What Causes Poor Uneducated White People To Vote Republican?

gop

According to a recent article by Quiet Mike, “Republicans like to say they are all about responsibility.” Then they turn around and support things like the SCOTUS decision in favor of Hobby Lobby, which takes personal responsibility away from citizens and places it in the hands of the corporation.

Their politicians lied to engage our country in a war justified by a search for nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. Now they are trying to blame the entire Iraq war on President Obama.

The Republicans advocate cutting food stamps, unemployment, education, and health care – all while cutting taxes for the wealthy. The GOP has a long history of demonizing poor people. The relatively new Tea Party crowd and the Libertarians have the reigning attitude of “go fend for yourself” when it comes to providing any type of assistance to the poor.

If You’re Poor, You’re Just Lazy

Republicans consistently garner a large chunk of their votes from poor, white, uneducated voters. Why? What causes poor uneducated white people to vote Republican?

Some of it may be attributed to the many gerrymandered districts. Some is due to the active voter suppression tactics the GOP has been employing not only in the present but historically as well. But those are not the only reasons for this trend.

Paul Weyrich has been labeled as one of the founding fathers of the modern conservative movement. Weyrich often proclaims that he doesn’t want people to vote. It is his contention that the fewer people who vote, the better the GOP chances are of winning elections. In this writer’s view, some of this desire to limit voting is due to racism.

What is even more striking is that we have seen where this behavior by the uneducated, low-income white voter has worked against their best interest. Sadly, this seems to be the norm. This reality is what makes this whole topic puzzling. A quick example is to view North Carolina where predominantly low-income voters have loaded up the legislature with one of the most radical right-wing factions of government in the country. What did they get in return? A tax increase.

This political reality did not spring up overnight. What we are seeing is the aggravated side effects of the decades-long Southern Strategy.

What is the Southern Strategy?

AtwTER

Lee Atwater

In American politics, the Southern Strategy refers to a Republican Party strategy to gain political support for certain candidates “in the southern United States by appealing to racism against African Americans.” Lee Atwater reintroduced this political tactic in the early 1980s, refining it from its origins in the 1960s and bringing it into the current political scene.

Let’s not pull any punches here. The Southern Strategy’s main purpose was to transform the south from blue states to red states by invoking the reality of institutional racism. This transformation is one of the most significant in American history. It is also one of the main factors that make modern politics what it is today. However, this transformation remains a mystery to most people. People did not just wake up one day and start voting for Republicans in the south. There had to be a plan.

The Rise Of The Southern Middle Class In The South

Changing demographics played a role in this strategy. With most industrialization and factories locating in the northern states, many black families left the south to relocate to the north. All the while, the white middle class was growing in the south. With this migration of blacks to the north, many whites in northern states migrated down south. This migration lowered the black population in the south and increased the white population. This change in demographics alone set the table for a racist political strategy to take root.

Many of the whites that moved from the north were of a different mindset than that of the traditional southerner. Around this time, late 1960s and into the early 1970s, the economics of the south improved, and this change in demographics and economy gave the south much more power politically than it had before this transformation. These new southern implants from the north were not as preoccupied with the racial issues as the traditional southerner. The Civil War was not an issue for these new southern citizens.

These northern implants to the south were a different brand of Republican. More moderate and centered politically than the far right and radical southern Republicans. They were agreeable to the issues of lower taxes, individual freedoms, and less government regulation. This new dynamic created a different electorate in the south. This change in the south raised eyebrows with the Republican Party elites and gave rise to opportunity for a minority party to garner a foothold in this region of the country.

These changing demographics also ushered in non-traditional type industries that started locating in the south. Industries like communications and high-tech industries settled into the Research Triangle in North Carolina. With these changes also came more urbanization in the south. Cities like Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston experienced phenomenal growth. All of these factors served to change the political landscape in the south.

The most dramatic change on the political front was the push by the national Democratic Party for the rights of African-American citizens. Prior to this movement, the Democratic Party had not been particularly favorable of civil rights for blacks. For example, Franklin Roosevelt (FDR) failed to endorse anti-lynching legislation. FDR did not support this legislation in fear that he would antagonize the southern members of the house and senate who would not pass other legislation he deemed more important.

Starting in the late 1940s the Democratic Party began to adopt civil rights legislation. President Truman integrated the military after World War II. The very first time civil rights legislation became a part of any political party’s platform was by the Democrats in 1948. This eventually led to the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1968.

