Is there a difference in being republican and being racist ?

[HSFBfan]

4 minutes ago, ngdawg said:

I feel like the topic should be rewritten as "Is there a difference between being a Trump supporter and being racist?" I bet there are several Republicans who are not as far right as Trump and are not racist. 

Also, fun fact. Through the majority of history, the platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties were flipped. Those who opposed slavery and were mainly concentrated in the North were the Republicans, while Democrats supported slavery and were located in the South. Lincoln was a Republican, but today, he would be considered a Democrat. It gets even more confusing the farther back you go. Originally, there were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. The Federalists became Republicans, who in turn became Democrats. The Democratic-Republicans became Democrats, who in turn became Republicans. So which person flipped these platforms? William Jennings Bryan. He had views that matched both parties and failed repeatedly to gain the presidency. After a while, the Democratic and Republican parties opposed each other's views so much that they just ended up flipping platforms. Thanks, William Jennings Bryan, for making history confusing.

Well as of 1992 when clinton ran for presidency his button still had the battle flag of northern Virginia. So as of 1992 the democrats were still putting that symbol front and center and he was elected president twice 

[concha]

 

Curious as to the thoughts regarding the party that promoted and defended slavery, was the party of Jim Crow, of the Klan, and has remained prominent in US politics for the last several decades promoting division and identity politics, and keeping a large part of the black community dependent on their largesse and poorly educated in schools they control while concentrated in areas of high crime and low opportunity that they keep that way?

Democratic Party policies can be directly tied to the breakdown of the black family.  What was once 1 kid in 4 or 5 not living in a two parent household became 7 or 8 out of 10.  Criminal justice reforms by the likes of their current candidate have blacks boys more often than not growing up without a father.  Huge numbers of kids are not proficient in math nor reading (13 high schools in Baltimore had ZERO kids between them who were proficient in math in 2019 - think about that).

But it took Trump to begin criminal justice reforms, to increase funding of HBCUs and push prosperity zones.

What is the big leftist idea du jour?

To see more and more blacks violently die as they dismantle police forces.  To see black neighborhoods and businesses burn.

 

But thankfully for the Dems, they have a MSM that keeps them focused on that shiny object known as "Orange Man Bad".

And the clown patrol on here is part of the masses that dutifully gaze at it with blank stares.

 

[ngdawg]

1 minute ago, concha said:

 

Curious as to the thoughts regarding the party that promoted and defended slavery, was the party of Jim Crow, of the Klan, and has remained prominent in US politics for the last several decades promoting division and identity politics, and keeping a large part of the black community dependent on their largesse and poorly educated in schools they control while concentrated in areas of high crime and low opportunity that they keep that way?

Democratic Party policies can be directly tied to the breakdown of the black family.  What was once 1 kid in 4 or 5 not living in a two parent household became 7 or 8 out of 10.  Criminal justice reforms by the likes of their current candidate have blacks boys more often than not growing up without a father.  Huge numbers of kids are not proficient in math nor reading (13 high schools in Baltimore had ZERO kids between them who were proficient in math in 2019 - think about that).

But it took Trump to begin criminal justice reforms, to increase funding of HBCUs and push prosperity zones.

What is the big leftist idea du jour?

To see more and more blacks violently die as they dismantle police forces.  To see black neighborhoods and businesses burn.

 

But thankfully for the Dems, they have a MSM that keeps them focused on that shiny object known as "Orange Man Bad".

And the clown patrol on here is part of the masses that dutifully gaze at it with blank stares.

 

See, that's not really correct. Based off of name, it would the Democratic Party at the time, but their platform was that of modern day Republicans. Therefore, they would actually be considered Republicans, not Democrats.

[HSFBfan]

2 minutes ago, concha said:

 

Curious as to the thoughts regarding the party that promoted and defended slavery, was the party of Jim Crow, of the Klan, and has remained prominent in US politics for the last several decades promoting division and identity politics, and keeping a large part of the black community dependent on their largesse and poorly educated in schools they control while concentrated in areas of high crime and low opportunity that they keep that way?

