Adios AA

[WhiteTrash]

Yes, unironically the Ds are more supportive of law and order and family values at this point in history.

Do you miss the good old days when D's fought and died to keep slavery?

[tower912]

Nope.   I miss the days when R's weren't  fighting to bring it back.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Nope.   I miss the days when R's weren't  fighting to bring it back.

Turn off msnbc and hit the putting green.

[Uncle Rico]

Do you miss the good old days when D's fought and died to keep slavery?

This argument is about as stupid as any argument out there.  This is the kind of brainless argument a simpleton makes, ignoring history completely.

Southern democrats of the civil war era and Dixiecrat era post WWII don't exist anymore because they were replaced by republicans after the passage of the Civil Rights bill in 1964.

True story: Southern Democrats filibustered and fought against this bill happening.  Didn't matter because the Republican Party saw an opportunity to win the south by siding against such things moving forward.  JFK and LBJ both knew the risk they'd lose the south and pushed for it anyway.  And they did lose the south. 

Can you imagine any Republican representing a southern state having the huevos to do something like this today?  The answer is no.  Why did Strom Thurmond switch parties in 1964?  So he could oppose civil rights and keep getting elected.

So, yes, democrats of 175 years ago were on the wrong side of history.  The southern democrats of the 50's and 60's were on the wrong side of history.  Quite the winning argument you make.

[tower912]

Turn off msnbc and hit the putting green.

You spent more time on this post than I have on cable news since the start of 21.  Except for January 6 and the Nashville school shooting.  (Relatives attend that school)   I read lots of different sources.  I don't do cable news.

And I said what I said.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

You spent more time on this post than I have on cable news since the start of 21.  Except for January 6 and the Nashville school shooting.  (Relatives attend that school)   I read lots of different sources.  I don't do cable news.

And I said what I said.

You have moved further to the looney left than just about anyone on here since '21.   Might want to put down the Nation, comrade.

[Dickthedribbler]

Your ilk will age out of existence soon enough and your backwards thought will go along with.

Good riddance to most of you.

I have extremely broad shoulders and am more than capable of taking care of myself in these matters.

But don't go dissing my ilk.

[Skatastrophy]

I have extremely broad shoulders and am more than capable of taking care of myself in these matters.

But don't go dissing my ilk.

Hahaha, internet tough guy!

[tower912]

You have moved further to the looney left than just about anyone on here since '21.   Might want to put down the Nation, comrade.

My political viewpoints are pretty much where they have been since college.  Pragmatic liberal.   I appreciate anyone from any political bent who makes a practical policy proposal to make the world a better place.   I bust on anybody trying to take America back to the 50's.  1950's, 1850's or 1750's.   What can be be done to take us forward?   Because we need all of us.  White, black, brown, yellow, male, female, straight, gay, somewhere in between.   And even worse, this is where my faith has led me.

Do you, Ziggy.   Oink.

[lawdog77]

Your ilk will age out of existence soon enough and your backwards thought will go along with.

Good riddance to most of you.

Hoping a bunch of people die. How very un-Marquette like.Think you might want to step away from the keyboard for a few

[ZiggysFryBoy]

My political viewpoints are pretty much where they have been since college.  Pragmatic liberal.   I appreciate anyone from any political bent who makes a practical policy proposal to make the world a better place.   I bust on anybody trying to take America back to the 50's.  1950's, 1850's or 1750's.   What can be be done to take us forward?   Because we need all of us.  White, black, brown, yellow, male, female, straight, gay, somewhere in between.   And even worse, this is where my faith has led me.

Do you, Ziggy.   Oink.

Name 1 legitimate R that is advocating for the return of slavery in this country.  Not some Twitter fringe nutcase.

Frankly, the insinuation that half of the country wants to bring back slavery is offensive and un- Christian.   Might be time to reevaluate your views.

And TSmith is the only double swine around here.

[tower912]

It was a direct riposte to white trash.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

It was a direct riposte to white trash.

Nope.   I miss the days when R's weren't  fighting to bring it back.

So are you saying that Rs want to bring back slavery or that you think Rs are fighting to bring it back?

[The Sultan]

So are you saying that Rs want to bring back slavery or that you think Rs are fighting to bring it back?

Try to be intellectually consistent for once...

Do you miss the good old days when D's fought and died to keep slavery?

[Hards Alumni]

I have extremely broad shoulders and am more than capable of taking care of myself in these matters.

