Racism is a mental issue-I agree

Search

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
85,699
Tokens
Most liberals are racist, they use religion and race and success to divide us, so they need racism to advance their selfish causes
 

New member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
67
Tokens
Most liberals are racist, they use religion and race and success to divide us, so they need racism to advance their selfish causes

Ever hear of the Southern S[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]trategy[/FONT]
 

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
25,901
Tokens
Ever hear of the Southern S[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]trategy[/FONT]

Yes and it belongs to the Southern Dixiecrats.
 

Never bet against America.
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
8,398
Tokens
Welching on bets has got to be yet another mental disease. (R2P)
 

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]It's obvious that a bleeding heart produced that video. I would be willing to wager that the things
he talks about he really doesn't care about. When you consider the size of population the U.S. has
the number of racist incidents that occur are miniscule.

Just another fake solution in search of a fake problem.
[/FONT]
 

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
12,457
Tokens
Ever hear of the Southern S[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]trategy[/FONT]

This story is in the textbooks and on the history channel and regularly repeated in the media, but is it true? First, no one has ever given a single example of an explicitly racist pitch by Nixon during his long career. One might expect that a racist appeal to the Deep South actually would have to be made, and to be understood as such. Yet, quite evidently none was.

So progressives insist that Nixon made a racist “dog whistle” appeal to Deep South voters. Evidently he spoke to them in a kind of code. Really? Is it plausible that Nixon figured out how to communicate with Deep South racists in a secret language? Do Deep South bigots, like dogs, have some kind of heightened awareness of racial messages — messages that are somehow indecipherable to the media and the rest of the country?

This seems unlikely, but let’s consider the possibility. Progressives insist that Nixon’s appeals to drugs and law and order were coded racist messaging. Yet when Nixon ran for president in 1968 the main issue was the Vietnam War. One popular Republican slogan of the period described the Democrats as the party of “acid, amnesty and abortion.” Clearly there is no suggestion here of race.

Nixon’s references to drugs and law and order in 1968 were quite obviously directed at the antiwar protesters who had just disrupted the Democratic Convention in Chicago. His target was radical activists such as Abbie Hoffman and Bill Ayers. Nixon scorned the hippies, champions of the drug culture such as Timothy Leary, and draft-dodgers who fled to Canada. The vast majority of these people were white.

Nixon had an excellent record on civil rights. He supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He was an avid champion of the desegregation of public schools. The progressive columnist Tom Wicker wrote in the New York Times, “There’s no doubt about it — the Nixon administration accomplished more in 1970 to desegregate Southern school systems than had been done in the 16 previous years or probably since. There’s no doubt either that it was Richard Nixon personally who conceived and led the administration’s desegregation effort.”

Upon his taking office in 1969, Nixon also put into effect America’s first affirmative action program. Dubbed the Philadelphia Plan, it imposed racial goals and timetables on the building trade unions, first in Philadelphia and then elsewhere. Now, would a man seeking to build an electoral base of Deep South white supremacists actually promote the first program to legally discriminate in favor of blacks? This is absurd.

Nixon barely campaigned in the Deep South. His strategy, as outlined by Kevin Phillips in his classic work, “The Emerging Republican Majority,” was to target the Sunbelt, the vast swath of territory stretching from Florida to Nixon’s native California. This included what Phillips terms the Outer or Peripheral South.

Nixon recognized the South was changing. It was becoming more industrialized, with many northerners moving to the Sunbelt. Nixon’s focus, Phillips writes, was on the non-racist, upwardly-mobile, largely urban voters of the Outer or Peripheral South. Nixon won these voters, and he lost the Deep South, which went to Democratic segregationist George Wallace.

And how many racist Dixiecrats did Nixon win for the GOP? Turns out, virtually none. Among the racist Dixiecrats, Strom Thurmond of South Carolina was the sole senator to defect to the Republicans — and he did this long before Nixon’s time. Only one Dixiecrat congressman, Albert Watson of South Carolina, switched to the GOP. The rest, more than 200 Dixiecrat senators, congressmen, governors and high elected officials, all stayed in the Democratic Party.

The progressive notion of a Dixiecrat switch is a myth. Yet it is myth that continues to be promoted, using dubious case examples. Though the late Sens. Jesse Helms of North Carolina and John Tower of Texas and former Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott all switched from the Democratic Party to the GOP, none of these men was a Dixiecrat.

