The mistake too many (with the facts on their side) make is that they respond to this charge by immediately defending themselves; this is exactly what the liberal in the argument wants, and if you go down this rabbit hole, they've won, pure and simple.
The proper course is to ignore the specious charge and challenge them to address the facts. Lather, rinse, repeat and stay fact-centered until they slink off.
Many Americans disliked Barack Obama for reasons that had nothing to do with the color of his skin.
The 4th poorest performing economy out of the 43 Presidents who preceded him nothing to do with race and everything to do with an inept economic policy.
Ditto for the weakest recovery in history, the most protracted rate of high unemployment (and underemployment), and the lowest Labor Force Participation rate in over 40 years.
Abuse of power (weaponizing the IRS and likely the CIA) had nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with an appalling lack of character and integrity.
Setting race relations back decades had nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with being a narrow-minded, race-baiting bigot.
Rendering our standing in the International Community somewhere between "weak" and "laughingstock" had nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with a fundamental lack of leadership abilities and an immoral compass.
Those are the facts that cause the intellectually dishonest to brandish the "r" word......
This is a myth that has been pushed by leftists for the last few decades, and has little, if any, factual backing. The true "sheep" (Atheist, et al) actually believe it.
"But Jefferson , a republican ........."
WHAT???????
Jefferson died on July 4, 1826. The Republican Party was founded in 1854, 28 YEARS after Jefferson died.
What's more, the annual Democrat Party celebration and fundraising dinners are referred to as Jefferson-Jackson Day events!
My God, how did you get to be so stupid?????
Mike of CT "...the argument quickly segues from a fact-based argument to an emotion-based argument,"
Once upon a time, I dealt with a landowner that had a well on it owned and operated by the company I worked for. He was an atheist, progressive liberal that basked in the sunlight of socialism. He was atement about having the well relocated off his property. I asked him if socialism is so great, why are you worried about a gas well that benefits the greater good on property you "own"? Remember, no private ownership of property right...?
The funny part is, the well existed before he bought the property unseen. Talk about clueless.
Never better said, my friend.
Never better said.
Democrats: The Party Of Racism
Did the Democrats just now notice the statues of the Confederacy? Have they been in a coma? All of a sudden they found self-riotousness over what “those people” represented. This is over the top hypocritical!
And please, don’t give me that line about the Parties changed sides! When, exactly, did that happen? During the FDR years? FDR was, and still is, a god to the Democrats. You know, the one who rounded up and interned Japanese, Italians, Germans and so on during World War II? No warrants. No due process. Nothing. Yup, American citizens! Ironic. And now they want to make up for it by giving NON-Americans all kinds of rights.
President Roosevelt appointed former KKK member Hugo Black to the Supreme Court! Pay attention now. As an Alabama Senator, Hugo Black filibustered an Anti-Lynching Bill. Hmmm. Hugo went on to write that Roosevelt spoke positively of the KKK and had many friends and supporters in it. During the Civil Rights movement, Hugo warned FDR that if he didn’t keep the Blacks in line it might get violent! He also stated, “unfortunately some people think Negros should have special rights under the law.” FDR would not allow the integration of whites and blacks in the armed services. I wonder how he would have handled transgender? Will we be removing his statue now too?
Maybe the Parties switched sides during the years of LBJ, a Democrat, who saw black people as being able to be played and had no problem calling them by the “N” word. (As a matter of fact, many of his close friends said it was one of his favorite words.) When LBJ was asked why he nominated Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court he stated, “When I appoint a “N” to the bench I want everyone to know he is a “N””. And his famous comment that once he got the Civil Rights Act passed, “I’ll have those “N’s” voting Democratic for 200 years.” Will we be pulling down his statue too?
Maybe the Party switch came in the 1970’s, you know, when Jimmy Carter, one of the biggest racists in your Party, well in any Party, was president. Jimmy, while serving on the school board in the 1950’s led the effort to relocate the site of a new black school. Why? Because, as he stated publically, the school was on the same side of the street as a white school and the kids would have to use the same sidewalk! The board later assured residents they would do everything they could to make sure the kids would not be walking on the sidewalk at the same time.
In 1976 the first black mayor of Gary Indiana, Richard Hatcher said Carter was, “a Frankenstein’s monster with a Southern drawl, a more cultured version of old Confederate at the school house door.”
Jesse Jackson, yes THE Jesse Jackson, called Carter “a throwback to Hitlerian racism.”Atlanta Mayor Maynard Jackson once exclaimed regarding Carter, “is there no white politician I can trust?”
Why would these people say this about Jimmy Carter? One of the most revered Democrats in history. Or was he Republican? I’m confused. I can’t figure out when they changed!
When the government was considering using “public housing” to integrate neighborhoods, Jimmy Carter stated, “I have nothing against a community that is made up of people who are Polish or Czech or French Canadian or black trying to maintain the ethnic purity of their neighborhood this is a natural inclination.” I’m guessing his statues need to come down too. Will we also be taking his name off of schools?
Maybe that Party switch came during Billy Bob Clinton’s reign! Bill has been touted as the single most effective president at increasing the black prison population because of his 1994 Crime Bill. Many in the black community believe he was trying to appease white Republicans whose vote he needed. So if he did that, wouldn’t that make him a racist? Or at the very least, a phony?
