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.
And how many of these people are you talking about were in congress so that they could vote for the civil rights act? Something tells me none of them, so in all actuality, you are arguing against me, with something that isnt even an argument.
Actually my original statement was about the voting tendencies in the South as a whole, not specifically the Congressmen. You turned it into let's name the dixiecrats contest because of me simply asking for a citation about your statement, which I've not once said was wrong btw.
I bet you guys will watch mel gibson though. Seriously the Obama hate is unprecedented and it is racial. Whatever, don't see his movies he couldn't make them forever anyway. Ive got news for you guys blacks are not going away, Even after Obama. So that anger the tea party feels will never go away. Enjoy your burn.
What a great way to rationalize incompetence- racism. According to you, without the issue of "racism", the nation would be thrilled with
9.1% unemployment
$1.6 trillion dollar deficits
$14.6 trillion in debt
manufacturing leaving the US in droves
diving US dollar
faltering stock market
massive buisness regulations
limitations on oil,gas, and coal exploration
no immigration policy
Get real. People don't like Obama because he is ineffective and incompetent. No one cares what color he is.
The accusation of "racism" has been so over used that it has almost become trite and comical. In the past, racism usually meant that one dealt with another differently based upon their race. Now "racist" means simply anyone who does not agree with far left liberal policy.
Come up with a new accusation that is more compatible with the inane retort of "racist". How about "dummy poop head" or something equally as "clever"?
Actually, it does. My original statement was about the voting tendencies in the South as a whole, not specifically the Congressmen. You turned it into let's name the dixiecrats contest because of me simply asking for a citation about your statement, which I've not once said was wrong btw.
But the person I was responding to, was saying how my statement that those that voted against the civil rights act was wrong.
So, you are responding and making a mute point, that you were not even involved in, or, you are using 2 screen names which is a direct violation of the TOS
Actually, it does. My original statement was about the voting tendencies in the South as a whole, not specifically the Congressmen. You turned it into let's name the dixiecrats contest because of me simply asking for a citation about your statement, which I've not once said was wrong btw.
You asking me for a citation was based on me saying that the majority of the democrats that voted against the civil rights remained democrats. Which is a true statement. As for a citation, you can cite me if you want, there is your citation.
But the person I was responding to, was saying how my statement that those that voted against the civil rights act was wrong.
So, you are responding and making a mute point, that you were not even involved in, or, you are using 2 screen names which is a direct violation of the TOS
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that by starting his statement with: This is not the case as far as the democrats that I have known enough to know how they voted. Isn't saying you are flat out wrong, just not what he experienced. 2 screen names lol. Paranoid much?
You asking me for a citation was based on me saying that the majority of the democrats that voted against the civil rights remained democrats. Which is a true statement. As for a citation, you can cite me if you want, there is your citation.
Yeah that's not how citations work. Look back to your post (or maybe eric's post) about peer reviewed, etc. etc. etc. I'd just take any simple web page that shows the data.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that by starting his statement with: This is not the case as far as the democrats that I have known enough to know how they voted. Isn't saying you are flat out wrong, just not what he experienced. 2 screen names lol. Paranoid much?
But, since it was in response to my statement that those you VOTED against, and he/she said not the ones he/she knew.
You seem to have a hard time keeping up and reading.
Yeah that's not how citations work. Look back to your post (or maybe eric's post) about peer reviewed, etc. etc. etc. I'd just take any simple web page that shows the data.
Okay, so you want me to make a web page real quick with the data, so you don't have to research it?
Come up with a new accusation that is more compatible with the inane retort of "racist". How about "dummy poop head" or something equally as "clever"?
I suggest "poop brain"
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.