The South, as a whole, became Republican during the 1980s and 1990s. This had nothing to do with Nixon; it was because of Ronald Reagan and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America.” The conservative appeal to patriotism, anti-communism, free markets, pro-life and Christianity had far more to do with the South’s movement into the GOP camp than anything related to race.

Yet the myth of Nixon’s Southern Strategy endures — not because it’s true, but because it conveniently serves to exculpate the crimes of the Democratic Party. Somehow the party that promoted slavery, segregation, Jim Crow and racial terrorism gets to wipe its slate clean by pretending that, with Nixon’s connivance, the Republicans stole all their racists. It’s time we recognize this excuse for what it is: one more Democratic big lie.
 
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
43,758
Tokens
This story is in the textbooks and on the history channel and regularly repeated in the media, but is it true? First, no one has ever given a single example of an explicitly racist pitch by Nixon during his long career. One might expect that a racist appeal to the Deep South actually would have to be made, and to be understood as such. Yet, quite evidently none was.

So progressives insist that Nixon made a racist “dog whistle” appeal to Deep South voters. Evidently he spoke to them in a kind of code. Really? Is it plausible that Nixon figured out how to communicate with Deep South racists in a secret language? Do Deep South bigots, like dogs, have some kind of heightened awareness of racial messages — messages that are somehow indecipherable to the media and the rest of the country?

This seems unlikely, but let’s consider the possibility. Progressives insist that Nixon’s appeals to drugs and law and order were coded racist messaging. Yet when Nixon ran for president in 1968 the main issue was the Vietnam War. One popular Republican slogan of the period described the Democrats as the party of “acid, amnesty and abortion.” Clearly there is no suggestion here of race.

Nixon’s references to drugs and law and order in 1968 were quite obviously directed at the antiwar protesters who had just disrupted the Democratic Convention in Chicago. His target was radical activists such as Abbie Hoffman and Bill Ayers. Nixon scorned the hippies, champions of the drug culture such as Timothy Leary, and draft-dodgers who fled to Canada. The vast majority of these people were white.

Nixon had an excellent record on civil rights. He supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He was an avid champion of the desegregation of public schools. The progressive columnist Tom Wicker wrote in the New York Times, “There’s no doubt about it — the Nixon administration accomplished more in 1970 to desegregate Southern school systems than had been done in the 16 previous years or probably since. There’s no doubt either that it was Richard Nixon personally who conceived and led the administration’s desegregation effort.”

Upon his taking office in 1969, Nixon also put into effect America’s first affirmative action program. Dubbed the Philadelphia Plan, it imposed racial goals and timetables on the building trade unions, first in Philadelphia and then elsewhere. Now, would a man seeking to build an electoral base of Deep South white supremacists actually promote the first program to legally discriminate in favor of blacks? This is absurd.

Nixon barely campaigned in the Deep South. His strategy, as outlined by Kevin Phillips in his classic work, “The Emerging Republican Majority,” was to target the Sunbelt, the vast swath of territory stretching from Florida to Nixon’s native California. This included what Phillips terms the Outer or Peripheral South.

Nixon recognized the South was changing. It was becoming more industrialized, with many northerners moving to the Sunbelt. Nixon’s focus, Phillips writes, was on the non-racist, upwardly-mobile, largely urban voters of the Outer or Peripheral South. Nixon won these voters, and he lost the Deep South, which went to Democratic segregationist George Wallace.

And how many racist Dixiecrats did Nixon win for the GOP? Turns out, virtually none. Among the racist Dixiecrats, Strom Thurmond of South Carolina was the sole senator to defect to the Republicans — and he did this long before Nixon’s time. Only one Dixiecrat congressman, Albert Watson of South Carolina, switched to the GOP. The rest, more than 200 Dixiecrat senators, congressmen, governors and high elected officials, all stayed in the Democratic Party.

The progressive notion of a Dixiecrat switch is a myth. Yet it is myth that continues to be promoted, using dubious case examples. Though the late Sens. Jesse Helms of North Carolina and John Tower of Texas and former Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott all switched from the Democratic Party to the GOP, none of these men was a Dixiecrat.

The South, as a whole, became Republican during the 1980s and 1990s. This had nothing to do with Nixon; it was because of Ronald Reagan and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America.” The conservative appeal to patriotism, anti-communism, free markets, pro-life and Christianity had far more to do with the South’s movement into the GOP camp than anything related to race.

