It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should we ban the Democratic Party?

page: 2
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 07:59 PM
link   
That's exactly what we need. We need to ban one of the two major parties so that there's only one party to vote for. That is the answer.

That will make America great again.




posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   


Ban the democratic party.

Hold THEM to the own standards.

The SAME standards they use for gun control (created to keep AA's from being armed).

Past behavior is supposedly indicative of future behavior.

BAN THE DEMOCRAT party.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian




1. Do you think that support for slavery was the conservative or progressive position?


Neither. It is just the right thing to do.




2. Do you think that support for segregation was the conservative or progressive position?


Same answer as the other.

What you are viewing as progressive in this day and age is not progressive. Giving more liberties to some people because of the color of their skin is not progressive. Progressive is for the benefit of all.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: theantediluvian

Anarchists are very liberal with their violence.


Was it a liberal that mowed people down with a car recently?



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: mkultra11

No, that's not true either. Antifa aren't Democrats. In fact, they're anarchists. They don't even vote and if they did, they'd vote for some nightmare like Trump in hopes of expediting the collapse of the system. DERP.


I didn't add them to the list, the KKK is enough. I did say that antifa is being morally supported by the media and Democrats and financially by Soros.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian




2. Do you think that support for segregation was the conservative or progressive position?


Support for segregation is a 'progressive' position, and ALWAYS been one.

The hypenated american moniker.

African American.

Hispanic American.

The list goes on.

Because GD simply calling ourselves just American has been deemed to be 'offensive'.

The left is,has been, and always will be .

The party of segregation, and slavery.
edit on 17-8-2017 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: theantediluvian




Yet it's the Republican base who is losing its s# over defending statues of the Confederate generals.


And who is the people right now acting like the ISIS and the Taliban trying to erase history they don't like ?

That would be the left. The democratic party.

Because there can't be any reminders THEY were on the wrong side.


While I'm not pro-"operation statue take down", how is removing a statue erasing history? If they start revising books and wikipedia, then we'd have a problem (not that kids these days actually get their information from books... sigh..).



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: mkultra11

I'm down for removing either or both major parties. I don't which one but both would be best.

Something needs to change and removing the democrats will only help liberals in the long run.


Well there is something we can agree on, both parties need to go the way of the dodo if the country ever wants to have a chance of improving.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:04 PM
link   
I think we should ban parties. Period.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: mkultra11

1. Do you think that support for slavery was the conservative or progressive position?

2. Do you think that support for segregation was the conservative or progressive position?

Answer those two questions honestly and maybe we can talk.


We're already talking aren't we? Your questions are irrelevant in the face of historical fact.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: redtic

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: theantediluvian




Yet it's the Republican base who is losing its s# over defending statues of the Confederate generals.


And who is the people right now acting like the ISIS and the Taliban trying to erase history they don't like ?

That would be the left. The democratic party.

Because there can't be any reminders THEY were on the wrong side.


While I'm not pro-"operation statue take down", how is removing a statue erasing history? If they start revising books and wikipedia, then we'd have a problem (not that kids these days actually get their information from books... sigh..).


Christ almighty.

The left has been running around decades like the Ministry of Truth, and Charlotte was just the latest location for Airstrip One.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Statues erected in 1924 aren't irreplaceable archaeologically relevant sites from thousands of years ago. In the case of the hundreds of Confederate monuments erected after Plessy v Ferguson and through the Civil Rights Era, they're icons of a butthurt conservative populace oppressing the s# out of non-whites while they still could.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Almost a hundred years.

Rather slow for a bunch of progressives.

To suddenly be running around whining bout them.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: mkultra11

Yet it's the Republican base who is losing its s# over defending statues of the Confederate generals. Generals who fought a war for the side who seceded from the Union because Lincoln was elected and they wanted to preserve the institution of slavery.

Monuments that were erected by pro-segregation Southerners in the time of Jim Crow laws, and in some cases — such as with Stone Mountain — on Klan lands. (Stone Mountain was the site of the founding of the modern Klan)

That should be a dead giveaway that something in your absurd low information yammering is amiss. Also, it was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and it was Barry "Mr. Conservative" Goldwater's lack of support for it that cost him the election in what was the biggest landslide to that point.

You're clearly a sponge for stupid propaganda.

And as you try to lay claim to liberal progressive victories, you call for the eradication of the opposing party like the ultimate right-wing authoritarian.

Jesus.


I read this and think about sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants. Why? The civil war was more about states rebelling against federal rule of law. True... Many say it is different...but really? I find it ironic that those that are on the side of sanctuary cities fighting against the 'union' are the same ones who despise what the confederacy was fighting for...aka...state rights.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

So considering that the last Confederate veteran died in the 1950's the concept of their kin putting something up to commemorate them is impossible?



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: mkultra11

I'm down for removing either or both major parties. I don't which one but both would be best.

Something needs to change and removing the democrats will only help liberals in the long run.


I completely agree that the two party system is actually a one party monopoly on our government and completely against what the Founders intended.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: theantediluvian

So considering that the last Confederate veteran died in the 1950's the concept of their kin putting something up to commemorate them is impossible?


Tombstones are next.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: mkultra11

Yet it's the Republican base who is losing its s# over defending statues of the Confederate generals. Generals who fought a war for the side who seceded from the Union because Lincoln was elected and they wanted to preserve the institution of slavery.

Monuments that were erected by pro-segregation Southerners in the time of Jim Crow laws, and in some cases — such as with Stone Mountain — on Klan lands. (Stone Mountain was the site of the founding of the modern Klan)

That should be a dead giveaway that something in your absurd low information yammering is amiss. Also, it was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and it was Barry "Mr. Conservative" Goldwater's lack of support for it that cost him the election in what was the biggest landslide to that point.

You're clearly a sponge for stupid propaganda.

And as you try to lay claim to liberal progressive victories, you call for the eradication of the opposing party like the ultimate right-wing authoritarian.

Jesus.


I read this and think about sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants. Why? The civil war was more about states rebelling against federal rule of law. True... Many say it is different...but really? I find it ironic that those that are on the side of sanctuary cities fighting against the 'union' are the same ones who despise what the confederacy was fighting for...aka...state rights.


Very good point, Had not thought about it in that way.

Given me something to ponder, thanks.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   
I guess the anti's never heard of historical preservation.

Given to buildings, and monuments over 75 years old.

But hey not the first time a bunch of northerners burned the south down.



posted on Aug, 17 2017 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




Was it a liberal that mowed people down with a car recently?


Like I said. Anarchists are very liberal with their violence.



new topics




 
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join