Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / August 2008
{OT:} Focus your energy on Obama-Biden
|
|
Thread rating:  |
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 24 Aug 2008 21:39 GMT Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket needs done. Contact your local representatives for phone banking, going door to door, etc. If you can sign up to work at your local voting station/location on election day, do so. Call now to get any necessary training.
Put alt.autos.toyota near the bottom of your list of things to do.
Ed S.
dbu - 24 Aug 2008 21:50 GMT In article <9c4295fc-f172-4337-99b3-ef574ece725e@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ed S. LOL, what's the difference between a progressive and a democrat? --
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 03:53 GMT > LOL, what's the difference between a progressive and a democrat? A Progressive is an radical Democrat.
larry moe 'n curly - 25 Aug 2008 05:39 GMT > > LOL, what's the difference between a progressive and a democrat? > > A Progressive is an radical Democrat. Theodore Roosevelt was a progressive but was never a Democrat.
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 13:08 GMT >> > LOL, what's the difference between a progressive and a democrat? >> >> A Progressive is an radical Democrat. > >Theodore Roosevelt was a progressive but was never a Democrat. The meaning has changed over time, just as the meaning of "conservative" has. Does anyone truly think GWB or McCain are conservative?
 Signature "Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the liberal, who wishes to replace them with others." ~ Ambrose Bierce, The Devils Dictionary
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 14:48 GMT On Aug 25, 8:08 am, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > LOL, what's the difference between a progressive and a democrat? > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > distinguished from the liberal, who wishes to replace them with > others." ~ Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary They are neoCons who never read the neocon manuals.
Jeff Strickland - 24 Aug 2008 23:03 GMT > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Put alt.autos.toyota near the bottom of your list of things to do. Alternatively, the sinking ship needs everybody to pick up a teaspoon and start bailing.
Hachiroku ハチロク - 25 Aug 2008 05:44 GMT > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ed S. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Talk about hook, line and sinker!!!!
Vash the Stampede - 25 Aug 2008 16:53 GMT > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ed S. Hey, Ed, explain something to me:
In the past few months, you and the other Liberal Democrats have been professing that Obama was the one to beat, and that nothing the Republicans could do could take him from being crowned.
Then, Saturday, the news comes out that Obama has selected (er, that is, was *told* to select) Biden as his running mate. You and yours said Biden was the best choice for the job.
Then, last night, I find this post, a "Call to Arms" for the Democrats to band together and put all efforts into making sure JoeBama gets all the backing, and get "any necessary training".
The only thing I can read from this is that you now think that Biden is more of a liability than an asset, and realized that now the election isn't so much in the bag, and that perhaps you might have lost more moderates and independents than anticipated...
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 17:06 GMT > > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra > > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > isn't so much in the bag, and that perhaps you might have lost more > moderates and independents than anticipated... It's going to take a huge effort for overcome the fact that Barack is half African-American and that a lot of people will go into the voting booth and vote for McCain because he is not black. It is a waste of energy to argue the issues here with insane rightwingnuts.
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 17:09 GMT >It's going to take a huge effort for overcome the fact that Barack is >half African-American and that a lot of people will go into the voting >booth and vote for McCain because he is not black. It is a waste of >energy to argue the issues here with insane rightwingnuts. Tell me, Ed. Why is Obama "African-American" and McCain "not black" as you state? I think you are being racist towards McCain.
 Signature "My vision is to make the most diverse state on earth, and we have people from every planet...On the earth in this state." ~ Gray Davis, former governor of California
Gary L. Burnore - 25 Aug 2008 17:16 GMT >>It's going to take a huge effort for overcome the fact that Barack is >>half African-American and that a lot of people will go into the voting [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Tell me, Ed. Why is Obama "African-American" and McCain "not black" as >you state? I think you are being racist towards McCain. You're a liar for claiming you think.
