 
     |
| William Penn -- Cancelled (Page 8/22) |
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 17, 10:20 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
As for the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki... I've learned over the years to not blindly accept history as I'm taught it, and to do my own research. I was taught in the Fairfax County Public School System that we bombed them to stop the war, and that countless lives were saved. Sure... I get that. But if I'm expected to be held accountable (because I'm mostly white) for things that happened 100s of years ago that had nothing to do with my family... then the Democrats can be held accountable for the ideology they held back then too. We didn't nuke a military base, we nuked a city, intentionally killing civilians. There were about 250k people killed instantly, with another 140k or so that died within the next two years from radiation poisoning and cancer. That's over 350k people dead because we dropped a bomb on them. There is no justification for this that I can accept. |
|
That doesn't inspire my confidence in the value of the other historical narratives that you've offered, from FDR's social programs, to the Eugenics movement and Planned Parenthood and all the other historical events and realities that you've invoked in your "Naughty List" about Democrats.
Beyond that, it seems like you're trying to elevate Republicans, simply by denigrating what Democrats have been like throughout their history.
Who were the prominent Republicans who reacted to Hiroshima and Nagasaki by going on record that this was shameful? Was there any wider regret about it among Republicans after the war, than there was among Democrats? I've never encountered anything that has given me that impression.
You bring up the Democrats and the Trail of Tears, which is an event that historians put within the time frame of about 1830 to 1850. There wasn't a political party that called itself the "Republicans" until 1854. Am I supposed to believe that there was any consensus among the first generation of Republicans that the Trail of Tears was a bad thing, or even that they would have been overwhelmingly inclined to call it the "Trail of Tears"..?
There were people at that time who put the free Negroes of the North and the Negro slaves in the South above the Indigenous Americans, and not just Democrats. The Union Army General Philip Henry Sheridan has been (dis)credited with the phrase "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," and even if that isn't an accurate indictment of his legacy, I think it represents an attitude that was not uncommon among both the Democrats and the Republicans of his era.
There's also the inconvenient fact of Democrats in the northern states that broke from the Democrats in the South and supported the Union and the abolition of slavery.
This could go on without end, but to encapsulate it, my friend... you're being way too simple-minded about all this—or overly reductionist, to use another term that I think hits the mark.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-17-2024).]
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
JAN 17, 11:22 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
That doesn't inspire my confidence in the value of the other historical narratives that you've offered, from FDR's social programs, to the Eugenics movement and Planned Parenthood and all the other historical events and realities that you've invoked in your "Naughty List" about Democrats.
Beyond that, it seems like you're trying to elevate Republicans, simply by denigrating what Democrats have been like throughout their history.
Who were the prominent Republicans who reacted to Hiroshima and Nagasaki by going on record that this was shameful? Was there any wider regret about it among Republicans after the war, than there was among Democrats? I've never encountered anything that has given me that impression.
You bring up the Democrats and the Trail of Tears, which is an event that historians put within the time frame of about 1830 to 1850. There wasn't a political party that called itself the "Republicans" until 1854. Am I supposed to believe that there was any consensus among the first generation of Republicans that the Trail of Tears was a bad thing, or even that they would have been overwhelmingly inclined to call it the "Trail of Tears"..?
There were people at that time who put the free Negroes of the North and the Negro slaves in the South above the Indigenous Americans, and not just Democrats. The Union Army General Philip Henry Sheridan has been (dis)credited with the phrase "The only good Indian is a dead Indian," and even if that isn't an accurate indictment of his legacy, I think it represents an attitude that was not uncommon among both the Democrats and the Republicans of his era.
There's also the inconvenient fact of Democrats in the northern states that broke from the Democrats in the South and supported the Union and the abolition of slavery.