The Democratic Party’s association with civil rights was gradual. Change started in the 1940s but was largely interrupted in the 1950s under a Republican president.

SCOTUS delivered the Brown v.Board of Education decision in 1954, beginning the forced integration of public schools. All the civil unrest that sprang up from the integration was blamed on the Republican president by angry white bigots in the region.

To traditional whites from the south, these changes represented the old horror stories of the Reconstruction Era that followed the Civil War. In the 1960s, with the changing of the political guard in Washington to John F. Kennedy and later Lyndon Johnson who made a public commitment and contract with the American people on civil rights, there was no turning back.

While many presidential historians don’t give President Johnson high marks on being a principled politician, it is without question that his efforts are the main reason we have civil rights for all minorities in this country today. It was Johnson who championed the coalitions. He was fully aware that this would spell doom for the Democratic Party in the south, but he went forward with it because he thought it was the right thing to do.

This change and political posturing in the 1940s and again in the 1960s created a real crisis for the party in the south. Many southern Democrats became angry with the party over this legislation. One of the common quotes bandied about in those days was, “We did not leave the party, the party left us,” which represented the mindset of many southern Democrats at that time.

The attitude was that the Democratic Party they knew and loved had changed. In response to this, the hierarchy in the Republican Party saw an opportunity. In fairness, it must be mentioned that unlike the Republican Party of today, moderation was the order in the party, and Eisenhower sending in troops to restore order in the late 1950s is a great example.

The Changing Times Of The Political South

With this new development and the emergence of the Dixiecrat wing of the Democratic Party being shunned, there were many in the Republican Party who felt that moderation should step aside to a more right-wing conservative approach. The Dixiecrats represented a huge block of votes that the Republican elites needed to implement their mantra of less government regulation and lower taxes.

With the changing dynamics taking place in the south, the Republicans were salivating for these new voters. In 1964, the Republicans nominated Barry Goldwater as their presidential candidate. Goldwater was considered a right-wing conservative, which caused some strife within the more moderate wing of the party. Their fears seemed to be realized when Goldwater went down in defeat. After that, the party began to focus more and more on social and religious issues.

By the time the 1968 elections rolled around, the Republicans had a plan which was the early stages of what became known as the Southern Strategy. The Nixon campaign walked a fine line trying not to be overtly racist, but his campaign did use soft-sell language that sent a subtle message to southern voters: “If you are not happy with the civil rights laws we are your solution.”

The Wedge Issues

proIssues like forced busing, which drove a wedge between some traditional southern Democrats and the Democratic Party, allowed opportunities for the Republican Party to capitalize on. The Republican Party used the term “forced busing” because it was not overtly racist, but it did function as a code to incite the racist whites of the south.

Affirmative action was also a wedge issue in the Untied States at that time. It was used effectively by the Republicans to weaken the southern Democratic coalition. In practice, this drove a wedge between blacks and Jews. Up to this point, most Jews had been sympathetic to civil rights legislation. However, affirmative action reminded many Jews of the days of quotas and created a division of viewpoints within the Jewish community. For the Jew, quotas meant only a certain number could take place in jobs, schools, and so forth.

There were many of these wedge-type issues whose language was not overtly racist but were code for racists. The biggest wedge issue in American political history has been abortion.

Nixon was in favor of civil rights, but he knew that to win the south he had to play the part and be disingenuous. This tactic worked very well for Nixon. In essence, Nixon fooled a huge block of poor uneducated white voters in the south to gain the win. Some say he would have swept the south had it not been for third party racist George Wallace. This was, in effect, the origin of the Southern Strategy for the Republican Party.

The Transformation Of The South Was Decades In The Making

Even though southerners had voted for a Republican president in the 1950s and with Nixon in the late 1960s, the Democrats continued to dominate in local, state, house, and senate elections. That transformation has taken decades and was a two-staged process. A top-down process. This reality has very important implications regarding party identification. The distribution of voters between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents is different in the south. Historically, southern Republican voters in the 1980s were more moderate. The conservative southern voter tended to identify as Independent. These Independent voters tended to be the old Dixiecrat voters, the George Wallace crowd.

It was these racist, old southern Democrats who were the last to transform themselves into card-carrying Republicans. This has set up a dynamic in the south that has made politics very distinct, but also has very important implications for the rest of the country.

