50 Cent Supports Hillary, Why?...

[Napoleon Ier]

If anyone has a civil rights record to be ashamed of it is liberal democrats.

Yes, many historic democrats have civil rights records to be ashamed of---I wouldn't call them liberal.

Of course she wouldn't...she's a liberal and doesn't want to be linked to the historical record of her party. She agrees that democrats have a horrible record on civil rights.

1. Founded itself in 1856 with the express purpose of ending the expansion of slavery.

Yep, they wanted to end slavery and modernize America. They were progressives. Modernizationism is not conservatism.

Again she dances around with the labels. I wouldn't disagree over the progressivism claim, but the problem is that democrats are trying to co-opt that title for themselves today instead of liberal. They have also redefined that term to grant rights for behavior with almost no restraints.

2. Produced president Abraham Lincoln & a Republican-dominated Congress, who successfully worked with Great Britain to end the slave trade, end slavery in the District of Columbia, issue the Emancipation Proclamation, pass the land grant acts which allowed blacks admission to agricultural schools, and repealed the Fugitive Slave Laws.

Slave trade officially ended in the United States in 1808, before either of today's parties were founded. Slave trade ended de facto across the Atlantic around 1850, quite some time before Lincoln was President. But in general, yes, as I've stated through, early Republicans were a liberal, progressive group.

Yet Lincoln had to sign a treaty with Great Britain in order to suppress it. The slave trade officially ended in 1808. The institution of slavery did not...hence, the reality of a Civil War with 620,000 known deaths. She's trying to diminish the fact that Lincoln had to sign legislation ending slavery in D.C. and then later, the Emancipation Proclamation. She's trying to co-opt that liberal/progressive label once again since her party tries to adopt the label today.

3. Stood against the Black Code Laws of the south.

Of course, early Republicans weren't perfect. They had their own Black Codes in the North. We're talking about the 19th century here, after all.

A half-truth...she's right about the North having black codes of their own, she's not telling the fact that lynching was associated with them in the south. Republicans passed federal legislation repealing state lynching laws from the south. 1871 - Republicans passed the Enforcement Act, protecting voting rights for blacks, it was repealed in 1894 when Democrat Grover Cleveland took office. The Republicans aren't clean on this issue, just less dirty.

4. Introduced the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, banning slavery....and 14th Amendment granting due process to all Americans (despite Democrat resistance).

Yep.

For someone who doesn't know historical fact, she sure is agreeing with me a lot. She finally was able to do so without additional commentary & spin.

5. Had to override presidential vetoes in order to confer rights on blacks and protect the Freedman's Bureau.

When?

The Republican congress overcame Andrew Johnson's veto in 1866. He saw the bill as unwarranted. If she's a teacher, she should know this. This is pretty basic stuff even taught at the high school level. I'm not trying to make fun of her, but that's a pretty basic thing required to be taught (at least in California public schools).

6. Introduced & passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 so all Americans could have equal access to public accomodations.

It's funny, the two legislators primarily responsible for the passing of this act, Charles Sumner and Benjamin F. Butler, were long-time Democrats. Of course, during Reconstruction you COULDN'T really be in politics if you were a Democrat, so they became Republicans. It's funny, these two men could so easily alter their party identities. Of course, it happened on a nation-wide scale about 100 years later, so...

So here she tries to diminish what Sumner & Butler accomplished because they used to be Democrats. Notice she doesn't disagree with my facts...just tries to add commentary to spin the interpretation of it. The fact is both men left the democrat party and joined the Republicans.

I wouldn't be so quick to diminish their accomplishment if I were her, after all, Democrats could try to claim they won the Cold War in the near-future based on the fact that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before switching over to the Republicans.

9. Called for the desegregation of blacks/whites within the U.S. military

Of course, that happened under Truman.