This could go on without end, but to encapsulate it, my friend... you're being way too simple-minded about all this—or overly reductionist, to use another term that I think hits the mark. |
|
You're arguing theoretics... the "what if" Republicans existed during the trail of tears (for example), would they have supported it. Essentially, you're viewing Americans as their whole being belonging to one or two ideologies. I am not doing that. Republicans... as a party establishment, which is what's being criticized here as much as the Democrat party as a party establishment, didn't exist then... as you've clearly stated. These things that people did under the Democrat leadership have no bearing on the Republican party. Who knows what everyone thought individually, does that matter? But to answer your question *directly* ... what did Republicans think about Native Americans? Well... Republicans incidentally have had a mostly positive effect on Native American policy... promoting and signing legislation into law such as the Indian Citizen Act of 1924 under Coolidge, numerous instances of Republican presidents returning land to native Americans (Nixon), and even the Indian Self-Determination and Self-Organization act which gave official sovereignty back to Native American tribes and their lands (Ford).
My intent isn't to "raise" Republicans by "shitting" on Democrats. I'm simply pointing out that Democrats are exceptionally... EXCEPTIONALLY hypocritical in the way they proclaim to be the savior of everyone, when they are almost directly responsible for most of the ills of the past for these minority groups in the first place. And then fabricate history... literally evey tearing down statues representing it, to cover for the fact that nearly everything bad in history seems to be at the hands of the Democrats. MAYBE... maybe if the Republicans existed before Lincoln, they would have been bad too... but they didn't. They don't own that history. The truth is, if you do read up on Republican history, it was founded on ... and has been responsible for ... many of the very positive things that have shaped this country for the better... with little to no negative history. That's the thing about history... it grows every day, so it remains to be seen. We can do our best based on our beliefs and values, but we never really know when we're on the right side of history until after it plays out.
A political party is a choice. It's not like being born in another country, or being born with a disability, or being born a specific race, etc. It's a choice. I was a Democrat before... and I've made a conscious choice to identify as a Republican because for the most part, these ideals align with my views.
As for the bombing of Japan. My view isn't a pro-Republican view, but I listed it as something that "I" personally view to be a horrible decision by a Democrat president. Most people in the Republican party (as well as the Democrat party) believe this to have been a good decision. Case in point, Ole Joe above disagrees with me, which is fine. We're taught in grade school that it was a good decision, and we quickly gloss-over the death toll. But this is an opinion of mine that at the time, Truman was well aware that hundreds of thousands could die. I don't want to misrepresent quotes and history... but years go when I came to this conclusion, I did a lot of reading about this incident, and Truman was callous. They had known much better ways to cripple Japan, and the tide was already turning in the war to the point that it was already deemed unnecessary. We bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in part because we wanted to show Russia that we had this technology and were able to use it. They were an ally of ours, of course... but not like the now-NATO nations... as we saw with the Berlin Wall and the effective separating out of Europe into a Communist and Democratic / Capitalist side. So... it's been my conclusion through a lot of reading, that this death was unnecessary. Maybe it's because of my time in Afghanistan, but I recognize that every human being has a brain, desires, an interest. We wiped out 340k+ souls so we could prove to Russia that we had the power we did.
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 17, 01:16 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Sorry... this is complete nonsense. Almost every Southern State well up into 1999 had a Democrat governor...
|
|
Sorry, but this is complete nonsense.
Alabama has had a Republican governor for 30 of the last 36 years
-Louisiana for 19 of the last 43 years
-Texas for 36 of the last 44
-Mississippi for 27 of the last 31
-South Carolina for 36 of the last 48
-Florida for 28 of the last 36
-Arkansas for 19 of the last 27
-Texas for 32 of the last 52
-Missouri for 26 of the last 50.
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 17, 01:38 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by randye:
Racist leftists will always desperately cling to that "parties switched sides" myth like a drowning man clinging to a life raft.
|
|
Myth #1....The Republicans were not "competitive" in the south before 1964. In the 15 Presidential elections from 1900 to 1964 The "confederate states" only voted Republican 13% of the time (25 of 195). In the 15 Presidential elections since 1964 they have voted Republican 77% of the time (151 of 196). That is a change of over SIX HUNDRED PERCENT
.