Primary elections determine who will be nominated to run in the general elections. What we have learned is that people who vote in the primaries are generally the most passionate about the issues of the day and, more importantly, most loyal to the party of their choice. These voters are quite different than people who just vote in the general elections. What has transpired from this difference is that candidates that do well in the primary elections don’t always fare as well in the general elections. This is paramount for a minority party like the Republicans. The primaries tend to be way more important to them than to the Democrats.

In the Democratic Party most candidates from the south tend to be in step with the national Democrats as a whole, which is basically the more liberal wing of the party. Moreover, because of the civil rights legislation and the Democrat’s position on many of the wedge issues, Democrats have overwhelmingly garnered the black, Hispanic, and feminist vote in the country. This reality has led to very successful general election outcomes for the Democratic Party over the years. In order to be successful, a political candidate must get the support of the party loyalists, and must also attract what has become known as the swing voter. Getting the support of these swing voters has become an issue for Democrats in the south. On the other hand, in the Republican primaries, appealing to the loyalist base is pretty much a given, but attracting the swing voter is more difficult.

A distinct trait in the south to this very day is that the swing voters tend to be the old Dixiecrat voters. The now-aging George Wallace crowd has become the new racist Tea Party crowd. The growing number of white supremacist anti-government groups are now the swing voters in the south. The reality of creating unconstitutional gerrymandered voting districts by implementing illegal voter suppression laws has made the primaries vital in the transformation of power in the south.

Gerrymandering Has Created Republican ‘Safe Zones’

Changes in district boundaries have made it increasingly hard for Democrats to win general elections in the south. These tactics and their success have placed the Democrats at a huge disadvantage. This all started in the 1970s and have become the standard operating procedure in the region.

This strategy of mobilizing the core supporters has intersected with the issue of race in a startling way. The Republican Party commitment to the Southern Strategy basically meant that the party was writing off the black vote. The party decided they would have to find a way to win without the black vote.

The Republican Party had to win more of the white vote in the south. A startling statistic used in Republican campaigns is called “white votes needed.” What has created a huge problem for the Republicans in modern day politics is the upswing in political participation by blacks, Hispanics and women. This new reality has created a situation where the Republicans now need to win what is called a super-majority of the white vote.

The Republicans need to get no less than 60 percent of the white vote. In this writer’s view, getting 60 percent of white people to agree on anything is almost impossible. So, the Republicans decided to use the one issue that they felt could galvanize the electorate to their side – race.

The thinking is that most white southerners harbor some form of prejudice towards blacks. This reality is more prevalent than in the poor white uneducated population of the south than anywhere else. Poor whites have a desire to feel superior to something or somebody – blacks and now Hispanics fill that need.

This political strategy is unfortunate. It has created a huge divide in our country. What is really tragic is the Republican Party is stuck with this strategy because to abandon it would amount to political suicide. This approach does not fare well for the Democratic Party unless we, as liberals, can champion a cause of enlightenment and education.

Voter participation is the key to change. The Republicans want you to be discouraged by the process. They want you to surrender to their desire. If you’re not going to vote Republican, they are of the opinion that you should not be allowed to vote at all.

The Democrats face many disadvantages in the south. To get the issues of gridlock and obstruction from our governess, we must not be idle observers. I think Pastor William Barbour, who hails from my hometown of Goldsboro, North Carolina said it best.

rev barber

 



About Johnny Hill

Johnny Hill is a freelance writer who has extensive experience in writing for sales, marketing and advertising. He has a background in radio broadcasting which is showcased in the music mixes he creates for his Facebook page, "One Nation Under the Groove." Johnny has been an avid and life long student of politics . He is the founder of the House of Public Discourse Political Organization, which he created as a platform for his progressive liberal ideology. You can follow Johnny on Twitter, @hillj60.

Connect

View all Posts Visit Website

Comments

  1. Buck Houston says:

    Are you people the Onion or just acting like a Media Matters’ astophysicist?

    1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

      Read “Deer Hunting for Jesus” for a more in depth analysis of how the demagogues of the religious right use ignorance and fear to remain in power.

      1. Buck Houston says:

        Or, how far and wide your peoples’ group think authorities will go to implant new comic book villains in the mind of the American ignorant, from the free world frame of reference.

        1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

          Never mind, you don’t have to read the book, you’re living it.

          1. Buck Houston says:

            Lick the lies of your authorities off their toilets and grin!

            Oh! You people are just something.