Democratic Party policies can be directly tied to the breakdown of the black family.  What was once 1 kid in 4 or 5 not living in a two parent household became 7 or 8 out of 10.  Criminal justice reforms by the likes of their current candidate have blacks boys more often than not growing up without a father.  Huge numbers of kids are not proficient in math nor reading (13 high schools in Baltimore had ZERO kids between them who were proficient in math in 2019 - think about that).

But it took Trump to begin criminal justice reforms, to increase funding of HBCUs and push prosperity zones.

What is the big leftist idea du jour?

To see more and more blacks violently die as they dismantle police forces.  To see black neighborhoods and businesses burn.

 

But thankfully for the Dems, they have a MSM that keeps them focused on that shiny object known as "Orange Man Bad".

And the clown patrol on here is part of the masses that dutifully gaze at it with blank stares.

 

Ita Friday night how many people will die tonight and this weekend across America 

[HSFBfan]

Just now, ngdawg said:

See, that's not really correct. Based off of name, it would the Democratic Party at the time, but their platform was that of modern day Republicans. Therefore, they would actually be considered Republicans, not Democrats.

It dont work that like. They were the democrat party 

No republican was ever part of Jim crow etc 

[ngdawg]

5 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Well as of 1992 when clinton ran for presidency his button still had the battle flag of northern Virginia. So as of 1992 the democrats were still putting that symbol front and center and he was elected president twice 

I don't know. I guess there wasn't the necessary resistance at the time. Keep in mind that it wasn't until 1972 that the entire South voted Republican (with former Democrat ideals). 

[HSFBfan]

Just now, ngdawg said:

I don't know. I guess there wasn't the necessary resistance at the time. Keep in mind that it wasn't until 1972 that the entire South voted Republican (with former Democrat ideals). 

Or people were pansies like today angered about every little thing 

[ngdawg]

1 minute ago, HSFBfan said:

It dont work that like. They were the democrat party 

No republican was ever part of Jim crow etc 

But the platform mimics that of current Republicans. All they did was switch names basically. Take a book and a pillow for example. Say that in the past a book was known as a pillow and a pillow was known as a book. Now, we would now that a book is called a book because it has pages and paper. The pillow is called a pillow because it has the material inside the cover. Back then, a pillow was still a pillow and a book was still a book, but we just gave them different names. Likewise, the ideals have not changed, only the party name has.

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, ngdawg said:

But the platform mimics that of current Republicans. All they did was switch names basically. Take a book and a pillow for example. Say that in the past a book was known as a pillow and a pillow was known as a book. Now, we would now that a book is called a book because it has pages and paper. The pillow is called a pillow because it has the material inside the cover. Back then, a pillow was still a pillow and a book was still a book, but we just gave them different names. Likewise, the ideals have not changed, only the party name has.

Well heres hows the ideology hasn't changed. 

The democrats voted for and practiced segregation. 

We now have black students who will vote for the democrats screaming for segregation on school campuses 

[ngdawg]

1 minute ago, HSFBfan said:

Or people were pansies like today angered about every little thing 

I can see why the Confederate flag angers people. To African-Americans, it represents slavery and oppression, along with cruel mistreatment. I understand that it's party of America's history, but is it really? The Confederate States broke away from America, so in theory, they should not even be represented today. Overall, just because certain people view the flag as Southern heritage doesn't mean others have to as well. America is symbolized by different beliefs, and this is just one of them.

[HSFBfan]

Just now, ngdawg said:

I can see why the Confederate flag angers people. To African-Americans, it represents slavery and oppression, along with cruel mistreatment. I understand that it's party of America's history, but is it really? The Confederate States broke away from America, so in theory, they should not even be represented today. Overall, just because certain people view the flag as Southern heritage doesn't mean others have to as well. America is symbolized by different beliefs, and this is just one of them.

Yes and I can understand your point but it falls under the freedom of speech

I have a huge problem with the gay flag but I see it when I drive around

Do I burn it nope. I continue to drive by and understand they have that right to fly that controversial flag

[ngdawg]

1 minute ago, HSFBfan said:

Well heres hows the ideology hasn't changed. 

The democrats voted for and practiced segregation. 

We now have black students who will vote for the democrats screaming for segregation on school campuses 

First of all, that would be the Republican platform with the name of "Democrat". Remember, a book is a book because of what it contains on the inside, not on the outside. 