 Signature gburnore at DataBasix dot Com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- How you look depends on where you go. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³ Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase ===========================================================================
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 17:39 GMT On Aug 25, 12:09 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > >It's going to take a huge effort for overcome the fact that Barack is [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > people from every planet...On the earth in this state." ~ Gray Davis, > former governor of California Huh? Is McCain black? Damn, I missed that.
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 17:44 GMT On Aug 25, 12:39 pm, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 25, 12:09 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Huh? Is McCain black? Damn, I missed that. Listen, you need to take some remedial reading comprehension classes. Maybe one of those Dubya unfunded No Child LEft Behind classes. ;-)
I'm saying voters will not vote for Barack because he is black; they will vote for McCain because he isn't black. The rationale seems to be vote for the guy who is not black.
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 17:58 GMT >On Aug 25, 12:39 pm, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >will vote for McCain because he isn't black. The rationale seems to >be vote for the guy who is not black. You refer to Obama as African-American, not as black. But when comparing McCain you refer to him as not black instead of not African-American. Why the disparity?
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 18:10 GMT On Aug 25, 12:58 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > >On Aug 25, 12:39 pm, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Both have the same meaning for me. I can't write my opinions using your language meanings.
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 18:02 GMT >I'm saying voters will not vote for Barack because he is black; they >will vote for McCain because he isn't black. The rationale seems to >be vote for the guy who is not black. On the contrary, many people WILL vote for Obama precisely because he is black. Among those will be 90+% black people, many white people who feel guilty because of their forefathers, and the majority of non-white citizens. The sad thing is these people aren't even considering the issues or his stance on them, just his race.
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 18:09 GMT On Aug 25, 1:02 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > citizens. The sad thing is these people aren't even considering the > issues or his stance on them, just his race. And 99.9% of white people vote for the white candidate. The white populations is larger that the black population.
Even if you sneak race discussions through clever language, you still are thinking of race first instead of last.
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 18:13 GMT >> On the contrary, many people WILL vote for Obama precisely because >>he is black. Among those will be 90+% black people, many white [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >And 99.9% of white people vote for the white candidate. The white >populations is larger that the black population. If 99.9% of white people will vote for the white candidate then this election is over before it starts. You know this is not true.
Seth Hammond - 25 Aug 2008 19:06 GMT On Aug 25, 1:02 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > citizens. The sad thing is these people aren't even considering the > issues or his stance on them, just his race. And 99.9% of white people vote for the white candidate. ----------------------------
Not only is that a stupid statement, it's also clearly racist. It belittles you.
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 20:16 GMT On Aug 25, 2:06 pm, "Seth Hammond" <lesliesethhamm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Not only is that a stupid statement, it's also clearly racist. It belittles > you. Does not!
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 20:24 GMT >> And 99.9% of white people vote for the white candidate. >> ---------------------------- [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Does not! Does too!
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 25 Aug 2008 20:27 GMT On Aug 25, 3:24 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > >> And 99.9% of white people vote for the white candidate. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Does too! Nuh uh!
badgolferman - 25 Aug 2008 20:36 GMT >On Aug 25, 3:24 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Nuh uh! Yeah huh!
Hachiroku ハチロク - 25 Aug 2008 21:59 GMT > On Aug 25, 1:02 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Not only is that a stupid statement, it's also clearly racist. It belittles > you. He's used to it. Making stupid statements, and belittling himself...
Hachiroku ハチロク - 25 Aug 2008 21:59 GMT >> On the contrary, many people WILL vote for Obama precisely because he >> is black. Among those will be 90+% black people, many white people who [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > And 99.9% of white people vote for the white candidate. The white > populations is larger that the black population. Wow, Ed, you changed my mind. I think I'll go out and vote for Barack *JUST* because he's black! After all, he deserves it! Look at hw much his people suffered...
What? He's not descended from slaves...at all? Oh, that's OK. We still owe it to him because his people were oppressed.
What a way to pick a candidate...
