Bass Pro Shops   Daveys Locker Sportfishing  Newport Landing Sportfishing   The Fishing Syndicate  Carver Covers  Tight Lines Guide Service  Bob Sands Fishing Tackle 
Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 181

Thread: The Confederate Flag

  1. #161
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Murrieta
    Posts
    3,789

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Quagga View Post
    And I see you dodged my post responding to you, so here it is again. Perhaps you'd like to respond.



    Did you just make a blanket statement about one race of people?



    And once again, since it seems to be falling on a lot of willfully deaf ears - the Confederate flag owes it's resurgence to racially bigoted and pro-segregation groups of the 1950's. That resurgence had been twisted into the guise of "southern pride", in a pathetic attempt to maintain some semblance of legitimacy.



    Brent actually did acknowledge the possibility that Hawggy isn't racist, but is either unable or unwilling to acknowledge that the Confederate flag embodies some of the most despicable and hateful thoughts in this country's history. If it's the latter, then it is in fact willful ignorance.
    but is either unable or unwilling to acknowledge that the Confederate flag embodies some of the most despicable and hateful thoughts in this country's history. If it's the latter, then it is in fact willful ignorance.
    Indeed I did acknowledge it. As I said previously, some democrat/nationalistic socialist created hate groups hijacked that flag for a period in the mid 20th century. They were the few and the minority. The vast majority of southerners did not support those groups and thus cannot be blamed for the actions of the few. If you want to ban flags then you must ban all of them, including the Stars and Stripes because slavery existed much longer under that flag. With that being said it's ridiculous because slavery was a worldwide phenomenon that has touched nearly every race since humanity existed and was ended 160 years ago in America. No one in modern times has endured slavery in the USA and it is now being used as a political weapon to silence those who oppose the demorat agenda, indeed of all political parties, the democrats themselves are the ones who perpetuated the hate. It was the republicans who ended slavery AND overwhelmingly voted to pass the civil rights act in the 60's which the majority of democrats at that time vehemently opposed . Today they are despicably using it for political gain AND hiding their own involvement in the perpetuation of hate. They are using race division tactics to divide this nation in their twisted thought that they can further the advancement of centralized federal government power over the people. Far too many due to apathy, ignorance, or just flat out hate cannot recognize that fact and in fact will give up all their INDIVIDUAL rights for the sake of political correctness. The Confederate battleflag today, as it was in the 19th century, is a symbol of rebellion against the federal government's overreaching, overbearing power and that is why the socialist democrats and the establishment now want it's elimination and they are USING certain folks to achieve that goal...

    Now I'm done with this thread because I'm quite bored with the redundancy...

  2. #162
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Indeed I did acknowledge it.
    I wasn't addressing you, you nincompoop.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    As I said previously, some democrat/nationalistic socialist created hate groups hijacked that flag for a period in the mid 20th century. They were the few and the minority. The vast majority of southerners did not support those groups and thus cannot be blamed for the actions of the few.
    That is patently false. The Dixiecrats in fact took the popular vote and their respective electoral votes in 4 southern states, and there is strong electoral evidence to support that they would have taken as many as 5 additional southern states had they not had to run as a third party ticket. So no, they were not in the minority.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    If you want to ban flags then you must ban all of them, including the Stars and Stripes because slavery existed much longer under that flag. With that being said it's ridiculous because slavery was a worldwide phenomenon that has touched nearly every race since humanity existed and was ended 160 years ago in America. No one in modern times has endured slavery in the USA and it is now being used as a political weapon to silence those who oppose the demorat agenda, indeed of all political parties, the democrats themselves are the ones who perpetuated the hate.
    You gotta love it when Hawggy starts coming up with desperate rationalizations about OTHER flags to back his pathetic support the confederate flag.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    It was the republicans who ended slavery AND overwhelmingly voted to pass the civil rights act in the 60's which the majority of democrats at that time vehemently opposed .
    Your parents have any children that lived? Your claim that the majority of democrats opposed the civil rights act is a blatant lie:

    By party[edit]

    The original House version:[20]
    Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
    Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)

    Cloture in the Senate:[21]
    Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
    Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

    The Senate version:[20]
    Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
    Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