            1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              The writer is an Anthropologist that spent several years studying the phenomenon. You can make crazy suppositions all you like, but the data is pretty conclusive.

              Of course if you can come up with some proof that the author has some hidden agenda, or falsified the data by all means present it. Otherwise your argument is devoid of any significance.

            2. Rhonda Thissen says:

              Or, he’s just a troll.

            3. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Trolls are fun, Schools over and i’m bored.

            4. Donise says:

              People have time to engage in such banter. Intellectual idiot I think. My time is too valuable! Death to all trolls!

            5. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Also this “You people”
              Is an overgeneralization, since you don’t have a clue who my people are.

            6. Buck Houston says:

              Consider it a compliment.

            7. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You mean logical fallacy.

            8. Buck Houston says:

              That we can agree. In fact, the very apex of irony. A genetic structured to become the very problem it sets out to solve. The imaginary number in a complex mathematics, always 180 out of phase. A convolution of a convolution of pure idiosyncratic inanity, presented as truth.

              A bound soul. A resentment wrapped inside a rationalization.

              “you people”

            9. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You are an awesome example of exactly what the article is talking about. Do you mind If I copy this thread for my political sociology class?

            10. Buck Houston says:

              You could “follow me” or I would gladly appear in a GoToMeeting, video and all.

              I would gladly clear the fog of rationalization you people comfort yourselves in.

            11. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Then why don’t we try to have a meaningful discussion? I am curious to hear why you think liberals are so brainwashed and victims of authoritarian propaganda?

              I don’t mean to strawman your position, but this is the impression I get based on your comments.

            12. Buck Houston says:

              I use extreme language to get your attention -.

              I know you’re a smart person, perhaps smarter than me. I know you know anthropology very well.

              But I bet a lot of your thinking is based upon a world of government funding. May I ask if I am wrong?

            13. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “But I bet a lot of your thinking is based upon a world of government funding.”

              My thinking is based on a lifetime of reading and education.

            14. Buck Houston says:

              And mine a lifetime in physics both for government and industry. Plus a decade as an entrepreneur. Good luck to you.

            15. Mary Preston says:

              Your a little old to have just 10 years as an entrepreneur. A late bloomer maybe? Or did you finally inherit mommy and daddys money? So what you say is you got yours , so screw everyone else. Typical republican. Your compassion for the poor is only outdone by your imaginary education. Using big words does not help hide your very small heart.

        2. joshuabayerjazz says:

          Mr. Houston’s intense over-the-top exercise in thesaurus-usin’ is hilarious. ‘His people’ are trying really hard to make up for the obvious deficiencies illustrated in the spot-on article. Makes total sense – can’t blame them. Once you go all in with hate for just about everything that forwards society, you need to double down hard. It’s tough to admit that your entire belief system is bullsh*t and in essence damages society, your loved ones – everybody.

          1. Buck Houston says:

            “It’s tough to admit that your entire belief system is bullsh*t and in essence damages society, your loved ones – everybody.”

            Never a truer phrase emanated from a stock comic book mind of the left.

            TY – you made my day.

          2. Buck Houston says:

            Prune that plethora of petty progressive pedantry for this trailer park bible toten six pack wife beatin’ 1 percentile golden spoon six pack high frequency tradin war mongering uneducated clingin to my bible baggin racist please.

        3. OrygunDux says:

          I got into a “discussion” with a person the other day that tried to use large words the same way you do. Over the course of eight replies back and forth he NEVER answered the question. If it makes you feel like an adult to try and bully people by using a thesaurus to scramble the words to make it seem like your intelligent so be it. In this case you never refer to the article or try to use a FACT to uphold your words. You babble well sir!

          1. Buck Houston says:

            “Discussion?” Show me anywhere where you people have a discussion that’s not identical to a hyena-herd witch hunt.

            1. OrygunDux says:

              Please see the attached. They definitely apply to you. Good Bye.

      2. Buck Houston says:

        Ask yourself what the opposite of fear is. Is it not courage?

        Is courage not faith?

        So when you describe an axis of fear, the educated see your peoples’ group-think goblins implanted by your group-think authoritarians – projected 1:1 with the way you formulate the problem.

        I’m glad you’re learning about logical fallacies.

        .

        1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

          “Ask yourself what the opposite of fear is. Is it not courage?”

          I view courage as doing the right thing in spite of fear, so they are not opposites but part of a dialectic, one cannot exist without the other.