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 26 Aug 2008 00:37 GMT > >> On the contrary, many people WILL vote for Obama precisely because he > >> is black. Among those will be 90+% black people, many white people who [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > What a way to pick a candidate... You keep bending words to match your canned reply. I won't even attempt to explain where and how you strayed way off.
Hachiroku ハチロク - 26 Aug 2008 04:34 GMT >> >> On the contrary, many people WILL vote for Obama precisely because he >> >> is black. Among those will be 90+% black people, many white people who [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > You keep bending words to match your canned reply. I won't even > attempt to explain where and how you strayed way off. I'm not the one who said:
>> >> On the contrary, many people WILL vote for Obama precisely because he >> >> is black. Among those will be 90+% black people, many white people who [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> > And 99.9% of white people vote for the white candidate. The white >> > populations is larger that the black population. Scott in Florida - 28 Aug 2008 02:25 GMT >>I'm saying voters will not vote for Barack because he is black; they >>will vote for McCain because he isn't black. The rationale seems to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >citizens. The sad thing is these people aren't even considering the >issues or his stance on them, just his race. ,,,,or the fact that Barry has NO qualifications to be CIC.
NONE.....
He can't think.
He is stupid.
 Signature Scott in Florida
Scott in Florida - 28 Aug 2008 02:23 GMT >On Aug 25, 12:09 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Huh? Is McCain black? Damn, I missed that. We all are......
 Signature Scott in Florida
Hachiroku ハチロク - 25 Aug 2008 21:56 GMT >>It's going to take a huge effort for overcome the fact that Barack is >>half African-American and that a lot of people will go into the voting [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Tell me, Ed. Why is Obama "African-American" and McCain "not black" as > you state? I think you are being racist towards McCain. Liberals have a tendancy to be the most prejudiced people on the planet. Not always aimed at blacks, though.
Herman Cardon - 25 Aug 2008 23:52 GMT >>> It's going to take a huge effort for overcome the fact that Barack is >>> half African-American and that a lot of people will go into the voting [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Liberals have a tendancy to be the most prejudiced people on the planet. > Not always aimed at blacks, though. Well...consider:
http://www.wayneperryman.com/wp/?p=22
Rev. Wayne Perryman, associate pastor of Mt. Calvary Christian COGIC in Seattle, Washington, first filed a significant reparations lawsuit against the Democratic Party in 2004. The suit was dismissed two times before Perryman refiled in 2005 and now the case is pending further action in the U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, Docket #0535890.
Perryman’s lawsuit does not seek millions of dollars. It asks that the Democratic Party issue a national apology for what he termed its past racist policies and practices toward blacks-and that they fund production of a series of documentaries which would record and preserve the tainted legacy of the party with free distribution to all public and private schools in the country.
These reported Democratic transgressions, Perryman outlined in his book, “Unfounded Loyalty: An In-depth Look Into the Love Affair Between Blacks and the Democrats.” In it, and in his lawsuit, the Seattle minister details events which occurred from 1792 through 2002 which he claims show the pattern of bias and racism from that political party.
Perryman explained his motivation in an open letter given to The Louisiana Weekly, “I am a community activist and an inner-city minister located in the Seattle Washington. In addition to working with gang members and professional athletes, I spend my leisure time doing research. In 1993, based on personal research, I challenged major Christian Publishers and scholars that continued to produce publications promoting the Curse of Ham theory (a theory that justified slavery from a Christian perspective). My efforts resulted in a public apology and the removal of the 400 year old curse theory from all of their publications including removing it from the Encyclopedia Britannica. My book: The 1993 Trial on the Curse of Ham was based on that research.”
“Most of my adult life I have voted for, and worked with a number of Democratic candidates at the local level. In 1996, I served as a member of the Washington State Black Clergy to Re-elect President Bill Clinton and worked closely with the co-chair. After President Clinton was re-elected, I was challenged by a group of young people from our church regarding the history of the Democratic Party and their relationship with blacks. Their challenge prompted me to devote a considerable amount of time researching the subject.”
