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

    45,971
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    TankParrish83
    Newest Member
    TankParrish83
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Will probably be released by the Democrats come September.  Sound familiar?
    • Sure.  You reassign an employee and they leave voluntarily instead of being fired and being open to litigation.  The outcome is the same, but you are making my point.  The superintendent and AD and principal are all empowered to make personnel decisions.  Instead of accepting the decision made, you talk about lawyering up, no one else was reprimanded, railroad job.  I am old enough to remember when high school sports taught life lessons...accountability being chief among them.
    • I know absolutely nothing about the situation, but I do know head coaches of sports other than the AD have actual teaching assignments, and I know from my wife having worked in the sped department of multiple schools that it’s not uncommon at all for coaches to shirk those duties.  It could very well be that this was the case at BC.  Or not, I don’t know.  Just bringing this up to point out the fact that, although many coaches only want to worry about coaching, they generally have several other responsibilities at the school.  some of them neglect or ignore these duties entirely.  If he’s been written up for other issues before, it’s a dumb argument to say “he was punished for this and others were not”.  If he had a pile of write ups in his file and they did not then it makes sense that the punishments were different.  
    • He wasn’t fired, he was reassigned and people get reassigned all the time. If he was actually fired, then you would have a point, but he wasn’t fired. Based on the information presented here no way this would stand if they fired him and he lawyered up. 
    • I heard the assistant was going to get this job and assume it was referring to the old Vidor coach, Nate Smith.  I always thought he did more with less at Vidor and can't help but think he shares some responsibility in Vidor's recent success. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...