    The Senate version, voted on by the House:[20]
    Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
    Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Today they are despicably using it for political gain AND hiding their own involvement in the perpetuation of hate. They are using race division tactics to divide this nation in their twisted thought that they can further the advancement of centralized federal government power over the people. Far too many due to apathy, ignorance, or just flat out hate cannot recognize that fact and in fact will give up all their INDIVIDUAL rights for the sake of political correctness. The Confederate battleflag today, as it was in the 19th century, is a symbol of rebellion against the federal government's overreaching, overbearing power and that is why the socialist democrats and the establishment now want it's elimination and they are USING certain folks to achieve that goal...
    Once again, the flag owes its prominence today due to its resurgence in the 1950s by racist, pro-segregation south. It is that FACT which makes its use today so divisive. Trying to mask that underlying motivation by claiming "southern pride" or "individual/states rights" is disingenuous and despicable. Purporting that its use is nothing more than some sort of anti-establishment stand is no less than willful ignorance, and absolutely shameful.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Now I'm done with this thread because I'm quite bored with the redundancy...
    That's right, quit while you're behind....

  3. #163
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Murrieta
    Posts
    3,789

    Default

    Of course you are playing on my mistake of including the word "of" in my sentence "majority of democrats". Democrats held the congressional majority and could have easily passed this legislation had they truly supported it.

    The Republican passed '64 civil rights act

    During the Kennedy administration, the Republican minority in Congress introduced many bills to protect the constitutional rights of blacks, including a comprehensive new civil rights bill.
    In February 1963, to head off a return by most blacks to the party of Lincoln, Kennedy abruptly decided to submit to Congress a new civil rights bill. Hastily drafted in a single all-nighter, the Kennedy bill fell well short of what the republican party had introduced into Congress the month before. Over the next several months, Democrat racists in Congress geared up for a protracted filibuster against the civil rights bill.The bill was before a committee in the House of Representatives when John Kennedy was murdered in November 1963.
    Invoking his slain predecessor, Lyndon Johnson made passage of the bill his top priority, and in his first speech to Congress he urged Representatives and Senators to do "more for civil rights than the last hundred sessions combined". Though he shared Johnson ́s convictions on safeguarding the constitutional rights of blacks, if Nixon had been in the White House then instead, Democrats in favor of segregation and those unwilling to see a Republican achieve the victory would have blocked his legislative initiative in Congress. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was an update of Republican Senator Charles Sumner ́s 1875 Civil Rights Act. In striking down that law in 1883, the Supreme Court had ruled that the 14th amendment was not sufficient constitutional authorization, so the 1964 version had to be written in such a way as to rely instead on the interstate commerce clause for its constitutional underpinning. Mindful of how Democrat opposition had forced the Republicans to weaken their 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts, President Johnson warned Democrats in Congress that this time it was all or nothing. To ensure support from Republicans, he had to promise them that he would not accept any weakening of the bill and also that he would publicly credit the republican party for its role in securing congressional approval. Johnson played no direct role in the legislative fight, so that it would not be perceived as a partisan struggle. There was no doubt that the House of Representatives would pass the bill. In the Senate, Minority Leader Everett Dirksen had little trouble rounding up the votes of most Republicans, and former presidential candidate Richard Nixon also lobbied hard for the bill. Senate Majority Leader Michael Mansfield and Senator Hubert Humphrey led the Democrat drive for passage, while the chief opponents were Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, of later Watergate fame, Albert Gore Sr., and Robert Byrd. Senator Byrd, a former Klansman whom Democrats still call "the conscience of the Senate", filibustered against the civil rights bill for fourteen straight hours before the final vote. The House of Representatives passed the bill by 289 to 124, a vote in which 80% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats voted “yes”. The Senate vote was 73 to 27, with 21 Democrats and only 6 Republicans voting “no”. President Johnson signed the new Civil Rights Act into law on July 2, 1964. Overall, there was little overt resistance to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The struggle was not yet over, however, as most southern state governments remained under the control of segregationist Democrats. And now, most of those Southern states are under the control of the republican party.

    Why do you hate so much...