“My research included reviewing Congressional Records from 1860 to present, reading the works of several renowned history professors (both black and white) and looking at the Democratic Platform from the early 1800’s to 1954. In addition to these documents I reviewed the research of those who produced the books: Without Sanctuary, 100 Years of Lynchings and added to my library the History Channel’s series on The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow and Reconstruction: The Second Civil War. Excerpts from those books and film documentaries were included as exhibits in my Reparations lawsuit against the Democratic Party.”
“The graphic depictions of whites fighting over the private parts of black men (penises, fingers, ears) after hanging them and igniting them with kerosene, is forever embedded in my mind. I can still hear the cries of the victims’ wives and children pleading and begging for the lives of their loved ones while Democratic national and local elected officials joined the crowd and cheered. The lynching of Mary Turner, the nine-month pregnant mother was even more horrific and graphic. All of these events took place under the banner of “States Rights” in regions controlled by Democratic governors, mayors, judges, sheriffs, Congressmen and U.S. Senators. Like Dr King, my parents lived through those times in Atlanta and I never fully appreciated what they and other blacks went through until I had completed my research.”
“In addition to lynchings and terrorist attacks by the Democrat’s terrorist organizations (as revealed in the 1871 Senate hearings), Democrats legislated Black Codes, Jim Crow laws and a multitude of other repressive legislation at the federal and state levels (and repealed other key pieces of Civil Rights legislation) all in an effort to deny blacks their rights as citizens. The entire system of racism in America was meticulously thought-out and carried-out by a powerful political machine. And that political machine according to Historians, was the Democratic Party - the party of “White Supremacy.”
“Based on these findings, I sent the April 5, 2004 letter to the D[emocratic] N[ational] C[ommittee] requesting that they issue an apology to African Americans. In 2005, I sent a second letter to the DNC, again requesting an apology. When the DNC ignored these requests, I filed my first lawsuit on December 10, 2005.”
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 26 Aug 2008 00:37 GMT > > edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Liberals have a tendancy to be the most prejudiced people on the planet. > Not always aimed at blacks, though. We are back in conservative world where saying makes it so.
Hachiroku ハチロク - 26 Aug 2008 04:32 GMT >> > edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > We are back in conservative world where saying makes it so. Too bad you're a Liberal. It's fun getting into a discussion with a Liberal. In a matter of mere minutes they're reduced to screaming meemees frothing at the mouth.
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 26 Aug 2008 05:01 GMT > >> > edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Wrongo, sparky. Fiscally I'm right of center. Environmentally I'm left of center. I believe in balanced budgets, no wars of adventure, progressive taxes, term limits for both Senators and Congressman, universal healthcare (just give me John McCain's healthcare options). Regulated Corporations, something like the European Union rules. (Look them up yourself.)
I don't believe in corporate welfare, I despise it. I think spending more than the rest of the world combined on our military is unconscionable. I subscribed to The National Review and The American Spectator while also subscribing to Rolling Stone and The Washington Times. I tried my best to accept the tenets of Neo-Conservatism but it was impossible. They borrow money our grandchildren will have to pay off, they start wars that somebody else will fight and die. (Guess why Jerome Corsi got out of military duty - Eczema. I kid you not.)
Anyway who gives a flying intercourse. It's too late.
Hachiroku ハチロク - 26 Aug 2008 05:25 GMT >> >> > edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Anyway who gives a flying intercourse. It's too late. And yet you decide to vote for a man who will (according to his statements) spend more on social programs than any other President since FDR?
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 26 Aug 2008 14:58 GMT > >> >> > edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Make no mistake, Barack is a realist and a capitalist. There IS a difference between being a capitalist and a fascist. And you must also realize that America cannot survive without basic healthcare provided by someone other than businesses. Our businesses cannot compete while paying out these benefits. But you must also realize that the wetdream of conservatives where "only those who work hard get stuff" can't work if we continue to outsource jobs and entire business sectors to other countries. We can't show up those lazy people if we don't have jobs.