Myth #2....It did not take 25 years. Within 8 years of the passage of The Civil Rights Act Democrats had lost control of over 25% of their Senate seats in the south (6 of 23) and many more in the House. Before the Civil Rights Act Democrats held a majority of House seats in every southern state with a majority of over 80% in 9 of the 11. Eight years later they had lost control of 2 states and only held an 80% majority in 5 of them. It took longer for a complete change of control, but it started immediately.
Here is a quote directly from Nixon Campaign strategist Kevin Phillips. . . "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"
In 2005, Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman even acknowledged the Republicans "Southern Strategy" in the 1960's.
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 17, 01:48 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
The idea that members of the Democrat party would switch sides to join the party that literally facilitated the very thing they hated (passage of the Civil Rights Act), is completely ludicrous. It makes absolutely no sense. Democrats, in an attempt to sort of "cleanse" their checkered past... hinge everything on Johnson's quote, "We may have lost the South" after he signed the Civil Rights Act that Kennedy fought for. t. |
|
I hinge it on a direct quote from Nixon's campaign advisor Ken Phillips. It makes perfect sense.
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 17, 02:09 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
All of the things you say are an attempt by Democrats to explain away why literally almost everything bad in history is on their side, like...
- Trail of Tears / Andrew Jackson
- Jim Crowe / Segregation Laws
- Internment Camps
- Agent Orange
- Eugenics
- Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (killing 300k people in an afternoon)
- Founding of the KKK
... I mean, I'm not even scratching the surface.
|
|
As a white person how do you deal with the guilt of allowing slavery in the United States for almost 100 years?
As a man how do you deal with the guilt of denying women the right to vote fore 150 years?
As a citizen of Florida how do you deal with the guilt of the Jim Crowe era?
Also curious of how eugenics is a democrat idea? Teddy Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, and Oliver Wendell Holmes all supported eugenics.
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
JAN 17, 02:34 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by BingB:
Sorry, but this is complete nonsense.
Alabama has had a Republican governor for 30 of the last 36 years
-Louisiana for 19 of the last 43 years
-Texas for 36 of the last 44
-Mississippi for 27 of the last 31
-South Carolina for 36 of the last 48
-Florida for 28 of the last 36
-Arkansas for 19 of the last 27
-Texas for 32 of the last 52
-Missouri for 26 of the last 50.
|
|
WOW... such gross manipulation of the statistics and what I said. As I've said repeatedly... from the beginning of time until around the year 2000... most Southern States were Democrat. They started to shift around the mid 90s through the mid 2000s.
Look at ANY of the states you've mentioned, and it will confirm exactly what I've said:
Louisiana: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...vernors_of_Louisiana
Florida: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...governors_of_Florida
Arkansas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...overnors_of_Arkansas
Texas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...f_governors_of_Texas
Mississippi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...rnors_of_Mississippi
South Carolina: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...rs_of_South_Carolina
You listed Texas twice, and then Missouri? What's that? Missouri is a northern State... they were part of the Union, not the Confederacy. Let's list some of the others you're forgetting.
Kentucky: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...overnors_of_Kentucky (still actually Democrat)
Alabama: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...governors_of_Alabama
As I explicitly stated... the Southern States started becoming Republican mostly after 2000. I am asking EVERYONE here, right now... to go look at those links I posted, and you will see exactly what I'm saying. The Democrat to Republican shift occurred in all of these states from the mid 90s through the mid 2000s. Before the mid 1990s... every single one of them was a hard-core blue state... and they had been that way all the way since and through the Civil War.
Either you're so grossly biased that you can't even see with your own lying eyes... or you're hoping everyone else is too dumb to accept what you're saying. This puts this discussion to bed.
| quote | | Originally posted by BingB:As a white person how do you deal with the guilt of allowing slavery in the United States for almost 100 years? |
|
Well, I'll tell you Fred. I'm half Hispanic, and the one lineage I have here in the United States is through my mom's father (my grandfather), who's family was Republican, with several family members through that lineage that fought for the Union Army against the Confederates (which I'd probably guess your family fought for).
