No plan, no strategy, no nothing...

JDIdiot, which part of "Thurmond switched parties because of his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act" did you not understand?

Go to the rotunda of the Texas capital and look at all the portraits of the time after the civil war. Lot's of black folks held office. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Horse shit, JLHomo. When were YOU at the Texas Capitol rotunda? Which black folks' pictures did you see in the rotunda? Barbara Jordan? Yep, she's there, all the way back from her service during Reconstruction!

Lots of black folks? Talking out of your asshole for a change.

I'm still waiting for Muskogee to show some evidence that 95% of southern politicians were black EVER.

Jesus, people! Yes. The Republicans try to suppress the black vote. The Democrats try to suppress the military and evangelical vote. The one that does the best job of suppressing wins the election. That's how it works. It's despicable, but let's be honest.

It's not about race. It's about power. Get real.

Jesus, people! Yes. The Republicans try to suppress the black vote. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Hanoi COG, you are obviously not paying attention. Please try to keep up with the story line prior to making your customary idiotic remarks!

My remarks were not about modern day Republican's trying "to suppress the black vote." Of course they do! Instead, my remarks were about JDIdiot's ridiculous claim that the extreme racial beliefs of the 1860's era Southern Democrats and today's modern day Democratic Party, are one and the same.

Depite JDIdiot's claim to the contrary, the 1964 Civil Rights "bill divided and engendered a long-term change in the demographic support of both parties." What was once the historical (racial) bigotry of the 1860's era Southern Democrats is now firmly embedded in modern day (Deep South) Republican Party culture.

Let's cut to the chase, shall we? in post Civil Rights Bill of 1964 America, Southern Democrats became Southern Republicans! Why? Because they are Southern bigots!

With that said, I would not blame JDIdiot if he were actually trying to distance himself from the historical racial hatred of the Deep South, irrespective of political affiliation. Unfortunately, that is not what he is trying to do. As usual, JDIdiot never lets the facts stand in the way of the lie he is trying to tell.

Hanoi COG, I know that you spend most of your waking hours tending to your financially lucrative glory hole located inside one of the men's restroom stall's at the Salina Bus Station. However, if you are going to take the time to make a comment, please pay closer attention to what is being said!

My remarks were not about modern day Republican's trying "to suppress the black vote." Of course they do! Instead, my remarks were about JDIdiot's ridiculous claim that the extreme racial beliefs of the 1860's era Southern Democrats and today's modern day Democratic Party, are one and the same. Originally Posted by bigtex

The first paragraph above should have read as follows:


My remarks were not about modern day Republican's trying "to suppress the black vote." Of course they do! Instead, my remarks were about JDIdiot's ridiculous claim that the extreme racial beliefs of the 1860's era Southern Democrats and today's modern day Democratic Party, are NOT one and the same.

My mistake!

You still didn't answer the question so I'll make it a charge. Why are you trying to hijack this thread with some of your patented stupidity? You're not even honest when you try to cut and paste from poor source material. I caught you lying and put out the full comment. Still, this is a hijack plain and simple. Is it because you have absolutely no answer to the OP? Your guy is a failure and a liar. Admit that, like so many liberal pundits have been, and move on. You fucked up by supporting Obama and your judgement is no longer credible. This is more about you than it is Obama.

Why are you trying to hijack this thread with some of your patented stupidity? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

It was you who first hijacked your own thread with "your patented stupidity," in post #17, when you said the following:

In the 1868 elections in Jones County, Mississippi there were 2500 registered republican voters. In the election only 7 voted. They were almost all freedmen and the Klan "protected" the polling places for the democrats. Jones County also where Chris McDaniels comes from. In fact, Jones County has long claimed the distinction of having seceded from the Confederacy. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

True to form, you then tried to accuse me of hijacking a thread in post #20 (my first post in this thread) that you had already hijacked in post #17.

Idiot!

after the Civil War, I would guess 95% Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

OK Muskogee. Howzabout you back up your bullshit?

Shouldn't be hard, even for you. You might even find an internet graphic or photo you can embed in your next post, GOOOOOOBER! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

OK Muskogee. Howzabiut you back up your bullshit?

OK. Muskogee. Howzabout I back up your bullshit?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...Federal_Office

Seems that during Reconstruction, there were NINE Blacks elected to Congress.

Spoze that's somewhere near 95%, eh! truckstop?.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Horse shit, JLHomo. When were YOU at the Texas Capitol rotunda? Which black folks' pictures did you see in the rotunda? Barbara Jordan? Yep, she's there, all the way back from her service during Reconstruction!

Lots of black folks? Talking out of your asshole for a change.