Look up Barack's and Michele's education. The Ivy League turns out corporatists, pragmatists (except for Dubya). The rich don't need us peons defending their tax breaks. They will survive paying a few thousand extra a year.
I can't change your mind and won't even attempt to. I'm trying only to motivate other Dems to do just a little bit extra for their local and national candidates. I already signed up to work at the polls for my county and I called to volunteer for my Congressman to work for his re-election.
Hachiroku ハチロク - 26 Aug 2008 15:55 GMT >> >> >> > edspyhil...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > sectors to other countries. We can't show up those lazy people if we > don't have jobs. But it was under Bill Clinton's watch that more and more decent American jobs were outsourced, esp tech support jobs to India. I posted a link here about a year ago that showed Bill and Hillary were the biggest driving force in outsourcing good American jobs to India.
> Look up Barack's and Michele's education. The Ivy League turns out > corporatists, pragmatists (except for Dubya). The rich don't need us > peons defending their tax breaks. They will survive paying a few > thousand extra a year. Bill and Hillary's credentials are also excellent, and they're two of the biggest dummies ever to occupy the White House.
> I can't change your mind and won't even attempt to. I'm trying only > to motivate other Dems to do just a little bit extra for their local > and national candidates. I already signed up to work at the polls for > my county and I called to volunteer for my Congressman to work for his > re-election. And it's this call to arms I can't understand. You and others were SURE Obama could beat McCain, until Sunday. Tell me, what changed? ;)
Jeff - 26 Aug 2008 17:04 GMT <...>
> > Make no mistake, Barack is a realist and a capitalist. There IS a > > difference between being a capitalist and a fascist. And you must [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > about a year ago that showed Bill and Hillary were the biggest driving > force in outsourcing good American jobs to India. And what did President Bush due to reverse this flow?
> > Look up Barack's and Michele's education. The Ivy League turns out > > corporatists, pragmatists (except for Dubya). The rich don't need us [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Bill and Hillary's credentials are also excellent, and they're two of the > biggest dummies ever to occupy the White House. Let's not get into an argument about who is dumb.
> > I can't change your mind and won't even attempt to. I'm trying only > > to motivate other Dems to do just a little bit extra for their local [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > And it's this call to arms I can't understand. You and others were SURE > Obama could beat McCain, until Sunday. Tell me, what changed? ;) Did anything change? I mean, do you really think that Obama or McCain could beat the other without volunteers working to help him get elected?
Jeff
Hachiroku ハチロク - 26 Aug 2008 19:15 GMT > <...> > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > And what did President Bush due to reverse this flow? What should he have done? Closed the borders? If he did the Democrats would be screaming "Protectionism!"
>> > Look up Barack's and Michele's education. The Ivy League turns out >> > corporatists, pragmatists (except for Dubya). The rich don't need us [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Let's not get into an argument about who is dumb. Right. Good idea. Except for Bill Clinton.
>> > I can't change your mind and won't even attempt to. I'm trying only >> > to motivate other Dems to do just a little bit extra for their local [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Did anything change? I mean, do you really think that Obama or McCain > could beat the other without volunteers working to help him get elected? Gee, the way the banter was going in this newsgroup, there was not beating Obama. You guys all had him crowned already. Then Sunday Ed says we need all the help we can get.
Looks to me like Ed thinks Biden is more of a liability than an asset.
Probably true. I'm sure it drove Moderates away.
> Jeff Gary L. Burnore - 25 Aug 2008 17:15 GMT >> > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra >> > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >booth and vote for McCain because he is not black. It is a waste of >energy to argue the issues here with insane rightwingnuts. Yep. Racist f.cking necon dupes can't even admit they're racist, let alone necons or dupes.
 Signature gburnore at DataBasix dot Com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- How you look depends on where you go. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³ Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase ===========================================================================
Seth Hammond - 25 Aug 2008 17:32 GMT >>> > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra >>> > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Yep. Racist f.cking necon dupes can't even admit they're racist, let > alone necons or dupes. The Olympics are over. It's time to resume ugly racism.