...and was actually enforced under Eisenhower. Once again, not telling the entire story. I must admit that Truman should get credit for signing the actual act though. He should also get credit for saying the following:

"I think one man is just as good as another so long as he's not a nigger or a Chinaman. Uncle Will says that the Lord made a White man from dust, a nigger from mud, then He threw up what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I. It is race prejudice, I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion Negroes ought to be in Africa, Yellow men in Asia and White men in Europe and America." (1911 letter to his wife)

"I went nigger chasing on Monday. Right through Central Africa: Vine St. There was no trace of that Nelson nigger." (1914 letter to his wife) There's a lot more than that but you get the picture.

10. Worked with businessmen to create schools in the south for poor black youth

That's very nice. To what are you referring?

Republican businessman Julius Rosenwald created approximately 5,000 schools for poor black children in the south. Other Republicans like Andrew Carnegie & George Eastman contributed $$ to the cause as well.

11. Been instrumental in getting the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed (because the one in 1875 was declared unconstitutional)

Yep. The Civil Rights Act section at the LBJ Presidential Library, which is right here in my city so I visit it frequently, is my favorite. I walk through it and I cry and cry and cry. What a huge turning point this was for the Democratic Party... and one that began to lose them their conservative Southern base.

She doesn't disagree with me. She just adds commentary.

1. Produced presidents who forcefully interred Japanese-Americans against their will - FDR. It took a Republican president to sign an act to compensate them for that - Ronald Regan in 1988.

INTERNED! Interred means buried. The Redress that you mention from 1988, of course, was pushed through congress by a Democrat--Mineta.

Oh no, I made a typo...therefore my point must not be correct!!! Notice how she conveniently leaves out the fact that Republican Alan Simpson helped get that bill passed through the Senate.

2. Produced supreme court justices which were openly members of the KKK - Hugo Black

And he was burnt in effigy by segregationists in his homestate of Alabama for his pro-civil rights record in the Supreme Court.

3. Produced governors which tried to used military force to keep blacks from having equal access to integrated high school - Orval Faubus. It took a Republican president to force his hand - Dwight Eisenhower.

Yep.

Once again, after initially saying I don't know what I'm talking about...she agrees.

4. Produced senators which lead opposition to the lunch counter integration movement - Ernest Hollings

Haha, that's the guy who called Beavis and Butt-head "Buffcoat and Beaver"!

...and again, doesn't disagree but changes the subject with a little humor.

5. Long supported segregation, especially by men like J. William Fulbright, who Bill Clinton admitted was his political mentor.

J. William Fulbright was a segregationist alright. He also created the Fulbright Scholarship, possibly the most prestigious scholarship in the US, promoting international study and unity. Fulbright was also a big proponent of the United Nations. He was simultaneously concerned with bringing people of different nations together, but keeping people of the same nation apart. Racism sure is a powerful thing, isn't it?

3rd times a charm. She doesn't disagree with Clinton claiming Fulbright, an admitted segregationist, was his political mentor. She adds commentary and leads off into a statement about philanthropy & the UN. She's trying to get the focus off of segregation.

7. Produced supreme court judges who: (a) dissented from the Dred Scott decision, (b) overturned the notion of 'separate but equal' in Brown vs. Board of Education

You silly goose. Of course you know that Brown vs. Board of Education was unanimous.

That's pretty convenient to not tell the whole story. The facts are:

1. The case was argued on behalf of the school districts against Brown by John W. Davis, the former Democrat candidate for president in 1924. (who lost to Calvin Coolidge)
2. The case was actually first heard in 1952. Fred Vinson, the Chief Justice, was probably going to be the swing vote (5-4) in favor of upholding Plessey vs. Ferguson and continuing "separate but equal". He didn't want to be the swing vote so he ordered re-argument for 1953.
3. Vinson died during the break. Eisenhower (encouraged by Herbert Brownell, Jr.) nominated & pushed through Earl Warren to be his replacement.
4. Warren was able to convince the other judges to arrive at a unanimous decision to overturn the concept of "separate but equal". He even got Stanley Reed (the last holdout) to join everyone else with the decision. THAT'S WHY IT WAS UNANIMOUS...WARREN PUSHED FOR IT!!
5. Herbert Brownell, working with Eisenhower, appointed judges within federal districts to enforce the Brown vs. Board of Education verdict.