That is something I don't agree with. Integration has to be a priority at this point. However, you seem to nitpick on the smaller, less prevalent issues while disregarding the ones staring everyone right in the face. There seems to be a blatant disregard for pressing issues, but a full attention given to the extremely small minority advocating for segregation of schools.

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, ngdawg said:

First of all, that would be the Republican platform with the name of "Democrat". Remember, a book is a book because of what it contains on the inside, not on the outside. 

That is something I don't agree with. Integration has to be a priority at this point. However, you seem to nitpick on the smaller, less prevalent issues while disregarding the ones staring everyone right in the face. There seems to be a blatant disregard for pressing issues, but a full attention given to the extremely small minority advocating for segregation of schools.

But they have failed to realize they are screaming for something the likes of MLK died trying to get rid of. So did MLK die for nothing 

I beieve the big reason we have all these issues is because we are being forced to accept things by society that people dont feel comfortable accepting

People shouldn't have to accept everyone. People should be allowed to have their views and not have to worry about their safety 

[ngdawg]

6 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Yes and I can understand your point but it falls under the freedom of speech

I have a huge problem with the gay flag but I see it when I drive around

Do I burn it nope. I continue to drive by and understand they have that right to fly that controversial flag

You don't burn it. Good. But other do. We both know you'd be lying if you said that the vast majority of America supports gay rights. However, there are still people that strongly oppose being gay and take matters into their own hands. Instead of burning a flag, they shoot up a gay bar called the Pulse Nightclub, killing 50 people in America's most deadly mass shooting. You cannot selectively choose what to remember and what to ignore. If you are going to remember the violence against the Confederate flag, it would only be human to remember the violence against the gay flag, too.

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, ngdawg said:

You don't burn it. Good. But other do. We both know you'd be lying if you said that the vast majority of America supports gay rights. However, there are still people that strongly oppose being gay and take matters into their own hands. Instead of burning a flag, they shoot up a gay bar called the Pulse Nightclub, killing 50 people in America's most deadly mass shooting. You cannot selectively choose what to remember and what to ignore. If you are going to remember the violence against the Confederate flag, it would only be human to remember the violence against the Confederate flag, too. 

I dont agree with shooting gay people but I dont agree on forcing people to accept them

[ngdawg]

Just now, HSFBfan said:

But they have failed to realize they are screaming for something the likes of MLK died trying to get rid of. So did MLK die for nothing 

I beieve the big reason we have all these issues is because we are being forced to accept things by society that people dont feel comfortable accepting

People shouldn't have to accept everyone. People should be allowed to have their views and not have to worry about their safety 

No, he did not. It's a process. If we look at the overall situation of civil rights in the post-WWII era to now, it has greatly improved (regardless of the minor incidents that people never fail to overexaggerate). MLK brought to attention the mistreatment and begun the fight for civil rights. The process that he started continues today. It is because of him that we have peaceful protesters and not an entire force of African-Americans destroying buildings and such. This conversation reminded me of Frederick Douglass's "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?" I know you don't support this at all, but it may be worth your time to read it. You probably will disagree with everything, but if you are truly open-minded, you would consider reading that.

[ngdawg]

2 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

I dont agree with shooting gay people but I dont agree on forcing people to accept them

Nobody forced you to accept them. You can have your views, but just don't make it widely public. There are some people who believe in putting milk before cereal or cereal before milk. However, if they know that their way is unconventional, they keep it a secret. Had to throw that in to make it a little more enjoyable.

[HSFBfan]

Just now, ngdawg said:

Nobody forced you to accept them. You can have your views, but just don't make it widely public. There are some people who believe in putting milk before cereal or cereal before milk. However, if they know that their way is unconventional, they keep it a secret. Had to throw that in to make it a little more enjoyable.

