Why is discrimination acceptable for some people?

Obama is black....he got elected President.....get the fuck over it. Originally Posted by timpage

mulatto

mu·lat·to

[muh-lat-oh, -lah-toh, myoo-] Show IPA
noun, plural mu·lat·toes, mu·lat·tos. 1. Anthropology . (not in technical use) the offspring of one white parent and one black parent.

2. Older Use: Often Offensive. a person who has both black and white ancestors.

get it right for once, dicknose

Funny choice of words Timmie. MLK would not be a "DEVOUT" republican. Talking about a minister and politics that is strange. I wonder what you mean. I take it is about reflection. You see in others what you are capable of doing. You equate politics and religion so you assume that other are the same.

Ben Carson is a pretty great person as is Condi Rice. Benjamin O. Davis was a pretty good general and his son was better. I could vote for Herman Cain or Allen West.

Ever hear of Robert K Byrd? Albert Gore Sr.? J. William Fulbright? George Wallace? Orval Faubus? Lester Maddox? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I find it interesting that JD Idiot felt the need to expose and criticize Sen Byrd in post #26 of this thread for being a racist Dixiecrat (which he was) but failed to offer any criticism of the Dixiecrat I had referenced in post #21 (Senator Thurmond) for also being a racist Dixiecrat (which he was).

I can only conclude that Mr. Idiot was disappointed that Senator Byrd later apologized repeatedly for his past racist beliefs and is proud of Senator Thurmond for having never felt the need to apologize for his continued support of racial segregation for most of his time in office.

Hmmmm?

StromThurman was more than a Dixiecrat (deserves capitalization), he was the presidential nominee of the Dixiecrats. Now you make the erroneous statement that Thurman never apologized for his past. We'll get to that in a minute. His daughter who was biracial was treated like any other embarassing daughter of an important official. He did not acknowledge her but he did support her and her mother. I imagine the same thing would have happened had her mother had been white, Asian, or Hispanic. She was, sadly, an embarassment to his career. He did not treat her mother like Jesse Jackson did or try to buy her off like John Edwards.
Strom Thurmond did some bad things but as time passed he did some better things. Today we look at them as normal but it was outside the norm for a Southern politician to hire black staffers (he was the first Southern senator to do so), to nominate and support black judges in the south (he was also the first Southen senator to do that as well), and he supported civil rights legislation when Byrd did not. You can, and we all know you will, say that that this is all about posturing and not indicative of a real change of heart but you're only guessing.
I'm not sure what you consider an apology or what would satisfy you when if fact you have no dog in the hunt. Would you have liked to have seen Strom in sack cloth and ashes crawling on his knees to the church of MLK? Byrd never did that either. Byrd was a Klansman and Thurmond was not. That by itself should shut you up about comparing the two men.
Maybe you should look at the example of his daughter. She died with her secret. She knew what her father had to do to be effective and she knew what he supported. She probably knew him better than you or I did.

Now you make the erroneous statement that Thurman never apologized for his past. We'll get to that in a minute. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm still waiting for a link to Senator Thurmond's actual apology!

Not to worry, I have plenty of time!

In case you missed it, you will find Senator Byrd's apology below and if you are still not convinced that he actually apologized, just follow the Wiki link.

From Wikipedia:

Byrd also said, in 2005, "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."

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

What that dumb fuck JD does not understand id that those Dixiecrats are not Republicans! Those Dixiecrats elected Ronnie and now head up the Tea Party and that merry band of gun toting bible thumpers.

JD thinks a Dixiecrat is horrible , turns out, JD votes lock step with'em in the Tea Party!

What that dumb fuck JD does not understand id that those Dixiecrats are not Republicans! Those Dixiecrats elected Ronnie and now head up the Tea Party and that merry band of gun toting bible thumpers.

JD thinks a Dixiecrat is horrible , turns out, JD votes lock step with'em in the Tea Party! Originally Posted by WTF

What I find to be highly ironic is that JD Idiot initiated a thread specifically dealing with "Why is discrimination acceptable for some people," only for us to soon learn that JD himself finds Senator Strom Thurmond's level of discrimination acceptable but not Senator Byrd's. Discrimination by any other name is still discrimination, whether it is done by Senator Thurmond or Senator Byrd.

Thurmond and Byrd were BOTH WRONG! End of Sentence!!!!!

What makes JD's actions even more laughable would be that Senator Byrd later offered a very specific and apparently sincere apology (justifiably so) while Senator Thurmond went to his grave and never apologized for his actions (justifiably no).

I feel quite certain that the irony of the title of this thread, as well as the convoluted statements from the thread starter himself, is now flying miles and miles above JD Idiot's bigoted head!

And he claims to be a Professor!