Just in case a liberal will try to deny all this:

#1 - summary
#2 - Herbert Brownell
#3 - more in depth summary

DISCLAIMER: Napoleon Ier does claim to have written any of the above. This was a bare-faced copy 'n paste...but I just thought it was too good to waste on my inbox.

An absolute killer.

Cmon', rebutt that, btmeggy. I dare ya. I double dare ya m********.

[reminisco]

Tonkaed: name a single welfare program that acheived the aims it set out to.

Unemployment Insurance

[reminisco]

also, as a general call out to Napoleon (Racist) Ier,

have you ever worked with the homeless or downtrodden?

have you ever actually gone two days without a meal.

i have.

so when you have too, then i'll listen to anything you say about social welfare.

[Napoleon Ier]

im not going to lie i thought i posted in here earlier....

while i think a lot of the current programs arent hitting the mark as far as effectiveness, i think its worth questioning what we are defining as success. it would help at least shape the discussion.

However there are some programs, like foodstamps for instance which i think have done pretty well all things considered. This isnt to say i dont think other programs havent been effective, because i think they have mostly been effective to a degree.

For those who want to do some reading here is an article that i think brings up some relevant things to discuss welfare and waste and government policy and the like. I think a lot of the reforms that have been made to tighten the belt so to speak, have made welfare far less effective than it could be.

Certainly all welfare is likely to serve one of two categories, to provide a safety net or to be a stopping point on the way back to work...its difficult to try and blend the two together.

Anyway heres the article, its not that long, it just has a number things attached at the end.

http://www.ukcpr.org/Publications/FB_2003.pdf

To be honest I was just quoting a challenge set by the big man from my sig in an interview some time in the 70s.

[crazed crayola]

So wat if america isnt rdy, its his constutional right to run and wat dumbfuck moron brought his name into this, that america hating asshole better run for it. america isnt rdy i mean we go from hating one skin color to another. next white people will cut themselves cuase they wish they black thier is no end to the hate and prejudce. why? i have no idea.


as long as we live you shall be hated by someone. its the screwed up way of human god dam nature.

my solution is to put circumsion as the punishment for racial injustice

[Frigidus]

So wat if america isnt rdy, its his constutional right to run and wat dumbfuck moron brought his name into this, that america hating asshole better run for it. america isnt rdy i mean we go from hating one skin color to another. next white people will cut themselves cuase they wish they black thier is no end to the hate and prejudce. why? i have no idea.


as long as we live you shall be hated by someone. its the screwed up way of human god dam nature.

my solution is to put circumsion as the punishment for racial injustice

What about people already circumcised? Oh, and the first amendment too.

[Napoleon Ier]

also, as a general call out to Napoleon (Racist) Ier,

have you ever worked with the homeless or downtrodden?

have you ever actually gone two days without a meal.

i have.

so when you have too, then i'll listen to anything you say about social welfare.

1/ Find a single post I made in which I express a view indicating I believe in a hierarchy of races

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

[got tonkaed]

also, as a general call out to Napoleon (Racist) Ier,

have you ever worked with the homeless or downtrodden?

have you ever actually gone two days without a meal.

i have.

so when you have too, then i'll listen to anything you say about social welfare.

1/ Find a single post I made in which I express a view indicating I believe in a hierarchy of races

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

I have some things about social reproduction as a critique of the failures of the status quo that could be relavant if people wanted to read them. Though immediatly tangential, they could provide a little bit of background as to why the "do nothing" approach toward welfare presents a bit of a problem.

[Guiscard]

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

What he does have, Nappy, and what many people have that you don't is (and, flames begin in 3...2...) experience of the real world. Not living with your parents in Oxford, doing your GCSEs, reading French National Front e-mails all evening, but actually knowing people who are on benefits, knowing young single mothers, knowing people with mental problems or drug addictions and actually talking to them about how things like welfare allow them to survive. It's all well and good to make broad sweeping statements about what impact welfare has on the economy, but until you've experienced the human face of it then you have no right to lecture about anything really.