Yet the myth of Nixon’s Southern Strategy endures — not because it’s true, but because it conveniently serves to exculpate the crimes of the Democratic Party. Somehow the party that promoted slavery, segregation, Jim Crow and racial terrorism gets to wipe its slate clean by pretending that, with Nixon’s connivance, the Republicans stole all their racists. It’s time we recognize this excuse for what it is: one more Democratic big lie.

Great article Trends. Enjoyed reading that.
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
85,699
Tokens

New member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
67
Tokens
Lee Atwater

Former Chair of the Republican National Committee
Harvey LeRoy "Lee" Atwater was an American political consultant and strategist for the Republican Party. He was an adviser to US presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush and chairman of the Republican National Committee. Atwater aroused controversy through his aggressive campaign tactics.

May have started with Nixon, but Reagan took the
Southern Strategy to a new level.


[SUB][/SUB]
 

New member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
67
Tokens
This story is in the textbooks and on the history channel and regularly repeated in the media, but is it true? First, no one has ever given a single example of an explicitly racist pitch by Nixon during his long career. One might expect that a racist appeal to the Deep South actually would have to be made, and to be understood as such. Yet, quite evidently none was.

So progressives insist that Nixon made a racist “dog whistle” appeal to Deep South voters. Evidently he spoke to them in a kind of code. Really? Is it plausible that Nixon figured out how to communicate with Deep South racists in a secret language? Do Deep South bigots, like dogs, have some kind of heightened awareness of racial messages — messages that are somehow indecipherable to the media and the rest of the country?

This seems unlikely, but let’s consider the possibility. Progressives insist that Nixon’s appeals to drugs and law and order were coded racist messaging. Yet when Nixon ran for president in 1968 the main issue was the Vietnam War. One popular Republican slogan of the period described the Democrats as the party of “acid, amnesty and abortion.” Clearly there is no suggestion here of race.

Nixon’s references to drugs and law and order in 1968 were quite obviously directed at the antiwar protesters who had just disrupted the Democratic Convention in Chicago. His target was radical activists such as Abbie Hoffman and Bill Ayers. Nixon scorned the hippies, champions of the drug culture such as Timothy Leary, and draft-dodgers who fled to Canada. The vast majority of these people were white.

Nixon had an excellent record on civil rights. He supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He was an avid champion of the desegregation of public schools. The progressive columnist Tom Wicker wrote in the New York Times, “There’s no doubt about it — the Nixon administration accomplished more in 1970 to desegregate Southern school systems than had been done in the 16 previous years or probably since. There’s no doubt either that it was Richard Nixon personally who conceived and led the administration’s desegregation effort.”

Upon his taking office in 1969, Nixon also put into effect America’s first affirmative action program. Dubbed the Philadelphia Plan, it imposed racial goals and timetables on the building trade unions, first in Philadelphia and then elsewhere. Now, would a man seeking to build an electoral base of Deep South white supremacists actually promote the first program to legally discriminate in favor of blacks? This is absurd.

Nixon barely campaigned in the Deep South. His strategy, as outlined by Kevin Phillips in his classic work, “The Emerging Republican Majority,” was to target the Sunbelt, the vast swath of territory stretching from Florida to Nixon’s native California. This included what Phillips terms the Outer or Peripheral South.

Nixon recognized the South was changing. It was becoming more industrialized, with many northerners moving to the Sunbelt. Nixon’s focus, Phillips writes, was on the non-racist, upwardly-mobile, largely urban voters of the Outer or Peripheral South. Nixon won these voters, and he lost the Deep South, which went to Democratic segregationist George Wallace.

And how many racist Dixiecrats did Nixon win for the GOP? Turns out, virtually none. Among the racist Dixiecrats, Strom Thurmond of South Carolina was the sole senator to defect to the Republicans — and he did this long before Nixon’s time. Only one Dixiecrat congressman, Albert Watson of South Carolina, switched to the GOP. The rest, more than 200 Dixiecrat senators, congressmen, governors and high elected officials, all stayed in the Democratic Party.

The progressive notion of a Dixiecrat switch is a myth. Yet it is myth that continues to be promoted, using dubious case examples. Though the late Sens. Jesse Helms of North Carolina and John Tower of Texas and former Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott all switched from the Democratic Party to the GOP, none of these men was a Dixiecrat.

The South, as a whole, became Republican during the 1980s and 1990s. This had nothing to do with Nixon; it was because of Ronald Reagan and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America.” The conservative appeal to patriotism, anti-communism, free markets, pro-life and Christianity had far more to do with the South’s movement into the GOP camp than anything related to race.