I'm still waiting for Muskogee to show some evidence that 95% of southern politicians were black EVER. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

what part of GUESS do you not understand

I, unlike many of you, do not live on this board 24/7, there was some great football games last night

Tampon, I'm starting to think that English is a second langauge to you.

what part of GUESS do you not understand

I, unlike many of you, do not live on this board 24/7, there was some great football games last night Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

Yeah. Pity about Okie State. I was pulling for them.

However, you're simply deflecting. You said you guessed 95% of southern politicians were black at the time of reconstruction. there were 9 black people elected to congress at that time.

Your "guess" indicates your level of ignorance and stupidity. Just because you "guess" or "estimate" or "think" something doesn't give you a pass from someone else calling BULLSHIT on you.

I did. You're trying to dodge.

Period.

I'm starting to think that English is a second langauge to you. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

JDIdiot, where do you rank on the "langauge," chart? Is English your 5th or 6th "langauge"? It is apparent that you can't even spell the word language.

There you have it folks, a classic example of how well they teach their students to spell in the Idiotville Independent School District:

l-a-n-g-a-u-g-e (langauge).

As I said in the previous post, JD is an Idiot! Live with it, 'cuz it's not gonna change!

The first paragraph above should have read as follows:

My remarks were not about modern day Republican's trying "to suppress the black vote." Of course they do! Instead, my remarks were about JDIdiot's ridiculous claim that the extreme racial beliefs of the 1860's era Southern Democrats and today's modern day Democratic Party, are NOT one and the same.

My mistake! Originally Posted by bigtex

Actually, you made the mistake on this post above, not the first one. JD B is claiming they are one and the same - that's his whole point. The Democrats were racists then and it carries over to today. Your counterpoint is that they are not one and the same.
This is actually an effective strategy you should follow more often - cluelessly argue both sides - cause you can get it right half the time - which is way more often than usual for you.

(for reference, the first quote is shown below)

Originally Posted by bigtex

My remarks were not about modern day Republican's trying "to suppress the black vote." Of course they do! Instead, my remarks were about JDIdiot's ridiculous claim that the extreme racial beliefs of the 1860's era Southern Democrats and today's modern day Democratic Party, are one and the same.

Why don't we try this while I'm wearing my old glasses (that allow me to see the computer screen)? You don't have that excuse. You have not acknowledged the obvious about the thread hijacking have you?

So answer the OP...


And Tampon is wrong again. At no time (this is his lie) did I say that racial beliefs of the democratic party of the 1860s matches the racial beliefs of the modern democrat. However, both groups of democrats see the black people as their "property". For labor in the old days and votes in the modern times. Just like the old days, there are even black people working against the benefits of the masses of the black population today.

Tampon, you don't win arguments by lying.

you don't win arguments by lying. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

For once we agree! One wins arguments by presenting the facts, not lying. The facts that were initially presented in post #24 of this thread, follows:

"Proven false?" Now that's a laugh! It was brought "out again," because JDIdiot continues to perpetuate the same pathetic "broken record" lie.

Even Wikipedia clearly states in more than one reference (see below) that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "bill divided and engendered a long-term change in the demographic support of both parties."

Anyone with any intelligence should be able to connect the dots. Oops, that eliminates JDIdiot from consideration. He has no intelligence!

From Wiki:

Thurmond switched parties because of his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Thurmond

The bill divided and engendered a long-term change in the demographic support of both parties. President Johnson realized that supporting this bill would risk losing the South's overwhelming support of the Democratic Party. Both Attorney General Robert Kennedy and Vice President Johnson had pushed for the introduction of the civil rights legislation. Johnson told Kennedy aide Ted Sorensen that "I know the risks are great and we might lose the South, but those sorts of states may be lost anyway." Senator Richard Russell, Jr. later warned President Johnson that his strong support for the civil rights bill "will not only cost you the South, it will cost you the election". Johnson, however, went on to win the 1964 election by one of the biggest landslides in American history. The South, which had five states swing Republican in 1964, became a stronghold of the Republican party by the 1990s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 Originally Posted by bigtex

As the Patriarch of the Notorious Idiot KLAN, errr Clan would say, CARRY ON!

Why don't we try this while I'm wearing my old glasses (that allow me to see the computer screen)? You don't have that excuse. You have not acknowledged the obvious about the thread hijacking have you?

So answer the OP...


And Tampon is wrong again. At no time (this is his lie) did I say that racial beliefs of the democratic party of the 1860s matches the racial beliefs of the modern democrat. However, both groups of democrats see the black people as their "property". For labor in the old days and votes in the modern times. Just like the old days, there are even black people working against the benefits of the masses of the black population today.

Tampon, you don't win arguments by lying. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

LMAO Judy didn't have his spelling glasses on..