But don't go dissing my ilk.

Time comes for all.

[Hards Alumni]

Hoping a bunch of people die. How very un-Marquette like.Think you might want to step away from the keyboard for a few

Everyone dies, my friend.  Everyone.  I am not wishing a violent end for anyone.

[Pakuni]

Name 1 legitimate R that is advocating for the return of slavery in this country.  Not some Twitter fringe nutcase.

How do you tell them apart?
I mean, there are definitely some sane Republicans out there, but by and large they've been shunned and marginalized by the wingnuts (see: Cheney, Kinzinger, Hogan, Sununu, Romney, Ryan, etc.).

[tower912]

I like that Wisconsite who runs the Bulwark.  He seems to still have a lingering common sense cell somewhere sometimes.

[Pakuni]

I like that Wisconsite who runs the Bulwark.  He seems to still have a lingering common sense cell somewhere sometimes.

Yep. The Bulwark and The Dispatch are where the sane GOP has gone.
The National Review, despite a couple of solid writers, is mostly a lost cause. The three of them combined probably don't receive as much traffic as the Daily Wire or The Blaze.

[Uncle Rico]

I like that Wisconsite who runs the Bulwark.  He seems to still have a lingering common sense cell somewhere sometimes.

That's Charlie Sykes and his opinions shift as the wind blows.  He saw an opportunity to monetize an Anti-Trump wing of the Republican Party.

In fairness, when he was still on the air, he was anti-Trump from the get go and pushed Ted Cruz.  His backing of Cruz probably helped him win Wisconsin during the 2016 primaries. 

I'm agnostic on Sykes.  I listened to his show and actually called in a few times when he got into discussions of things not necessarily political.  His years on the air definitely opened a door to Trumpism, however.

Saying all that, I think people on both sides see a lot of grifter in him

[WhiteTrash]

This argument is about as stupid as any argument out there.  This is the kind of brainless argument a simpleton makes, ignoring history completely.

Southern democrats of the civil war era and Dixiecrat era post WWII don't exist anymore because they were replaced by republicans after the passage of the Civil Rights bill in 1964.

True story: Southern Democrats filibustered and fought against this bill happening.  Didn't matter because the Republican Party saw an opportunity to win the south by siding against such things moving forward.  JFK and LBJ both knew the risk they'd lose the south and pushed for it anyway.  And they did lose the south. 

Can you imagine any Republican representing a southern state having the huevos to do something like this today?  The answer is no.  Why did Strom Thurmond switch parties in 1964?  So he could oppose civil rights and keep getting elected.

So, yes, democrats of 175 years ago were on the wrong side of history.  The southern democrats of the 50's and 60's were on the wrong side of history.  Quite the winning argument you make.

There is literally nothing is your post that discredits or refutes the statement/question in my post. You only gave more details of the facts.

In a different discussion of the history of Democrats, yes the party came to its senses and recognized people of color are humans and deserving to be treated like any other human beings. There are great Democrats who did great things for this country. I am glad we have the Democratic Party. I also appreciate the valuable contributions of the Republicans. 

   

[WellsstreetWanderer]

I very much doubt people who suffered under Mao, Stalin and the Dear Leaders of North Korea have said anything of the sort, and if they are, they're morons ... as is anyone who would take such a remark seriously.
Nobody is being sent to the Gulag. Nobody is being murdered on the quad for their opinions. Nobody is being sent to forced labor camps.
Any such suggestion is pure idiocy.
Incorrect , former inhabitants of the above come out regularly and warn about the suppression of free speech
and wokeness. As for no Gulag look no further than Americans being held for 3 years in solitary without a trial for Jan6. These are facts ,Bruh
But keep playing the victim.

[The Sultan]

"Wokeness" 😂😂😂

[TSmith34, Inc.]

"Wokeness" 😂😂😂

Shush now. Huge numbers of people that suffered under repressive autocratic regimes have come to the U.S. and complained about our wokeness. As everyone knows. It's just a proven, indisputable fact. They'd almost rather go back to their oppressors than suffer our wokeness, in fact.

[Pakuni]

Shush now. Huge numbers of people that suffered under repressive autocratic regimes have come to the U.S. and complained about our wokeness. As everyone knows. It's just a proven, undisputable fact. They'd almost rather go back to their oppressors than suffer our wokeness, in fact.

Wokeness is the exact same thing as Stalin's purge. Nobody disputes this.