  4. #164

    Default

    lad quagga...wasnt dodging.didnt find it an issue to respond to what you said since i understand the blacks perpective of that flag. if you read some parts of my post...i also stated i have an issue with this flag when used by kkk or similar groups. i just find it humorous to have blacks catagorize all whites as racist simply on what we beleive. didnt respond to you cause i agreed with parts of your post.

  5. #165
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Of course you are playing on my mistake of including the word "of" in my sentence "majority of democrats". Democrats held the congressional majority and could have easily passed this legislation had they truly supported it.
    Let's entertain your pathic grammatical excuse for a moment. Whether you meant to say "majority of democrats" or "majority democrats", your statement is still false, and I presented the voting stats to prove it.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    The Republican passed '64 civil rights act
    I am sure there is a point to your plagiarism of Michael Zak's essay. Perhaps it was to validate your false claim of opposition of the Civil Rights Act by the "majority of democrats"/"majority democrats".

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    And now, most of those Southern states are under the control of the republican party.
    Which only goes to show that racist/bigot views transcend party politics, and has since the creation of this country.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Why do you hate so much...
    Quit crying, Hawggy. Oh wait, you can't help it - as your history of going back on your own word points out yet again:

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Now I'm done with this thread because I'm quite bored with the redundancy...

  6. #166
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Murrieta
    Posts
    3,789

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Quagga View Post
    Let's entertain your pathic grammatical excuse for a moment. Whether you meant to say "majority of democrats" or "majority democrats", your statement is still false, and I presented the voting stats to prove it.



    I am sure there is a point to your plagiarism of Michael Zak's essay. Perhaps it was to validate your false claim of opposition of the Civil Rights Act by the "majority of democrats"/"majority democrats".



    Which only goes to show that racist/bigot views transcend party politics, and has since the creation of this country.



    Quit crying, Hawggy. Oh wait, you can't help it - as your history of going back on your own word points out yet again:

    No plagiarizing, I didn't claim it as my own nor am I profiting on it. Nice try. I ask you again, why do you hate so much? And again, I'll come and go as I please. If I want to address your nonsensical hate towards me I will, if I don't I won't. But go ahead Caitlyn, you have to have the last word as most psychopaths do...

  7. #167
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    No plagiarizing, I didn't claim it as my own nor am I profiting on it. Nice try.
    Yes, you did plagiarize it. Deal with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    I ask you again, why do you hate so much?
    And I say again: quit crying. Or would you prefer I tell you that the only thing I hate is wanton stupidity and ignorance, which you epitomize? Either works.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    And again, I'll come and go as I please. If I want to address your nonsensical hate towards me I will, if I don't I won't.
    Sure, you can contradict yourself as much as you want to placate your pathetic ego by responding to me.

  8. #168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dpaulus9 View Post
    brent....thats ok.. you can keep on spewing your hate. thats all you done on your post to others who dont agree with you. unlike you, i can understand both sides of these issues. i guess you cant educate ignorant people like you. lol
    I'm not spewing hate other than refuting ignorant remarks. I don't hate anyone or anything. I've never threatened violence or anything like that as some on here have towards me. So your comments really make no sense. You're calling me ignorant for not agreeing with you. A little hypocritical there you think?

  9. #169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Oh, did you hear Donald Trump's upcoming speech in Arizona had to be relocated to a much larger venue due to a huge demand for attendance? Imagine that, the demorats are giving away tickets to their leading lady(?) Her Hilariousnesse's speeches and still can't even come close to filling up the venues...
    I just had to quote this for posterity's sake.

    The passive aggressive support for Trump in posts like this is fantastic, and I hope he does gets the nomination. And if not, I hope he runs as an Independent and gets the loony vote.

    Hawgz, you a Trump supporter, or was this parenthetical just coincidence?

  10. #170
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkShadow View Post
    I just had to quote this for posterity's sake.

    The passive aggressive support for Trump in posts like this is fantastic, and I hope he does gets the nomination. And if not, I hope he runs as an Independent and gets the loony vote.

    Hawgz, you a Trump supporter, or was this parenthetical just coincidence?
    DS, you'll have to forgive Hawggy for not responding to you right away. Word has it he got delayed in Columbia, S.C. - something about a rally he was in last Saturday or something....

Page 17 of 19 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •