Jump to content

GOP Rep. Gohmert Introduces Resolution To Ban Democratic Party!


Reagan

Recommended Posts

Look at the political map From the 60s mostly all states where democratic ( I hear people use the term my dad’s democratics party... ok Now look at the political map mostly all those states are republican states.. did these people stop being racist in 50/60s years or did they find a new banner to hide under... 

Serious question 

Serious answers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Cuz everyone on here realizes that BOTH sides of the aisle have been and will continue to be self-serving POS’s, right? None of them could give a rat’s ass about any of our well-being. Too much money in politics to be made for us to begin being a thought in a politician’s mind. Term limits anyone? Even the best and the brightest will be turned by greed. You are NOTHING to them. Once you read this, start over and read it again, please. 

Agreed, majority of them are attorneys so that kinda explains a lot. 😁 There’s no doubt they’re self serving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Realville said:

 

Republicans passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Democrats Opposed It.

 

 

 

Your statement. 65% vote to pass the bill isn’t opposing. The bill came about through JFK, a Democrat. The bill was signed by Lyndon, a democrat. This was near the end of the transition. Lots of conservatives were still loyal to the Democratic Party at this point. Everything was mixed up which is why MLK was a independent and I am to this day even though most conservatives vote republican now 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Reagan said:

"Republicans passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Democrats Opposed It."

It passed because the majority of the votes came from Republicans!  Do your homework!

It was passed by democrats. I did my homework. You can’t deceive me. Try that with someone else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Look at the political map From the 60s mostly all states where democratic ( I hear people use the term my dad’s democratics party... ok Now look at the political map mostly all those states are republican states.. did these people stop being racist in 50/60s years or did they find a new banner to his under... 

Serious question 

Serious answers

They know unless they’re plain stupid. Most aren’t stupid they’re just trying to be deceptive. Yet most of them claim to be Christians. Smh 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

They know unless they’re plain stupid. Most aren’t stupid they’re just trying to be deceptive. Yet most of them claim to be Christians. Smh 

I don’t think I’ve seen one post about Christianity on this thread. “No amount of evidence will ever convince an idiot.” Mark Twain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Look at the political map From the 60s mostly all states where democratic ( I hear people use the term my dad’s democratics party... ok Now look at the political map mostly all those states are republican states.. did these people stop being racist in 50/60s years or did they find a new banner to his under... 

Serious question 

Serious answers

Serious answer: I think everyone is racist by today’s standards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Look at the political map From the 60s mostly all states where democratic ( I hear people use the term my dad’s democratics party... ok Now look at the political map mostly all those states are republican states.. did these people stop being racist in 50/60s years or did they find a new banner to his under... 

Serious question 

Serious answers

I believe that term was used in conjunction with the Democrats have always claimed to be for the working man. As you can see today they are not. I never took that phrase having anything to do with race but I don’t look at everything in a racial lens. Smashmouth I think your right!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Realville said:

I believe that term was used in conjunction with the Democrats have always claimed to be for the working man. As you can see today they are not. I never took that phrase having anything to do with race but I don’t look at everything in a racial lens. Smashmouth I think your right!

 

 

 

No one has answer my question. A random statement is not answering my question. I asked a specific question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PAMFAM10 said:

No one has answer my question. A random statement is not answering my question. I asked a specific question.

I really have no interest in answering your questions when I never get an answer from you on why you support the Democrats...and please don't throw out that you have no affiliation with the Democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

I really have no interest in answering your questions when I never get an answer from you on why you support the Democrats...and please don't throw out that you have no affiliation with the Democrats.

Why do you support gay marriage and don’t tell me you have no affiliation..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Realville said:

Serious Answer: It sounds like the Republicans have eradicated a lot of The  Old Southern Democratic  Racist. Glad to see them go.

That’s what you believed happened generations of hate and racism gone in 50 years.

 Thanks for answering 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Look at the political map From the 60s mostly all states where democratic ( I hear people use the term my dad’s democratics party... ok Now look at the political map mostly all those states are republican states.. did these people stop being racist in 50/60s years or did they find a new banner to hide under... 

Serious question 

Serious answers

All of them were then and now racists by today’s standards. You and me too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...