The History of the Democrat Party

Originally Posted by Southern Man
Interesting that you'd bring up the ACLU in a discussion of the Democrat Party's history. Here's a bit of theirs:

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45959
Didn't you realize that Sanger hated blacks and sought to selectively breed them out through abortion? Her movement, Planned Parenthood, has been very successful at killing black babies for decades.
Click to expand...

uscitizen said:
True they did defend Rush.
Click to expand...

I just caught your post, US. Thanks for the creds.

The little dunce refuses to understand that the ACLU defends EVERYONE'S civil liberties....whether you agree with the client du jour or not. Which is why the whole right wing condemnation of the ACLU as a liberal only organization is a joke, given the historical record.
 
Southern Man said:
I am happy to have educated you. :)
Click to expand...
It just amazes me that you can be so intellectually dishonest. It's interesting that you fail to note that you're "History of the Democratic Party" is also the History of Southern Conservatives.

One of two things is going on here.

#1. You must think were extremely stupid to buy this bullshit.
#2. You buy this bullshit and are extremely stupid.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I just caught your post, US. Thanks for the creds.

The little dunce refuses to understand that the ACLU defends EVERYONE'S civil liberties....whether you agree with the client du jour or not. Which is why the whole right wing condemnation of the ACLU as a liberal only organization is a joke, given the historical record.
Click to expand...
The conservatives antipathy towards the ACLU pretty much supports the claim I've been making that conservatives just don't know what freedom and liberty are. They are just words to them. They are all for Freedom and Liberty until like someone actually practices them. Then hear them howl.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
What was the DATE of the case, you pompos windbag? Did it not fall under the time when the Patriot Act was in place?
Click to expand...

PostmodernProphet said:
hmmm....it also seems to have fallen under the time when the Stanley Cup was being played....thus, professional hockey is also to blame....
Click to expand...

And there you have it folks.....when asked a simple question, the postmodernfool just blathers on because dealing with being proven wrong is just too much for him......so much more to pity. I'm done with him here.
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
And there you have it folks.....when asked a simple question, the postmodernfool just blathers on because dealing with being proven wrong is just too much for him......so much more to pity. I'm done with him here.
Click to expand...

Taich, you need to be done with everyone, you're just not in the same league with the intelligent posters here....I think it's because you have this amazing disassociation between what happens in your mind and what happens in the world....
 
Nearly two years before the first shots were fired in the Civil War, simmering hostilities over slavery erupted on a "field of honor" in California, where a pro-slavery judge mortally wounded an anti-slavery senator in a duel.

The duel showed how political disagreements over slavery had become increasingly violent, culminating in 1861 when the war broke out.

On Sept. 13, 1859 -- 150 years ago today -- Sen. David Broderick, D-Calif., and Chief Justice David Terry of the California Supreme Court faced off at 10 paces near the San Francisco-San Mateo County line at Lake Merced. Broderick fired first, but his hair-trigger pistol went off prematurely and the bullet landed in the ground. Terry then fired a bullet into Broderick's chest; Broderick, 39, died a few days later from the wound.

"They have killed me because I was opposed to slavery and a corrupt administration," Broderick said from his deathbed.

The Senate's historian, Don Ritchie, said that as Northerners and Southerners settled in California, the tensions over slavery spilled over into the free state.

Terry was from Kentucky; Broderick was born in Washington, D.C., but his family later moved to New York City. He went to California for the gold rush and wound up making it rich in real estate.

Although the Republican Party had emerged as the national abolitionist political movement, the California Democratic Party had an anti-slavery wing, with Broderick as its chief. This enraged Terry, a pro-slavery Democrat. He leveled a personal attack on Broderick at a political convention, a few months before the duel, that eventually led to their fateful encounter.

Terry charged that the anti-slavery Democrats "have no distinction they are entitled to; they are the followers of one man, the personal chattels of a single individual, whom they are ashamed of. They belong, heart and soul, body and breeches, to David C. Broderick."

Terry mocked them for claiming the support of Sen. Stephen Douglas, an Illinois Democrat who tried to straddle a middle ground on slavery and went on to lose the presidential race to Abraham Lincoln in 1860.

"Perhaps they do sail under the flag of Douglas, but it is the banner of the black Douglass, whose name is Frederick, not Stephen," Terry said to cheers at the convention. Frederick Douglass was a former slave and abolitionist, and invoking his name was meant as a slur, historian Ritchie said.
Click to expand...
http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2009/sep/13/an-ominous-shot-duel-fought-in-california-over-sla/
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It just amazes me that you can be so intellectually dishonest. It's interesting that you fail to note that you're "History of the Democratic[sic] Party" is also the History of Southern Conservatives.

One of two things is going on here.

#1. You must think were extremely stupid to buy this bullshit.
#2. You buy this bullshit and are extremely stupid.
Click to expand...

Talk about intellectual dishonesty, there's your misuse of a political term. The fact is, the Democrat Party has never been associated with the modern Conservative movement.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I just caught your post, US. Thanks for the creds.

The little dunce refuses to understand that the ACLU defends EVERYONE'S civil liberties....whether you agree with the client du jour or not. Which is why the whole right wing condemnation of the ACLU as a liberal only organization is a joke, given the historical record.
Click to expand...

I know. They've defended the KKK, for God's sake. What "liberal only" organization would want their name tied to the Klan?
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Obviously Senator Byrd liked the Klan.
Click to expand...

he did, when he was a kid.... he has LONG since renounced his brief affiliation with them.

Yet, THIS CENTURY, your party praised a man who ran for president on a platform that would have outlawed interracial marriage. YOUR party's leader said - THIS CENTURY - that America would be a better place TODAY, if that racist had WON the election in 1948.
 
maineman said:
he did, when he was a kid.... he has LONG since renounced his brief affiliation with them.

Yet, THIS CENTURY, your party praised a man who ran for president on a platform that would have outlawed interracial marriage. YOUR party's leader said - THIS CENTURY - that America would be a better place TODAY, if that racist had WON the election in 1948.
Click to expand...
In his inaugural address as governor, Thurmond not only called for abolishing the poll tax, but also advocated expanding workman's compensation laws, and better working conditions in plants and factories. He repeated his call for better public education, and told the state that "more attention should be given to Negro education".

Thurmond advocated in his inaugural speech: ..."equal rights for women in every respect...equal pay for equal work for women."
Click to expand...
Jack Bass and Marilyn W. Thompson, Ol' Strom: An Unauthorized Biography of Strom Thurmond (2003), pp 121-22; ch 8
 
Southern Man said:
Jack Bass and Marilyn W. Thompson, Ol' Strom: An Unauthorized Biography of Strom Thurmond (2003), pp 121-22; ch 8
Click to expand...

when you post the same stuff in post after post, it's called SPAM

The FACT is: Trnet Lott said that America would be a better place TODAY, if Strom Thurmond, who ran as a dixiecrat in 1948, who ran on a platform of racism and segregation....Lott sayd that we would be a better country TODAY if Thurmond had been elected president in 1948.

spin that all you want.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Taich, you need to be done with everyone, you're just not in the same league with the intelligent posters here....I think it's because you have this amazing disassociation between what happens in your mind and what happens in the world....
Click to expand...

He does have problems with "brain lock" occasionally....
 
maineman said:
honestly yurt.... who do you think that the VAST majority of KKK members voted for in the 2008 presidential election?

the democrat?

be honest for once, you crooked shyster.
Click to expand...

Probably....
And the entire CPUSA voted democrat too.....just as their party leaders told them to...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top