Yet the myth of Nixon’s Southern Strategy endures — not because it’s true, but because it conveniently serves to exculpate the crimes of the Democratic Party. Somehow the party that promoted slavery, segregation, Jim Crow and racial terrorism gets to wipe its slate clean by pretending that, with Nixon’s connivance, the Republicans stole all their racists. It’s time we recognize this excuse for what it is: one more Democratic big lie.


Has there ever been a bigger [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]partisan hack than [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]Dinesh D'Souza, guy is a total [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]propagandist. Nice spin job but you can't take this garbage [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]seriously?

Now wonder you didn't give a link.

[/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
Dinesh Joseph D'Souza is an Indian-born conservative political commentator, author, filmmaker, and conspiracy theorist, often described as a far right provocateur by media. sources.
 

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
12,457
Tokens
Has there ever been a bigger [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]partisan hack than [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]Dinesh D'Souza, guy is a total [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]propagandist. Nice spin job but you can't take this garbage [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]seriously?

Now wonder you didn't give a link.

[/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
Dinesh Joseph D'Souza is an Indian-born conservative political commentator, author, filmmaker, and conspiracy theorist, often described as a far right provocateur by media. sources.

So... like he said... you cant refute the message, so you attack him, the messenger?

Can you refute what he stated in his article?
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
85,699
Tokens
I don't like Democrats anymore than you do. Just not stupid enough to believe that Republicans are any better.

Lower taxes and fewer regulations certainly are better than higher taxes and larger government

Most career Republicans are not much better than more centrist Democrats, but all Republicans are better that race baiting higher taxing socialists

I will take the extreme right, libertarism, over the far left, socialism, every time

Stated differently, larger government and personal freedoms are incompatible






And Trump does not govern like a career politician, which is why it's so easy for all of them to unite against him
 

New member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
67
Tokens
Lower taxes and fewer regulations certainly are better than higher taxes and larger government

Most career Republicans are not much better than more centrist Democrats, but all Republicans are better that race baiting higher taxing socialists

I will take the extreme right, libertarism, over the far left, socialism, every time

Stated differently, larger government and personal freedoms are incompatible






And Trump does not govern like a career politician, which is why it's so easy for all of them to unite against him

I think it depends on who controls the government, tax's on who, & what regulations your talking about.

Both parties are in the pockets of the rich. We live in an [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]oligarchy that is headed to a [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]neo feudalism or [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]fascism.

Be careful taking the extreme side of anything, you may just get what you wish for.

The powers that be love Trump, he's given them more than what they ask for. [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
 

New member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
67
Tokens
So... like he said... you cant refute the message, so you attack him, the messenger?

Can you refute what he stated in his article?

D'Souza is a sellout shill, your not doing yourself any favors listening to the guy. But he is telling you what you want to hear. Go with you're Gods if you must.
 

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
I think it depends on who controls the government, tax's on who, & what regulations your talking about.

Both parties are in the pockets of the rich. We live in an oligarchy that is headed to a neo feudalism or fascism.

Be careful taking the extreme side of anything, you may just get what you wish for.

The powers that be love Trump, he's given them more than what they ask for.

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]Much like you I think both parties suck. One just a hole hell of a lot more so than the other.

You say we're headed toward neo feudalism, I say we've always been there. The adage money walks
and bullshit talks is true, always has been, always will be.

The rich don't play by the same rules as us peons. Having said that I really don't have a problem
with that. If you work your ass off and accumulate vast wealth you deserve the benefits.

What I have a problem with is when the wealthy try to use our money to benefit the lazy among us.

That's why I detest liberals and all they stand for. Now all Democrats are not liberal but all
liberals are democrats. So if I have to pick a party the Republicans are the lesser of 2 evils.

And anyone who tells you that you can always be a member of the Green Party or Libertarian Party or
American Independent Party or Peace and Freedom Party is a fool because that is who makes up those
parties.

It's either Republican or Democrat there is no alternative. One party doesn't want to live in your
basement the other does and it wants you to feed them too.
[/FONT]
 

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
12,457
Tokens
D'Souza is a sellout shill, your not doing yourself any favors listening to the guy. But he is telling you what you want to hear. Go with you're Gods if you must.

So, can you name all of the Racist democrats who switched parties during the "Southern Strategy"?... And what Racist speeches did Nixon give during his campaign during the "Southern Strategy" ?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,106,900
Messages
13,439,376
Members
99,341
Latest member
inac
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com