(sigh)
Hachiroku ハチロク - 25 Aug 2008 21:55 GMT >>> The only thing I can read from this is that you now think that Biden is >>> more of a liability than an asset, and realized that now the election [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Yep. Racist f.cking necon dupes can't even admit they're racist, let > alone necons or dupes. Now that you guys have decided that my 'prejudice' is because of racism, bear in mind I have nothing against Barack Obama, except his liberal policies, his increased spending, his health care for illegals, and the very visible strings the Democrat party has dangling from him. The fact that he's half black doesn't even appear on the list of why I won't vote for him...
Wow. Are you guys wound up tight, or what?!
Hachiroku ハチロク - 25 Aug 2008 21:53 GMT >> > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra >> > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > booth and vote for McCain because he is not black. It is a waste of > energy to argue the issues here with insane rightwingnuts. Please explain what that response has to do with the original post, what I posted, or Gary's reply.
Wow...talk about a train of thought getting derailed...
Mark - 26 Aug 2008 12:50 GMT In other words, you are saying that a lot of Dims are racist... I can't say that I disagree with you, just that I am surprised to hear you admit it so openly.
On Aug 25, 12:06 pm, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra > > > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Herman Cardon - 26 Aug 2008 18:40 GMT > In other words, you are saying that a lot of Dims are racist... I > can't say that I disagree with you, just that I am surprised to hear > you admit it so openly. Let's examine their history:
http://osdir.com/ml/culture.hobbies.guns.concealed/2005-04/msg00102.html
· Democrats opposed the Abolitionist.
· Democrats supported slavery and fought and gave their lives to expand it.
· Democrats supported and passed the Fugitive Slave Laws of 1793 &1854.
· Democrats supported and passed the Missouri Compromise to protect slavery.
· Democrats supported and passed the Kansas Nebraska Act to expand slavery.
· Democrats supported and backed the Dred Scott Decision.
· Democrats supported and passed Jim Crow Laws.
· Democrats supported and passed Black Codes.
· Democrats opposed educating blacks and murdered our teachers.
· Democrats opposed the Reconstruction Act of 1867.
· Democrats opposed the Freedman’s Bureau as it pertained to blacks.
· Democrats opposed the Emancipation Proclamation.
· Democrats opposed the 13th , 14th, and 15th Amendments to end slavery, make black citizens and give blacks the right to vote.
· Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
· Democrats opposed the Civil Right Act of 1875 and had it overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.
· Various Democrats opposed the 1957 Civil Rights Acts.
· Various Democrats argued against the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Acts.
· Various Democrats argued against the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Acts.
· Various Democrats voted against the 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act.
· Democrats supported and backed Judge John Ferguson in the case of "Plessy v Ferguson."
· Democrats supported the School Board of Topeka Kansas in the case of "Brown v The Board of Education of Kansas."
· Southern Democrats opposed desegregation and integration.
· Democrats started and supported several terrorist organizations including the Ku Klux Klan, an organization dedicated to use any means possible to terrorize African Americans and those who supported African Americans.
Congressional records reveal that there wouldn’t be a question of Reparations today had Democratic President Andrew Johnson signed Senate Bill 60 (in 1866) which would have given each African American family 40 acres and a mule. Instead, Johnson vetoed the Bill and continued to block other key pieces of legislation that were designed to bring about "equality" for African Americans.
Perryman further argues that:
During the past 200 years, our government operated under a two party system which directed, developed and determined the policies of our country. Whatever the government did or did not accomplish (particularly as it pertained to African Americans), was directly related to which political party was in power at the time.