          I have little use for faith, I prefer facts.

          Faith is what is used to rile up the masses you speak of. To focus their anger on things that are not really at fault for their problems. Like the rage against equal rights, promoted by the church.

          ” the educated see your peoples’ group-think goblins”

          WTF is a group think goblin? I have read hundreds of academic journals and have never seen this reference before. I’m assuming “the educated” implies academia.

          “I’m glad you’re learning about logical fallacies.”

          Too bad you haven’t yet, your comments are rife with them.

          1. Buck Houston says:

            Will the sun rise tomorrow?

            1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Will the sun rise tomorrow? Of course, you don’t fear it won’t.

              That’s faith.”

              No its based on evidence, which is based on years of observation. how many days has the sun not risen. Zero

              “My point? Look at the definition of your variables with that in mind and also include the language you used to describe faith to me.”

              I never described faith, I illustrated what it is used for.

              If you want a definition: Belief in things hoped for, yet remain unseen. That was my pastors definition anyway.

              ” You’ve created a “rationalization” not a “fact”.”

              I created nothing, I shared that I have little use for faith, and use evidence based on observations (what i call facts) to make my decisions.

              “I can feel the anger toward your boogeymen in your reply. As a scientist that ought to be a red flag.”

              Do you mean to say you think I’m angry? That makes much more sense than claiming to “feel” anything.

              What is my boogeyman? Is there an imaginary monster in my closet now?

              “Everyone has fear. Fear is real. Fear is also, debilitating.”

              Yes it’s why the weak minded turn to faith.

              “When we have faith, then we believe. Belief may be a law of physics.”

              What law is that?

              “I hope you see where I am going. So there’s other ways to think about
              what your doing. Important ways – especially when you are using the
              results or measurements to judge others as you have.”

              I don’t see where you’re going, but I agree that there are many way to think about a situation.

            2. Buck Houston says:

              You’re clueless.

              You may be studying anthropology, but I doubt you’ve had any mathematics or physics of any substance.

              You are angry, but I think life needs to humiliate you before you see what false pride has done to you.

              You profess to know fact and evidence. Show the world how you measure “fear”. What are the observables?

              Look, you’re an amateur. A Media Matters’ astrophysicist.

            3. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “You’re clueless.”

              I systematically tear your weak arguments apart, so you resort to personal attacks, why am I not surprised.

              “You may be studying anthropology, but I doubt you’ve had any mathematics or physics of any substance.”

              First go round at college was for an engineering degree, so wrong again.

              “You are angry,”

              Supposition and likely projection

              “You profess to know fact and evidence. Show the world how you measure “fear”. What are the observables?”

              How is this relevant? Emotional responses are nearly imposable to measure, since they vary by individual and by culture.

              ” A Media Matters’ astrophysicist.”

              Your opinion of me means little, since you have no idea who I am.

            4. Buck Houston says:

              You’re a government stipend academic. I was there 30 years ago. Good luck to you.

            5. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Actually I financed my own return to school. You should give up on being a psychic.

  2. raymanx says:

    You can’t even spell the headline correctly. What causes poor uneducated black people “to” vote Democrat?

    1. ironman2819 says:

      Actually the omission of the word “to” within a sentence is not an issue of spelling as much as it is an issue of proper sentence structure and or editing.

      You can’t even critique an article properly.

      1. Wally Hodges says:

        roflmfao

      2. raymanx says:

        Typical liberal. Critique this: You are a hypocrite.

        1. Jake Lewis says:

          ironman2819 is technically correct.

          1. Jimmy Howard says:

            the best kind of correct

        2. ironman2819 says:

          It is an assumption based on your blind hatred and ignorance of someone who doesn’t think exactly like you. A statement made by an intolerant fool.

          1. Wally Hodges says:

            Raymanx got smacked the F^&K DOWN!!!!! lmao

          2. Gman says:

            … says the hypocrite who no doubt calls black Conservatives “Uncle Tom”, “sellout”, “buffoon”, “coon”, etc.

            1. ironman2819 says:

              No… I call Black Conservatives “new millionaires” because the only black people I know who are conservatives are rich.

              You on the other hand… buffoon seems fitting enough.

            2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You’re a racist too? why am i not surprised?

            3. Gman says:

              I call out Ironman with the supposition that he, like most other white liberals, believes it is perfectly okay to call black people racist epithets as long as that black man or woman is not liberal. Your conclusion: I am the racist. Gotchya.

