100th Anniversary Of The Tulsa Race Massacre.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: Dfairlite
And they were democrats. Also not up for dispute.

Who says it is? The entire time I've been saying look at the demographic that made up the parties at that time, this isn't a difficult issue.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The Civil War Ear Democrats were conservative, that is not up for dispute.

If they hadn't been, there'd have been no Civil War, and the Federal Govt. would not be nearly as omnipresent as it is today.

originally posted by: seagull
If they hadn't been, there'd have been no Civil War, and the Federal Govt. would not be nearly as omnipresent as it is today.

Well, maybe, but going to bat over slavery isn't exactly a gold star moment.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Just wanting to make sure everyone knows the democrats have been racist slavery supporters since before the civil war, and still are. That's all.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Just wanting to make sure everyone knows the democrats have been racist slavery supporters since before the civil war, and still are. That's all.

Look at the demographics. The GOP is predominately white and there's a reason for that.

The Dembs have an all inclusive party and welcome all comers, even RINOs...

news.gallup.com...

www.pewresearch.org...

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Oh, I'll agree with that, but slavery wasn't the only issue involved.

Many of the same issues the states and federal govt. fight over today were fought over then, too. Slavery was only one of several. The nastiest, and least excusable, reason.

a reply to: olaru12

I thought the "I have black friends" argument was proof that someone was racist... Has that changed?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Just wanting to make sure everyone knows the democrats have been racist slavery supporters since before the civil war, and still are. That's all.

Just wanting to let you know it was conservative southerners that owned slaves.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Conservative southern democrats. Don't make it inaccurate by leaving off the party and inserting a label you intend to use to cause confusion.

Now we have conservative democrats nation wide perpetuating it.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Conservative southern democrats. Don't make it inaccurate by leaving off the party and inserting a label you intend to use to cause confusion.

Now we have conservative democrats nation wide perpetuating it.

Sure, now they are southern conservative Republicans. Funny how that happened, first people terk der slervs and now they terk der election.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: olaru12

I thought the "I have black friends" argument was proof that someone was racist... Has that changed?

If it makes you feel better to twist the narrative, then do it. But the truth remains....



Look at the demographics. The GOP is predominately white and there's a reason for that.

The Dembs have an all inclusive party and welcome all comers, even RINOs...

news.gallup.com...

www.pewresearch.org...

a reply to: olaru12

RINO's, by definition are not Democrat party members, but I don't expect democrats to understand such logic.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Incorrect. Those southern democrats tried to cheat Lincoln with absentee ballot fraud too. Gotta keep those slaves! Just like the northern democrats did this time around. Gotta keep those slaves! And when that wasn't enough, they printed some more ballots and "fixed" the machines. Eventually it will all come out and the morons that deny it will pretend they weren't morons.

Lest anyone doubt this, what was at the top of the agenda when Biden got back in? Resume the slave trade on day one!

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Incorrect.

No, very correct, they were conservative and they were from the south. I know you tried to argue that slave owners were somehow progressive but no one is buying your bull****.

They were dEmocrats

That’s a 100% fact

Regardless of the twists, the confederates were dEmocrats

So the bLM flag and the confederacy flag belong together. Both 100% dEmocrat operations

The Republican Party opposed slavery. Nothing at all has changed

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

LOL I can't believe how mad you are about this. Democrats wanted slaves back then. Democrats want slaves now. End of story. No matter how much you try to wriggle out of this by applying terms meant to confuse, you can't. The only way out is by saying that illegal immigrants are not modern day slave, which would be rightly called out as bull#.

a reply to: olaru12

Speaking as a former life-long Democrat, that's very much a fallacy.

Being of a somewhat conservative bent, I was very aware that I was unwelcome in many circles of the Democratic party. Especially in the past two, almost three, decades.

On more than one occasion I was verbally chastised for daring to disagree with certain ideals supported by the so called Progressive wing of the Democratic party.

My leaving was treated as high treason by the local democratic hierarchy, some of whom I'd known since we were kids in school. Friends, or so I thought...seems I was wrong.

Please refrain from trying to portray the Democratic party as somehow approaching "all-inclusive". I'm living proof that that just isn't the case any more...if it ever was to begin with--which I doubt.

I'll ask what I think is a very pertinent question...if the Dems are so all inclusive, why are so many folks leaving the party??

Neither the GOP, or the Democrats are anything like all inclusive.

a reply to: seagull

The very idea of a party being all inclusive is asinine anyway. The whole point is to appeal to people's ideals.

I won't go into the parties and their ideals, but let's just say, if people's ideals are all the same based on melanin levels, I'd be shocked.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Yes, it is asinine.

...and both parties are guilty of attempting to portray themselves as just that.

An example would be the treatment that Tulsi Gabbard has received for daring to back Sanders, rather than she who is finally irrelevant, and daring to run against the Annointed One.

She was the only Democratic candidate who was not invited to the Democratic National Convention as a speaker. Why was that, I wonder???

Could it be because she dares contradict she who is evil personified, and doesn't seem to much care for either Biden or Harris??

Naaah...couldn't be that. Some inclusion.