But what I really want to tackle is the ongoing, continual accusations of sexual assault by Billy Bob that seem to be totally acceptable to the Left. While governor, his troopers, and guards went and picked up women for him. (Google it.) When one woman went to her grandmother with the issue she was told, “You can go to your boss with it, but honey, he is the Governor. Be careful.” As the Governor, no one stood a chance. And back then, she and the others might have been blamed or accused of being a willing participant. But if they were all false, then why did he pay them to go away? I found 2 different reports. One identifying 11 different women, the other 7 with no names attached. State troopers had a running joke about the then-Governor who fancied himself as Mr. Lover! Was he a Republican who switched? And will we be pulling his statues down?
Then there is Ted Kennedy. Womanizer and “alleged” murderer. I guess we have to define murderer. Actually I’m not going to if you don’t know what one is then you shouldn’t be reading this piece. After a night of drinking Ted Kennedy was giving a ride “home” to a Miss Mary Jo Kopechne when his car went out of control on a small bridge and into the water. Ted had the presence of mind to get himself out of the car, go back to his room, shower, clean up, go to bed, and THEN, when he got up in the morning, call the police. When the autopsy was done it was found that she drowned, which means he had time to save her if he would have simply tried.
There were rumors that Mary Jo was pregnant, but since that part of the story has no real evidence, I won’t accuse him of it. Ted was known for talking down to in a condescending tone those who he felt were beneath him, most notably, black people. This was VERY evident when he was in a confirmation hearing for Mr. Gerald Reynolds’ appointment to the Office of Civil Rights at the Department of Education. According to one Senator, Ted was explaining everything to Mr. Reynolds as if he was a child or unable to comprehend. You know, like you do when someone is “beneath you.” So, will we be removing his name and statues from places of prominence?
The arguments are disingenuous. The rage fake. And the moral outcry is just laughable. The Left marches hand in hand with Communist flag waivers (Google it) even allowing them to be shown at the DNC. Yet they are supposedly outraged by the Confederate flag and the American Flag?
They’re fine walking next to the Communist flag that represents the killing of 100’s of millions of people and the oppression of 100’s of millions more. Yet they find a perverted satisfaction in burning a flag that may have many negative frays in it, but along with all those frays are many, many, many more threads saving 100’s of millions lives! America has brought food and aid to many war-torn countries and aid to countries ravaged by natural disasters. And they’ve brought smiles and calm and peace and joy to many LEGAL immigrants coming to America for a better life for their families...
"Except you fail to address why the majority of white supremacists today wouldn't vote for a dem today."
BFD!
So what?
There are less than 10,000 of them in the entire country.
I'm in no way a white supremacist and it's highly unlikely I'd ever vote for a Dem, either.
In addition, there are hundreds of thousands of people on the left who would never vote for a Republican.
So what's your point?
The root of hitler's power was a transfer of cash between government and certain corporations - sort of like the dems and tesla, wind companies, solar companies, etc. fascism is socialism.
Nice deflection; well, actually, it really isn't-nice, that is. You must have been the valedictorian at the "University of Specious and Unsubstantiated Charges"; making a declarative statement requires substantive proof.
Oh wait a second, I think you may try to cobble some together....let's take a look....
"How do I know? Look at the rallies! Anti Hillary, anti democrats, anti immigrant, anti Muslim etc. is that Because they're all liberals?"
Damn, what a letdown; for a second there I'd half-hoped you'd construct a semi-cogent argument.
No context for a broad and unsubstantiated assumption; all those rallies comprised what percent of the American electorate? That would be context, i.e. it would provide scope. At the moment you're in the "but I heard it from my local barber who read it in some paper or something" level of sourcing.
And what about all those anti's that you seem to have concocted, err, I mean connected? Anti-Hillary equals the portion of the electorate who happens to ascribe to the quaint notion that we are a nation of laws, something Mrs. Clinton circumvents whenever they prove inconvenient. Anti-Democrat equals the portion of the electorate that believes in personal accountability, the Constitution, the rule of law and that the government serves the people and not the other way around.
Anti-immigrant; don't confuse anti-illegal immigration with being anti-immigration; I know, that distinction is probably lost on you as I don't recall seeing you getting too worked up over it prior to......well, actually I doubt you're worked up at all about illegal immigration at all.
Anti-muslim? I think you mean anti-radical islamic terrorism. Don't worry, I'll give you a pass on this one; after all the former POTUS couldn't utter the words so why should I expect one of his legion of water-carriers to be able to?
" I'm not sure if We should even wait for an answer as much as you guys skirt around the issue."
I'm not sure you've asked a question as much as you've regurgitated about 6 weeks worth of posts on HuffPo or DailyKos. At the moment you have me questioning if you possess the intellectual depth to even make a half-hearted stab at a meaningful question on this topic.
The only skirting being done here is by you Gentle Gerbil; skirting around the difference between being pitiful or just plain boring.
NIXON???
Nixon was 50 YEARS ago, you moron!
"And how the democrats before Jim Crow era were conservatives up until LBJ signed the civil right act?"
I've got news for you:
A greater percentage of both GOP Congressmen and Senators voted FOR the Civil Rights Act than did the Democrat Congressmen and Senators.
Moreover, to your great surprise, I'm sure, Martin Luther King was a REPUBLICAN!
Must suck to be you!
"Anyone with a rudimentary education would know that."
You just hate conservative white people, isn't it?
I'm much more inclined to believe the Professor of Political Science at Vanderbilt (in the video).
Like most bowliberal wannabes...you get your information from Cracker Jack boxes...propaganda that has been formulated to make you feel better...you feed on it daily.
I've never watched Fox and Friends in my life and I've not watched any of the conservative shows on TV in well over a decade. In fact, other than a few sports events, I haven't watched any TV at all in over a decade.
Must suck to be you!