So than there is no reason to publicly put out there that someone is gay by your statement leave it in the closet 

[HSFBfan]

2 minutes ago, ngdawg said:

No, he did not. It's a process. If we look at the overall situation of civil rights in the post-WWII era to now, it has greatly improved (regardless of the minor incidents that people never fail to overexaggerate). MLK brought to attention the mistreatment and begun the fight for civil rights. The process that he started continues today. It is because of him that we have peaceful protesters and not an entire force of African-Americans destroying buildings and such. This conversation reminded me of Frederick Douglass's "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?" I know you don't support this at all, but it may be worth your time to read it. You probably will disagree with everything, but if you are truly open-minded, you would consider reading that.

didn't a mob just rip down his statue. Guess he didn't pass the liberal test 

[ngdawg]

1 minute ago, HSFBfan said:

So than there is no reason to publicly put out there that someone is gay by your statement leave it in the closet 

I was hoping you'd say that. If we are speaking to reality here, the majority of the country does not have a problem with gay people. As a result, it's alright to speak your mind or feelings. However, in a world of growing acceptance, resistance to that acceptance will always be viewed as an issue. Regardless of whether view yourself as justified or not, you will be considered negative because you supposedly oppose the efforts of equality. In your mind, you may view being gay as incorrect. However, to everyone else, you will be viewed as a negative influence in the fight for equality.

Now, with that being said, some things can get out of hand. Someone told me about something called "being demisexual". This apparently means that they only love someone when a connection forms between the two people. In my mind, I just wondered "Isn't that called love?" Now, I think the term "demisexual" is useless and not needed, but if someone identifies as demisexual, I am not going to speak out against them. Whether or not I support the cause, I just don't want to be an obstacle.

[ngdawg]

7 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

didn't a mob just rip down his statue. Guess he didn't pass the liberal test 

Here's something you have to understand: not all BLM protesters are using it for the benefit of equality. However, we cannot loop those exploiters in with the rest of the movement. BLM is a peaceful movement. Those rowdy characters are NOT a part of BLM. The sooner you start separating them from the actual cause, the sooner you will understand the reality of the situation.

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, ngdawg said:

I was hoping you'd say that. If we are speaking to reality here, the majority of the country does not have a problem with gay people. As a result, it's alright to speak your mind or feelings. However, in a world of growing acceptance, resistance to that acceptance will always be viewed as an issue. Regardless of whether view yourself as justified or not, you will be considered negative because you supposedly oppose the efforts of equality. In your mind, you may view being gay as incorrect. However, to everyone else, you will be viewed as a negative influence in the fight for equality.

Now, with that being said, some things can get out of hand. Someone told me about something called "being demisexual". This apparently means that they only love someone when a connection forms between the two people. In my mind, I just wondered "Isn't that called love?" Now, I think the term "demisexual" is useless and not needed, but if someone identifies as demisexual, I am not going to speak out against them. Whether or not I support the cause, I just don't want to be an obstacle.

It's not an issue though. I dont have to accept anyone. I dont have to like you. They have equality without shoving their agenda down our throats. But if they are gonna fly that flag of theirs no matter if they "offend" someone than I have the right to fly any flag i want that may or may not offend someone. 

But they don't want it both ways they want their way and if you don't comply your a this or that 

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, ngdawg said:

Here's something you have to understand: not all BLM protesters are using it for the benefit of equality. However, we cannot loop those exploiters in with the rest of the movement. BLM is a peaceful movement. Those rowdy characters are NOT a part of BLM. The sooner you start separating them from the actual cause, the sooner you will understand the reality of the situation.

either way I dont support either of them but the peaceful ones have to right to peacefully assembly so as much as i dont agree with their cause by peacefully marching they are doing no harm 

[concha]

29 minutes ago, ngdawg said:

See, that's not really correct. Based off of name, it would the Democratic Party at the time, but their platform was that of modern day Republicans. Therefore, they would actually be considered Republicans, not Democrats.

 

No. 

It is absolutely correct. 

Are you arguing that pro-slavery and Jim Crow views and racist views magically became Republican Party policies?

Of course they didn't.

Now, did "small government" policies arguably "flip"?  There arguments can be made.

 

[ngdawg]

1 minute ago, HSFBfan said:

It's not an issue though. I dont have to accept anyone. I dont have to like you. They have equality without shoving their agenda down our throats. But if they are gonna fly that flag of theirs no matter if they "offend" someone than I have the right to fly any flag i want that may or may not offend someone. 

But they don't want it both ways they want their way and if you don't comply your a this or that 

You have the right to fly the Confederate flag. No one is going to tear it off your flagpole and burn it. To some people, it's viewed as oppression. You can choose to fly the flag, but just know it has a double meaning.