[Napoleon Ier]

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

What he does have, Nappy, and what many people have that you don't is (and, flames begin in 3...2...) experience of the real world. Not living with your parents in Oxford, doing your GCSEs, reading French National Front e-mails all evening, but actually knowing people who are on benefits, knowing young single mothers, knowing people with mental problems or drug addictions and actually talking to them about how things like welfare allow them to survive. It's all well and good to make broad sweeping statements about what impact welfare has on the economy, but until you've experienced the human face of it then you have no right to lecture about anything really.

Don't think I have to respond to that.

[Napoleon Ier]

also, as a general call out to Napoleon (Racist) Ier,

have you ever worked with the homeless or downtrodden?

have you ever actually gone two days without a meal.

i have.

so when you have too, then i'll listen to anything you say about social welfare.

1/ Find a single post I made in which I express a view indicating I believe in a hierarchy of races

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

I have some things about social reproduction as a critique of the failures of the status quo that could be relavant if people wanted to read them. Though immediatly tangential, they could provide a little bit of background as to why the "do nothing" approach toward welfare presents a bit of a problem.

status quo: "Latin for the mess we're knee-deep in." As He of my avvy used to say.

Social Reproduction? Don't quite see how that'd relate, but sure, I gotta do something other than bloody gcse coursework during my 3-day vacation.

[Dancing Mustard]

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

What he does have, Nappy, and what many people have that you don't is (and, flames begin in 3...2...) experience of the real world. Not living with your parents in Oxford, doing your GCSEs, reading French National Front e-mails all evening, but actually knowing people who are on benefits, knowing young single mothers, knowing people with mental problems or drug addictions and actually talking to them about how things like welfare allow them to survive. It's all well and good to make broad sweeping statements about what impact welfare has on the economy, but until you've experienced the human face of it then you have no right to lecture about anything really.

I Don't think I have to respond to that.

Problem Identified.

[got tonkaed]

also, as a general call out to Napoleon (Racist) Ier,

have you ever worked with the homeless or downtrodden?

have you ever actually gone two days without a meal.

i have.

so when you have too, then i'll listen to anything you say about social welfare.

1/ Find a single post I made in which I express a view indicating I believe in a hierarchy of races

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

I have some things about social reproduction as a critique of the failures of the status quo that could be relavant if people wanted to read them. Though immediatly tangential, they could provide a little bit of background as to why the "do nothing" approach toward welfare presents a bit of a problem.

status quo: "Latin for the mess we're knee-deep in." As He of my avvy used to say.

Social Reproduction? Don't quite see how that'd relate, but sure, I gotta do something other than bloody gcse coursework during my 3-day vacation.

well have you read the bit about the economics yet? The social reproduction is essentially going to argue, that individuals have agency and that how they act and utilize the elements of welfare, will depend greatly on how the system is concieved. What seems to be what people find is that systematic disadvantages are acted upon often by a rejection of the means for other groups to socially reproduce. Some of the stuff i have is immediatly related to education and prisons.

But the parallels can be drawn once you understand where thats coming from. It actually can be a rather ugly message, but i also thing it promotes the do something rather than let it lie approach at the end of the day.

[Napoleon Ier]

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

What he does have, Nappy, and what many people have that you don't is (and, flames begin in 3...2...) experience of the real world. Not living with your parents in Oxford, doing your GCSEs, reading French National Front e-mails all evening, but actually knowing people who are on benefits, knowing young single mothers, knowing people with mental problems or drug addictions and actually talking to them about how things like welfare allow them to survive. It's all well and good to make broad sweeping statements about what impact welfare has on the economy, but until you've experienced the human face of it then you have no right to lecture about anything really.

I Don't think I have to respond to that.

Problem Identified.

Well no, actually. That's just juvenile. You can't grab random bits of sentences and quote them out of context without proper deference to proper grammatical syntax. I mean, this isn't my own language of choice, but it's not a complex linguistic subtetly to grasp.

Come on, Mustard,

This is the Clubhouse, not some bizarre e-creche.