On April 29, 1861, Democratic President Jefferson Davis told his Democratic Confederate Congress that: "Under the supervision of the superior race, their [blacks’] labor had been so directed not only to allow a gradual and marked amelioration of their own condition, but to convert hundreds of thousands of square miles of wilderness into cultivated lands covered with a prosperous people; towns and cities had sprung into existence, and had rapidly increased in wealth and population under the social system of the South... [which made the South one of the 16th wealthiest places in the world]; and the productions in the South of cotton, rice, sugar, and tobacco, for the full development and continuance of which the labor of African slaves was and is indispensable, had swollen to an amount which formed nearly three-fourth of the exports of the whole United States and had become absolutely necessary to wants of civilized man…."
Seven years later during the 1868 Presidential campaign, the Democratic Party’s campaign poster read: "This is a White Man's Country - Let the White Men Rule."
At the turn of the century (1913), Democratic Senator Ben Tillman said, "We reorganized the Democratic Party with one plank, and the only plank, namely, that this is a white man's country, and white men must govern it." From 1792 to 2002 (a period of 210 years), the Democratic Party carried out their proud tradition of white man rule by never electing a black man to the United States Senate from their party.
>From 1792 to 1962, the Democratic Party was more commonly referred to as the Party of White Supremacy. This was the period when most of the damage was done to African Americans (economically, physically, socially and mentally). It was during this period that the Democrats exhausted every effort that promoted slavery, destroyed Reconstruction and introduced Black Codes, Jim Crow laws and the Ku Klux Klan.
The chronicles of history reveals that the Institution of Slavery and Jim Crow Laws weren’t promoted, protected and preserved by prominent individuals or by the federal government. They were preserved by one political party and that party was the Democratic Party. Without their powerful political support, segregation would have ended long before 1865 and 1965. Plessy would have never taken Judge Furgeson to court, and the "Brown v. Board of Education" case would have never materialized.
The big question they had during the era of slavery was, whether or not a law or a person's actions violated the Constitution. The goal of the Democrats was to never allow the Constitution to be amended to include blacks as citizens. They wanted the freedom to treat African Americans as property (not as humans), without federal interference (this was their primary reason for fighting for their so-called States Rights). This was also the reason why Democrats were opposed to adding the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution and why they praised and supported the Dred Scott Decision. Republicans rushed to have these Amendments added to the Constitution while the states that were under Democrat control were still separated from the Union. Republicans knew they would have a difficult time getting these Amendments passed if the Democrats from the Southern States came back and joined their congressional (Democrat) counterparts in the North.
During era of slavery and Reconstruction, the Democrats were primarily interested in what they could do to blacks, not what they could do for blacks. From 1792 to 1962, the Democrats' support did not support or pass one law that was designed to give African Americans equality (in 170 years). With the exception of Truman’s efforts to integrate the military, every law that was introduced and passed by Democrats during this period was designed to hurt blacks, none were passed to help blacks. Perryman said, "Had the Democrats attempted to pass these same types of laws in 1864 that they claim credit for in 1964, the laws in 1964 would not have been necessary. Instead, in 1866 they passed Black Codes, in 1875 they passed Jim Crow Laws and in 1894 they passed the Repeal Act to repeal various pieces of previously passed Civil Rights legislation that were designed to give African Americans equality.
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 26 Aug 2008 19:35 GMT > > In other words, you are saying that a lot of Dims are racist... I > > can't say that I disagree with you, just that I am surprised to hear [quoted text clipped - 153 lines] > pieces of previously passed Civil Rights legislation that were > designed to give African Americans equality. Republicans bought and sold slaves.
dbu - 26 Aug 2008 20:30 GMT In article <41501518-6ec6-4665-9f4c-965aa26a939c@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
> > > In other words, you are saying that a lot of Dims are racist... I > > > can't say that I disagree with you, just that I am surprised to hear [quoted text clipped - 155 lines] > > Republicans bought and sold slaves. so did democrats --
Lucius Accius - 26 Aug 2008 20:25 GMT > · Various Democrats opposed the 1957 Civil Rights Acts. True, and they were mostly southern Democrats like Strom Thurmond, who later left the Democratic Party and became Republicans when it became apparent that the Democrats were going to support civil rights and leave their shameful past behind.
