Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When Malcolm X suggested that blacks should form rifle clubs, it went over like feeding chitlins to an Imam with Conservative Whites.
So these black conservatives need to put a sock in it. I've got nothing against the NRA, but outside of gun issues, most members are probably pretty hostile to any issue involving black folks.
Okay... now THAT is totally fabricating history based on personal ideology...
whimsical musings and nothing more.
Malcolm X was assassinated in 65, and pre-70s it was the white southern Democrats like Byrd and Wallace who were against arming blacks, not conservatives.
Let's also face the reality of things. The demography of the parties is changing. The RNC is offering a woman, a black, two Hispanics, a Libertarian, a reality star, and a few white candidates. This is a diverse group.
What are the Dems offering? A lying old white woman, an older white socialist, and a white progressive who just bailed. For a group that pins their ideology on diversity it certainly isn't what they are offering.
Okay... now THAT is totally fabrication of history based on personal ideology...
whimsical musings and nothing more.
Malcolm X was assassinated in 65, and pre-70s it was the white southern Democrats like Byrd and Wallace who were against arming blacks, not conservatives.
What on earth does that have to do with the founding of the National Rifle Association? Obviously you don't know, you don't have, and can't find a single shred of supporting evidence otherwise you wouldn't need to try to deflect the argument to issues totally not germane to the topic.
Here is the NRA's own account of their history and purpose, care to point to a single reference to arming for self-defense much less protecting Freedman from the Klan?
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,556 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h
Okay... now THAT is totally fabrication of history based on personal ideology...
whimsical musings and nothing more.
Malcolm X was assassinated in 65, and pre-70s it was the white southern Democrats like Byrd and Wallace who were against arming blacks, not conservatives.
no one in their right mind would label Byrd or wallace a liberal, nor did either of them when alive.
Quote:
Let's also face the reality of things. The demography of the parties is changing. The RNC is offering a woman, a black, two Hispanics, a Libertarian, a reality star, and a few white candidates. This is a diverse group.
What are the Dems offering? A lying old white woman, an older white socialist, and a white progressive who just bailed. For a group that pins their ideology on diversity it certainly isn't what they are offering.
First off, the demography of the parties are not changing.
The people you named all chose to run just as in the Democratic party, the fact that no one on the Democratic side who fit your fallacy of diversification structure means nothing, never mind the fact that the President of the united States is both a Democrat and a black man.
This is like saying " you already have a ferrrari in the drive way, why is your next car not going to be one as well ?".
Okay... now THAT is totally fabricating history based on personal ideology...
whimsical musings and nothing more.
Malcolm X was assassinated in 65, and pre-70s it was the white southern Democrats like Byrd and Wallace who were against arming blacks, not conservatives.
Let's also face the reality of things. The demography of the parties is changing. The RNC is offering a woman, a black, two Hispanics, a Libertarian, a reality star, and a few white candidates. This is a diverse group.
What are the Dems offering? A lying old white woman, an older white socialist, and a white progressive who just bailed. For a group that pins their ideology on diversity it certainly isn't what they are offering.
Byrd and Wallace were conservative. Southern Democrats made up one of the strongest conservative blocs in Congress.
What on earth does that have to do with the founding of the National Rifle Association? Obviously you don't know, you don't...bla bla bla
Obviously you have a comprehension problem.
My answer was to another poster who was off topic. My answer was directed to what he said, not to what you decided I should be talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter
Byrd and Wallace were conservative. Southern Democrats made up one of the strongest conservative blocs in Congress.
My how the goal posts change to fit the meme. If they were conservative Democrats, what were Republicans?
I find it ironic that Byrd remained a Democrat Senator right up until his death in the 90s. The Dems constantly distance themselves from their true roots... for votes of course.
This explains a lot for many here. It's never too late to learn!!!
This is what I don't get. There is certainly nothing that is discrediting to the history of the NRA because it wasn't founded to protect Freeman against the Klan. Debunking this bit of misinformation doesn't take anything away from the fact that the history of the NRA (at least until very recently) was civically remarkable. The NRA's marksmanship programs performed the original function of preparing young men with the proficiency of arms to fight in WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam. It provided great support for hunters and the competitive shooting sports, and in fact still does.
My answer was to another poster who was off topic. My answer was directed to what he said, not to what you decided I should be talking about.
My how the goal posts change to fit the meme. If they were conservative Democrats, what were Republicans?
I find it ironic that Byrd remained a Democrat Senator right up until his death in the 90s. The Dems constantly distance themselves from their true roots... for votes of course.
Everything isn't about Republican or Democrat.
Rockefeller was a Republican...no Republican today would vote him in as dogcatcher. Ditto Nixon, Ike, or George H. W. Bush.
That's a fact.
Southern Democrats were THE important conservative voting bloc prior to the mid 70's. They supported Nixon in both of his elections.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,556 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h
Obviously you have a comprehension problem.
My answer was to another poster who was off topic. My answer was directed to what he said, not to what you decided I should be talking about.
My how the goal posts change to fit the meme. If they were conservative Democrats, what were Republicans?
I find it ironic that Byrd remained a Democrat Senator right up until his death in the 90s. The Dems constantly distance themselves from their true roots... for votes of course.
By your own sentence in bold, you knew you were lying in your earlier post, anyways.
There was indeed a time in this nations history when neither party was ideologically solid. This isnt rocket science.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
