100th Anniversary Of The Tulsa Race Massacre.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Are you joking?

The internet is available

He opposes allowing blacks to go to school with whites while he was a young senator

It’s not a secret

In YOUR words, what did he mean when he said “I don’t want my kids going to school in a racial jungle”????

That’s “segregation “

I didn’t vote for joe biDen, he’s racist

When he was a young senator?

Time has moved on. How long ago was that?

“Grab em by the pussy”

Leftist hypocrisy

Joe biDen is known pro segregationist and it was only last weekend he outright stated that blacks can’t use lawyers and accountants

He hasnt changed, he’s a racist

But racism certainly isn’t a deal breaker for the 40million losers who voted for him

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

A President ‘serves’, Presidents dont ‘rule over’ anyone

An biDen may be completely bonkers (and racist) like you say, but he’s no billionaire

Your President "serves" and does not rule? No executive decisions? Really?

No, the president doesn't rule, though some are more influential than others. It depends on the abilities of each president and their support in Congress, among other factors. We have this thing called "separation of powers," a concept first etsablished in our Constitution. Our treatment by the British government persuaded the Founding Fathers to limit the power of the federal government. This was done by spreading its power more or less equally amongst the executive, legislatve and judicial branches. Checks and balances. If you followed Trump's tenure closely, you would have seen how he was constantly thwarted by the other two branches. At times it seemed like the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was running the country, blocking his attempts to reform immigration policy multiple times.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
LOL. Maybe you need to read it a couple of times. That is NOT what it says at all.

No? Who are the progressives and conservatives below?

If you asked a democrat back then the answer was: We should be allowed representation based on the number of people we have in our state, slave or not.

If you asked a republican back then the answer was: There should be no slaves so you should have no representation for allowing them in your state.

a reply to: alldaylong

Different nation all the same but nobody taught us about the "Tulsa Race Massacre" in school.

Think i heard about it in passing comments around these here parts but it was the Watchmen show that filled in the blanks.

Not verbatim but drew it to our attention.

a reply to: Breakthestreak

Obviously Biden is referring to the level of access young black entrepreneurs have to the likes of lawyers and accountants and the disparity between the two groups.

What's racist about that aside from the disparity of course?

In the USA, despite the efforts of equality proponents, income inequality persists among races.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Those labels are meaningless when transposed onto history before they existed. But if we take progressive and conservative values and apply them to the two sides, the progressives would be the south and the conservatives would be the north.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Those labels are meaningless when transposed onto history before they existed. But if we take progressive and conservative values and apply them to the two sides, the progressives would be the south and the conservatives would be the north.

Really? The Republicans created the American Progressive movement, learn some history.

a reply to: andy06shake

Access to accountants and lawyers? LMAO! You guys get crazier by the minute it seems. Do they not take your money if you are black? Do they not serve you if you are black?

a reply to: Dfairlite

Aye your right there is absolutely no disparity nor inequality whatsoever between the races in the USA or in my own nation for that matter.

Everything's hunky-dory, peachy clean and ticking along perfectly.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Oh, I know my history well. Which is why I said those labels don't really apply. For a time, all of the political parties claimed to be progressives. So how do you square that? Progressivism didn't start in the US until long after the civil war.

See, progressivism and conservatism as we know them today are not easily transposed onto the movements of the past that predate the movements. Modern day conservatism is best understood as adherence to the constitution. Modern day progressivism is best understood as subverting the constitution. When discussing a time period so close to the founding (only two or three generations removed) it's unwise to use modern day terms without understanding the underpinnings of those terms.

a reply to: andy06shake

There is plenty of disparity and inequality. Neither of those things are bad as neither of them are systemically imposed. If there are places where such disparities and inequalities are systemically imposed, I'm all for removing those impositions. Unfortunately for your position, such impositions are practically non-existent.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Im white mate, ile be just fine.

Off the top of my nut, and as to inequality and disparity where race is concerned in the USA we have the racial wealth gap, health care, poverty, housing segregation, education, unemployment rates and last but not least there are the crime rates and incarceration numbers to consider.

According to the Census Bureau, income inequality reached record levels in the US in the year 2018, that's a hell of a big magic wand that must have been waved to fix all those issues since then is it not?

I must have missed that part on the news. LoL

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Which is why I said those labels don't really apply.

Sure they do, Republicans were so progressive that they ended up forming the actual Progressives Party and there is nothing progressive about owning other humans beings despite your sad attempt at rewriting the narrative.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

there is nothing progressive about owning other humans beings despite your sad attempt at rewriting the narrative.

So why do modern "progressives" defend illegal immigration and refuse to stop it? Illegal immigrants are a slave class and all of the "progressives" seem to view them that way. Sometimes they say it out loud on accident when they ask things like: "who will take care of my landscaping if we get rid of illegal immigrants?" So despite their acknowledgement, why oh why aren't they on a crusade to end illegal immigration? Why did they react to trump, whose main campaign issue was illegal immigration, the nearly the same way the southern democrats reacted to lincoln?

What I find most entertaining about your arguments is how you like to shift the terms being used and never focus on the ideals behind the terms. Whatever term will suit your argument is the move you take next. It's quite predictable. When confronted with the fact that the principles of modern slavery are being reacted to the same by the two sides, you have run to hide behind the label progressivism and it's ties to the republican party 50 years after the time period that you are wanting to compare modern day to. It's a funny, but tired tactic. My question to you is, are you consciously implementing this strategy or is it just the natural progression of your thoughts? When you are proved incorrect, run to an unrelated term in an unrelated time and claim victory. Just an ego defense mechanism or conscious strategy to preserve what you view as your reputation?

a reply to: andy06shake

Off the top of my nut, and as to inequality and disparity where race is concerned in the USA we have the racial wealth gap, health care, poverty, housing segregation, education, unemployment rates and last but not least there are the crime rates and incarceration numbers to consider.

Can you explain how those are systemically imposed?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
So why do modern "progressives" defend illegal immigration and refuse to stop it?

Strawman, this isn't about modern progressivism, someone made an ill-informed comment about party history and needed to be educated as to historical party composition by ideology.

You want to talk about how screwed up modern progressivism is? Start a thread.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

LOL.

Republicans today oppose slavery, democrats support it. Same thing different century. Yet somehow you've deluded yourself into thinking you're right.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Whatever, bro, not even close to what I was discussing about historic party composition but continue to deflect by bringing up the present.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

How drunk are you right now?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: MiddleInsite

what if teaching history in fact promotes repeating it in other forms, in contrast to the old adage. if you dont know your history you are in favour of repeating past mistakes... or something.

what if the history is created/fabricated to fashion the future? the winners tell the story, and the good guys always win so its fine, shhh sorry for disturbing you.