So there is sure as **** no guilt on my part!
| quote | | Originally posted by BingB:As a man how do you deal with the guilt of denying women the right to vote fore 150 years? |
|
I also feel pretty good about this too. In 1919, the Senate and House were both majority Republican, and they were responsible for passing the resolution which they subsequently passed to the states, which at the time were also majority Republican because of the mid-term election in 1918.
| quote | | Originally posted by BingB:As a citizen of Florida how do you deal with the guilt of the Jim Crowe era? |
|
I don't, I didn't move to Florida until 1996. Before that, I lived in D.C., and before that, Massachusetts and Connecticut. And although I moved to Florida in 1996 when we still had Democrats in power, and it was still considered the KKK Southern Headquarters... I, along with other people from my state had moved down to help make it Republican and we were able to eliminate the KKK from our state.
| quote | | Originally posted by BingB:Also curious of how eugenics is a democrat idea? Teddy Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, and Oliver Wendell Holmes all supported eugenics. |
|
Lol... there's a big difference from people who believed only smart people should have kids together, and others where only certain races should have kids together, and a completely and totally different ball-game from the people like Margaret Sanger (a Democrat) who made it her life's work / goal to sterilize blacks and kill black babies: https://www.usatoday.com/st...s-column/5480192002/[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 01-17-2024).]
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 17, 04:20 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
from the beginning of time until around the year 2000... most Southern States were Democrat. They started to shift around the mid 90s through the mid 2000s.
Look at ANY of the states you've mentioned, and it will confirm exactly what I've said:
Louisiana: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...vernors_of_Louisiana
|
|
Elected first Republican Governor in 1980. Since then Republican Governor for 20 of 43 years
Elected first Republican Governor in 1967, just 3 years after passage of Civil Rights Act. Since 1987 Republican Governor for 28 of 36 years.
Elected first Republican Governor in 100 years in 1967 just 3 uears after passage of Civil rights Act. Republican governor for 19 of last 27 years,
Elected first Republican Governor in 100 years in 1979. Since then Republican governor for 36 of 44 years
Republican Governor for 27 of last 31 years.
Elected first Republican Governor in 100 years in 1975. Republican Governor in 36 of 48 years since.
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
You listed Texas twice,
|
|
The second "Texas" was actually Tennessee. Elected Republican Governor in 1971 since then Republican Governor for 32 of 52 years.
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
and then Missouri? What's that? Missouri is a northern State... they were part of the Union, not the Confederacy.
|
|
Missouri was admitted to the Confederacy on November 28 1861.
Absolutely NONE of these support your claim that no southern state had a Republican Governor until the mid 1990's. Thanks for posting the links so that everyone can see for them selves.
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
And although I moved to Florida in 1996 when we still had Democrats in power, and it was still considered the KKK Southern Headquarters
|
|
In 1996 Florida Republicans held a majority of the seats both of U.S House (15 of 23) and the State House (22 of 40). You also had a Republican Senator. The State was already pretty red by then.
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 17, 04:31 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Lol... there's a big difference from people who believed only smart people should have kids together, and others where only certain races should have kids together, and a completely and totally different ball-game from the people like Margaret Sanger (a Democrat) who made it her life's work / goal to sterilize blacks and kill black babies: https://www.usatoday.com/st...s-column/5480192002/
|
|
David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK, is a pro-Trump Republican. Does that mean the Republican Party supports the KKK?
For some reason I thought that you would be better than this.[This message has been edited by BingB (edited 01-17-2024).]
|
|
|
|
BingB
|
JAN 17, 04:37 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
I don't, I didn't move to Florida until 1996. Before that, I lived in D.C., and before that, Massachusetts and Connecticut. And although I moved to Florida in 1996 when we still had Democrats in power, and it was still considered the KKK Southern Headquarters... I, along with other people from my state had moved down to help make it Republican and we were able to eliminate the KKK from our state.
|
|
But according to your logic all CURRENT members of the Democrat Party are responsible for what happened 150 years ago. So that means all CURRENT citizens of Florida are responsible for the Jim Crowe era, right?
Or is there a problem with your logic?
|
|
|
|