today's Tea Party conservatives. It doesn't fit dipshit. Not even if you stretch it.

I would say that you can't possibly be that dumb. But you've already proven otherwise.

Naw....  He just can't read.

Quote from: rich_t on August 11, 2012, 04:56:05 PM
Naw....  He just can't read.

Man!!! It's frustrating. I almost feel sorry for these guys.

Quote from: kramarat on August 11, 2012, 05:01:26 PM
Man!!! It's frustrating. I almost feel sorry for these guys.

I find it rather entertaining.  Of course it kind of sucks that they are allowed to vote......

Quote from: kramarat on August 11, 2012, 04:54:52 PM
You're trying to equate conservative democrat racists from the 1800s, with today's Tea Party conservatives. It doesn't fit dipshit. Not even if you stretch it.

They are both conservatives.  They both stand on the same side of the ideological spectrum.  Furthermore, a very strong correlation can be established between being conservative, and being on the wrong side of history.

Conservative racists from the 1800s (and stretching into the late 20th century).  Anti-reform conservatives of the early 20th century.  Monarchists of the 18th century.  The Roman Catholic Mafia Church of the middle ages and renaissance.  Etc.

You're committing the same error I pointed out: thinking that the conservatives of this century are magically going to break the ideology's historical trend of abject failure.

Quote
I would say that you can't possibly be that dumb. But you've already proven otherwise.

You think you're fooling me with your shameless backtrack?  After arguing that the two parties did not switch ideologies, you suddenly come out and admit my point...but claim it is irrelevant.  Yeah, go on.

Quote
Yes the democrat party is a racist party.............always have been. Yes, a long, long time ago, there were conservative democrats. They were racists that believed in the constitution. Today's democrats, now embrace liberalism and shun the constitution in favor of socialism.............................with them in charge.

Your "logic" is pathetic.  You think that ideologies change parties, rather than parties change ideologies.  Right now, you just actually argued that, because democrats changed from conservative to liberal, the left turned racist.  Apparently, parties are real, while ideologies are just arbitrary! 

The stupidity here is so apparent, I'd encourage you to reread your reply.  I cannot believe you'd actually be this fucking dumb.

Quote from: rich_t on August 11, 2012, 05:12:23 PM
I find it rather entertaining.  Of course it kind of sucks that they are allowed to vote......

Yeah, it's entertaining when they're arguing with Solar or someone else. Not so much when it's me.