[Napoleon Ier]

also, as a general call out to Napoleon (Racist) Ier,

have you ever worked with the homeless or downtrodden?

have you ever actually gone two days without a meal.

i have.

so when you have too, then i'll listen to anything you say about social welfare.

1/ Find a single post I made in which I express a view indicating I believe in a hierarchy of races

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

I have some things about social reproduction as a critique of the failures of the status quo that could be relavant if people wanted to read them. Though immediatly tangential, they could provide a little bit of background as to why the "do nothing" approach toward welfare presents a bit of a problem.

status quo: "Latin for the mess we're knee-deep in." As He of my avvy used to say.

Social Reproduction? Don't quite see how that'd relate, but sure, I gotta do something other than bloody gcse coursework during my 3-day vacation.

well have you read the bit about the economics yet? The social reproduction is essentially going to argue, that individuals have agency and that how they act and utilize the elements of welfare, will depend greatly on how the system is concieved. What seems to be what people find is that systematic disadvantages are acted upon often by a rejection of the means for other groups to socially reproduce. Some of the stuff i have is immediatly related to education and prisons.

But the parallels can be drawn once you understand where thats coming from. It actually can be a rather ugly message, but i also thing it promotes the do something rather than let it lie approach at the end of the day.

The link won't work anymore.

From what I hear though, it looks like you need the State to completely change social perspective and engineer a very complex system. And whenever you get big state, well....

[Frigidus]

2/Do you have economic statistics and evidence, or just a load of unverifiable bullsh*t about starving?

What he does have, Nappy, and what many people have that you don't is (and, flames begin in 3...2...) experience of the real world. Not living with your parents in Oxford, doing your GCSEs, reading French National Front e-mails all evening, but actually knowing people who are on benefits, knowing young single mothers, knowing people with mental problems or drug addictions and actually talking to them about how things like welfare allow them to survive. It's all well and good to make broad sweeping statements about what impact welfare has on the economy, but until you've experienced the human face of it then you have no right to lecture about anything really.

I Don't think I have to respond to that.

Problem Identified.

Well no, actually. That's just juvenile. You can't grab random bits of sentences and quote them out of context without proper deference to proper grammatical syntax. I mean, this isn't my own language of choice, but it's not a complex linguistic subtetly to grasp.

Come on, Mustard,

This is the Clubhouse, not some bizarre e-creche.

Well, you can. It can actually be a major source of lulz. It's more whether you actually make a point or simply ridicule your intellectual opponent.

[got tonkaed]

public service annoucement....

i occasionally put pdfs on here that i access through my uni databases. I dont actually check them to see if they work on here.

Should i put something on here that you would like to read or even would tolerate reading so i can lambast you in a future post...send me a pm and i will figure out how to get it to you so we can be nerds together.

- got tonkaed.

[Dancing Mustard]

I Don't think I have to respond to that.

Problem Identified.

Well no, actually. That's just juvenile. You can't grab random bits of sentences and quote them out of context without proper deference to proper grammatical syntax. I mean, this isn't my own language of choice, but it's not a complex linguistic subtetly to grasp.

Come on, Mustard,

This is the Clubhouse, not some bizarre e-creche.

Well, you can. It can actually be a major source of lulz. It's more whether you actually make a point or simply ridicule your intellectual opponent.

Jeez, and we thought the Germans had no sense of humour...

[Napoleon Ier]

public service annoucement....

i occasionally put pdfs on here that i access through my uni databases. I dont actually check them to see if they work on here.

Should i put something on here that you would like to read or even would tolerate reading so i can lambast you in a future post...send me a pm and i will figure out how to get it to you so we can be nerds together.

- got tonkaed.

you joker tonky

[got tonkaed]

public service annoucement....

i occasionally put pdfs on here that i access through my uni databases. I dont actually check them to see if they work on here.

Should i put something on here that you would like to read or even would tolerate reading so i can lambast you in a future post...send me a pm and i will figure out how to get it to you so we can be nerds together.

- got tonkaed.

you joker tonky

i know....look at me use bits of slang that dont fit my dialect....who calls college uni?

im clever.