Admittedly, not all Dixiecrats left the Democratic Party in the 60's but if you think for even a moment that it was not the Dixiecrats (who left the Democratic Party) who benefited the most from the (late 60's/early 70's) Republican (Nixon-Goldwater) "Southern Strategy" that dominated politics in the Deep South for the next 50 years, then you are living in a fish bowl without sufficient oxygen levels to fuel a very warped mind.

Slowly but surely, nearly all of the 50's-60's era Dixiecrats (from both party's) have passed on but most, if not all, of the Democrats who stayed active eventually denounced their previous racist beliefs. The most prominent Dixiecrat who stayed with the Democratic Party was Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) and he had the following to say in his later life.

From Wikipedia:

In 1997, Byrd told an interviewer he would encourage young people to become involved in politics but also: "Be sure you avoid the Ku Klux Klan. Don't get that albatross around your neck. Once you've made that mistake, you inhibit your operations in the political arena." In his last autobiography, Byrd explained that he was a KKK member because he "was sorely afflicted with tunnel vision—a jejune and immature outlook—seeing only what I wanted to see because I thought the Klan could provide an outlet for my talents and ambitions. Byrd also said, in 2005, "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."

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

Most of the Dixiecrats turned Republican felt no desire to "inhibit their (racist) operations in the political arena." In fact, I am of the opinion that Senator Thurmond's (R-SC) racist beliefs helped him get re-elected many times over, despite the fact that his long time love interest was his African American housekeeper. Go figure!

With those thoughts in mind, I stand by my previous statement that it is you, not me, who stood corrected. The Republican Party of 1965 and beyond was not (and is not) the Republican Party of the 1950's and 1960's. Apparently, the "albatross" Senator Byrd referred to is around your neck, not mine. Live with it! Originally Posted by bigtex

Hey dumbfuck, that makes twice in a row that you didn't even address the point in question. Are you a stupid asshole or a disingenuous asshole? I corrected timmytard on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and proved the GOP played a critical role in getting it passed. Neither of your replies discusses or acknowledges the legislative facts - so how do you figure you are correcting my correction? If you can't man up to the facts, you are not an honest debater. Do you deny that the Republican Party played a crucial role in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Can you answer the question, dipshit?

With all of that said, your previous responses in this thread does lend credence as to why you felt compelled to make the following statement:

Hey, I don't discriminate - I hate everybody! Originally Posted by lustylad

That is a hell of a way to live your life, but who am I to tell you that you are one fucked up dude!

My unsolicited advice, seek counseling. And soon! Originally Posted by bigtex

My advice to you is go to a comedy club sometime. Idiots like you take everything too seriously.

Big Tex and WTF? Ewwww. Use some breath mints guys and then clear the shit out of your brains. We have all heard political apologies (but Tex and WTF seem to believe them) and the words are wasted. It is the actions that we need to look at. Thurmond's actions show that he repented whereas Byrd's actions show that he just said some words for the slobbering class. Thurmond demonstrated repentance and understanding, the former Klansman had a lot further to go with his actions and he failed. He voted for plantation policies, he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and he publicly still used the "N" word when speaking.

At NO time have I ever claimed that any racial discrimination by either Thrumond or Byrd was acceptable. Anything else you say is a damned lie.
At NO time have I ever claimed to be a "professor" either. There is a definite definition. Look it up. If you say otherwise then it is another damned lie.

We have all heard political apologies (but Tex and WTF seem to believe them) and the words are wasted. It is the actions that we need to look at. Thurmond's actions show that he repented whereas Byrd's actions show that he just said some words for the slobbering class. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Let me make sure that I have captured the gist of Professor JD Idiot's argument. He seems to have finally acknowledged that Senator Byrd actually apologized but apparently it was not a sincere enough apology to suit the Prof's discerning taste.

Furthermore, even though Senator Thurmond never apologized, his failure to apologize was much more sincere than Senator Byrd's actual apology.

Absolutely Classic! That's what I call a priceless response, worthy of Hall Of Fame recognition.
Yet another in an increasingly long line of convoluted arguments coming from Professor JD Idiot!

mulatto

mu·lat·to

[muh-lat-oh, -lah-toh, myoo-] Show IPA
noun, plural mu·lat·toes, mu·lat·tos. 1. Anthropology . (not in technical use) the offspring of one white parent and one black parent.

2. Older Use: Often Offensive. a person who has both black and white ancestors.

get it right for once, dicknose

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Is that a selfie waacco?

let timmytard reply for himself. as for selfies ... you remember this one yeah?


http://eccie.net/showpost.php?p=1053405983&postcount=35

let timmytard reply for himself. as for selfies ... you remember this one yeah?


http://eccie.net/showpost.php?p=1053405983&postcount=35 Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

I remember it well dick nose it is a pic of your ATF, and the one review you are so proud of. That is one ugly bitch you are fucking Waacco.

everyone on this board knows you made an idiot of yourself and you'll never live it down.