Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-14-2017, 02:34 AM
 
1,323 posts, read 583,822 times
Reputation: 1060

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog View Post
He's black so he's allowed to say that.



Policies shmolicies. The Media, dnc, academia, Deep State, pop culture, need I go on? ... are all very liberal. They give minorities and poor immigrants just enough... Crumbs to get by, a little cheese here, a little chedda there... in turn for their vote and a nice pad in thee ghetto.

Yeah, it's all about victimhood and playing on their fears. They also trash organized religion because that works for a few.

Some get out of the ghetto and go off to become CEOs due to pure hunger. Others just make it out.

Remember what I said... "So our troubles we think are of our own making." Statement of hope.
Um, 70% of black are employed and lower middle-class to one percenters. So the majority of black people don't need crumbs, don't need cheese, aren't victims and certainly aren't fearful. Do you know any black people? Fearful is not a word that remotely describes an entire race that has borne the brunt of humanity's wickedness and still prevails.

I think you need to head over to Appalachia, and preach to those folks. Tell them to get off the government teet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-14-2017, 02:37 AM
 
15,068 posts, read 6,122,364 times
Reputation: 5121
Quote:
Originally Posted by kajo13 View Post
Um, 70% of black are employed and lower middle-class to one percenters. So the majority of black people don't need crumbs, don't need cheese, aren't victims and certainly aren't fearful. Do you know any black people? Fearful is not a word that remotely describes an entire race that has borne the brunt of humanity's wickedness and still prevails.

I think you need to head over to Appalachia, and preach to those folks. Tell them to get off the government teet.
It's that old American obsession with black people talking in his post. People who peddle such nonsense are mentally on a plantation themselves. It is their culture to be obsessed with black people because they are culturally lacking and often religiously lacking as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 02:47 AM
 
1,323 posts, read 583,822 times
Reputation: 1060
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReineDeCoeur View Post
It's that old American obsession with black people talking in his post. People who peddle such nonsense are mentally on a plantation themselves. It is their culture to be obsessed with black people because they are culturally lacking and often religiously lacking as well.
And this forum is especially weird about it. For no reason, a black people thread just pops up. It's a bit unhinged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 06:19 AM
 
26,277 posts, read 14,872,822 times
Reputation: 14460
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
Even if you did not read the post I was responding to, you had to read the first half of the sentence you were responding to. Meaning you are purposefully being obtuse right now and pretending that the comment was about how good the bill was rather than whether or not JFK voted for it.

I thought you were better than that.
I read your post.

You point out that LBJ voted for it, showing Democrat support.

It was LBJ who watered down the bill to begin with so it wouldn't help the problem.

You were clearly distorting history or ignorant of history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 06:29 AM
 
26,277 posts, read 14,872,822 times
Reputation: 14460
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
In addition, between the two candidates, Johnson and Goldwater, it was Goldwater, the Republican, who voted against the Civil Rights Act.
You have been fed a distorted history.


#1 Barry Goldwater supported sweeping Civil Rights Bills in 1957, 1960, and he only voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, because he thought it would create a large federal police force based on the wording, but vocally supported a Civil Rights Bill.

Which is why Hillary supported Barry Goldwater: Goldwater Girl

#2 LBJ opposed any serious Civil Rights Bills in 1957 and 1960. LBJ was the one that took the teeth out of the 1957 Civil Rights Act to position himself as a Democratic leader. He only supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act when he could no longer ignore it.



Goldwater in fact complained that the 1957 Civil Rights Act didn't do enough, thanks LBJ! LBJ said justice can wait as he positions himself to be a Democratic Party leader!!! So much for letter from a Birmingham Jail about not waiting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 07:22 AM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,445 posts, read 16,358,514 times
Reputation: 5949
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon View Post
I read your post.

You point out that LBJ voted for it, showing Democrat support.

It was LBJ who watered down the bill to begin with so it wouldn't help the problem.

You were clearly distorting history or ignorant of history.
Again, you are purposefully lying, and im not sure why.

The post I responded to claimed specifically that JFK and the Dem majority didnt vote for civil rights before his presidency.

They clearly did.

Whether or not the bill was watered down or not was not in my mind frame, nor the person I was responding to.

You are trying to make a larger grandiose argument, which in and of itself would be fine, but in the process, you are trying to do 3 things

1. Change the subject to fit your narrative rather than what I was responding to.
2. claim to be a mind reader
3. call me a liar because you are a mind reader.

Those, you can not do.

Again, not sure why you are being this obtuse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 08:01 AM
 
1,400 posts, read 857,292 times
Reputation: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLVgal View Post
For real, I'm a reverse Oreo, and any Plantation remark is seriously bs. We know who owns the plantation. It's ignorant white people who keep voting against their own self interest. And you are their slaves. And you people continue to vote against basic worker rights.
It's ignorant to pretend that you have a superior insight in to what's best for someone else. Regardless, your point doesn't make any sense. How can "ignorant white people" own the plantation and still be slaves? Slaves to who?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 08:09 AM
 
26,277 posts, read 14,872,822 times
Reputation: 14460
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
What civil rights did JFK vote against as Senator, because Gov Track says both he and LB voted in favor of the 1957 Civil rights act

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/85-1957/s75
Why would you point out that LBJ voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act?

LBJ is the one who WEAKENED the 1957 Civil Rights Act so it wouldn't be fruitful.

LBJ did this because he valued positioning himself as a leader of the Democratic Party OVER that of Civil Rights.

Why would you mention this? Were you trying to distort history and falsely pretend that LBJ favored Civil Rights in 1957 or were you just ignorant of LBJ's history on Civil Rights?

If you are distorting - shame on you.

If you were ignorant - thank me for educating you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 08:26 AM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,445 posts, read 16,358,514 times
Reputation: 5949
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon View Post
Why would you point out that LBJ voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act?

LBJ is the one who WEAKENED the 1957 Civil Rights Act so it wouldn't be fruitful.

LBJ did this because he valued positioning himself as a leader of the Democratic Party OVER that of Civil Rights.

Why would you mention this? Were you trying to distort history and falsely pretend that LBJ favored Civil Rights in 1957 or were you just ignorant of LBJ's history on Civil Rights?

If you are distorting - shame on you.

If you were ignorant - thank me for educating you.
LBJ was Democratic Majority Leader, then VP, then President

That is why I mentioned him, because the argument was about JFK and Democratic leadership.

So again, if you want to make a grandiose argument, thats fine, but you went past that and started to make claims based on your own assumptions rather than simply responding to the context of the post.

How about I simplify it for you.

Was 1grin_g0 wrong when he/she said JFK did not vote for the civil rights act in the 1950's.

The simply answer is yes he/she was wrong. But I doubt you will answer, or worse yet, you will give some convoluted response .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2017, 08:38 AM
 
26,277 posts, read 14,872,822 times
Reputation: 14460
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
LBJ was Democratic Majority Leader, then VP, then President

That is why I mentioned him, because the argument was about JFK and Democratic leadership.
You mentioned that he voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act - as if he supported Civil Rights at the time.

He was the leader in weakening that measure so he could vote for it. He would have voted against it had it been a good Civil Rights Act as intended.

Your point was clearly BS. You were either distorting or you were ignorant of basic history - either way a bad look that you keep dodging this.


P.S. Speaking of hyper-partisan distortions as you attempted with LBJ here, you repeatedly argued that Romney was wrong that Russia was a geo-political adversary in the face of overwhelming evidence - simply, because your shepherd (Obama) mocked him for it to take pressure away from his flexibility comments. Are you willing to now admit that Romney was right now that you are on board Russian hysteria?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top