> · Various Democrats argued against the passage of the 1964 Civil > Rights Acts. Once again, disproportionately southern Democrats, many of whom later became Republicans, where their racism was more welcome, given Nixon's "southern strategy" outlined by his adviser Kevin Phillips in a NYT interview in 1970:
From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.
Also, quite a few Republicans opposed the 1964 Civil Rights act as well, including that conservative hero, Barry Goldwater.
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 26 Aug 2008 20:34 GMT > Also, quite a few Republicans opposed the 1964 Civil Rights > act as well, including that conservative hero, Barry > Goldwater. And McCain refused to condemn apartheid in South Africa.
dbu - 26 Aug 2008 20:54 GMT In article <e7569165-1700-45b1-b3e9-0c96b86ab90a@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> > Also, quite a few Republicans opposed the 1964 Civil Rights > > act as well, including that conservative hero, Barry > > Goldwater. > > And McCain refused to condemn apartheid in South Africa. Yes, and he also failed to condemn the mistreatment of the spotted owl. --
edspyhill01@yahoo.com - 26 Aug 2008 21:10 GMT > In article > <e7569165-1700-45b1-b3e9-0c96b86ab...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Yes, and he also failed to condemn the mistreatment of the spotted owl. > -- Your puny brain sees those two things as connected!
dbu - 26 Aug 2008 21:24 GMT In article <5232a50c-8fe7-4c9d-99f4-48a236f25590@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> > In article > > <e7569165-1700-45b1-b3e9-0c96b86ab...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Your puny brain sees those two things as connected! Oh, and I forgot to mention the Martians, McCain failed to condemn their mistreatment while in captivity at area C. --
Scott in Florida - 28 Aug 2008 02:22 GMT >> > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra >> > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >booth and vote for McCain because he is not black. It is a waste of >energy to argue the issues here with insane rightwingnuts. Barry has NO experience and is NOT qualified to be CIC.
Neither his Black or White half is qualified.
His COLOR does not matter......
 Signature Scott in Florida
Hachiroku ハチロク - 28 Aug 2008 04:20 GMT On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:22:49 -0400, Scott in Florida wrote:
>>> > Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra >>> > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > His COLOR does not matter...... This post was absolutely hilarious. Calling All Democrats! Calling All Democrats!
Even in Denver, they couldn't get together. On the votes for acclimation, Pelosi had to speak up quickly to quell the NAYs!
Scott in Florida - 28 Aug 2008 14:37 GMT On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:20:32 -0400, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno@e86.GTS> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:22:49 -0400, Scott in Florida wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >Even in Denver, they couldn't get together. On the votes for acclimation, >Pelosi had to speak up quickly to quell the NAYs! Dims are amusing.....
 Signature Scott in Florida
Gary L. Burnore - 25 Aug 2008 17:15 GMT >> Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra >> this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >Then, Saturday, the news comes out that Obama has selected (er, that is, >was *told* to select) Biden as his running mate. PROVE he was told to select biden or you'll show you're just spouting typical neocon talking points. Oh wait, you ARE spouting typical neocon talking points.
 Signature gburnore at DataBasix dot Com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- How you look depends on where you go. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³ Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase ===========================================================================
Hachiroku ハチロク - 25 Aug 2008 21:52 GMT >>Then, Saturday, the news comes out that Obama has selected (er, that is, >>was *told* to select) Biden as his running mate. > > PROVE he was told to select biden or you'll show you're just spouting > typical neocon talking points. Oh wait, you ARE spouting typical > neocon talking points. Even you aren't that gullible!
Mark - 25 Aug 2008 19:22 GMT Yeah - all you Obama bin Biden followers... give that little extra required effort to being five-star world class a-holes, instead of run- of-the-mill mediocre stupid a-holes that seems to be your norm.
On Aug 24, 4:39 pm, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Fellow Democrats and Progressives: Let's all try to do a little extra > this election. There are big and small tasks the Obama-Biden ticket [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ed S.
|
|
|