            4. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              No, you used a discussion board to use a bunch of racial epitaphs yourself. You can rationalize your behavior all day long, but it’s still a behavior.

            5. Gman says:

              Epitaph? Did someone die?

              Each of those EPITHETS are direct quotes from prominent Democrats or prominent people that openly support the Democrat Party.

        3. suburbancuurmudgeon says:

          Hypocrite? How?

        4. Cynthia Brown Christ says:

          You have no idea what the political idealogy of the person making that comment is.

          People with low IQ’s think that any belief not shrad by them is automatically an evil one – and the liberal are who they think is evil so they have this faulty lack of logic that makes them respond with some stupid liberal put down.

        5. blackjackbouvier says:

          Whoopsie, conservative. The headline is about voting Republican – if you cannot read – you are the problem 😉

        6. Steven Nein says:

          Critique this: Up yours!

          1. raymanx says:

            It’s already up yours. I’ll watch from here.

    2. julianenglish says:

      This is the internet, not the New York Times circa 1970. It is expected to have a fair amount of slippage due to the constraints of the form. Do you have any substantive criticism of the essay?

      1. Gman says:

        You’re giving the New York Times way too much credit.

    3. Steven Nein says:

      Let’s get this correct, “to vote REPUBLICAN”!

  3. Greg says:

    Isn’t “The rise of southern middle class in the south” redundant?

  4. Todd SympathyforThedevil Panco says:

    No one who needs this will have the attention span to read it.

    1. frankly2 says:

      Who needs it?

    2. Kenneth James Abbott says:

      Nobody who “needs it” as in doesn’t believe this collection of blatant, rather silly slander, will have the gullibility to believe it.

      This is just mental masturbation for liberals who want to keep the hate stoked up.

      1. zobva says:

        Great example of the “uneducated Republican” that the article is talking about. Thanks for using yourself as an illustration.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          Not buying into blatantly false conspiracies doesn’t make me “uneducated.”

          1. matureamerican says:

            No. Your complete stupidity does, though.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Hopefully you’ll forgive me if I don’t take your word for it, as I don’t believe that refusing to accept random slander is evidence of “complete stupidity.”

            2. Larry Asher says:

              But I bet you support Benghazi, Jade 15, Fema camps, Ebola, Sharia law, Death camps or any of the other hundreds of other conspiracy theories pumped out over the past several years.

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Jade 15 is a real operation, which you can look up. Benghazi, likewise, was a real event. There really are FEMA camps during emergencies, Ebola is a real disease… Just which of these are conspiracy theories?

            4. vivian greer says:

              you really can’t win with these people kenneth. if you believe in any of the things you listed above, you’re a paranoid conspiracy theorist, and if you don’t you’re uneducated and ignorant, or better yet, just plain evil.

            5. Mr. Outer Limits says:

              Yes. You can’t “win” with intelligent people when you’re that stupid. And you sure can’t win when you just have right wing talking points and lies, while we have the actual truth and facts. That would be why you and Kenneth are losers.

            6. Jessie Henson Long says:

              TROLL

            7. Riddle_the_Riddler says:

              Wow! That hurt!

            8. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -while we have the actual truth and facts.-
              Fortunately, you have nothing of the sort. That’s why you’re busy playing the race-card and tossing out ad hominems instead.

            9. martin woyzeck says:

              Where’s your truth and facts kenny.
              Cuz alexjones told you, or jesseventura, mikeadams,ron paul, the kockbros, or any of those
              nazi rightwingers

            10. Buck Shot says:

              I definitely troll liberals only. They get so butt hurt with their sissy city slicker social awareness/correctness. It definitely would be a boring world without cooky liberals. You all say some wierd shit.

            11. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              It’s kooky, not cooky. You folks mention butts a lot. Freud would say that you and your ilk are sublimating some tendencies. I know the world would be safer, more enlightened and progressive if not for you folks. Also, it’s spelled weird, not wierd.

            12. Tan Danglesworth says:

              There are plenty of us country liberals left, and we still are smarter than the carpet bagger cons that got into that small space between your ears.

            13. Howie Miles says:

              Why don’t you show us the facts? Don’t post anything from “FOX,not, NEWS”, Bret, Hannity, Rush, or any other RIGHT WING NUT JOB MEDIA source!
              Now get busy! You will find out some things that you won’t like!

            14. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              First, I’ll be happy to skip anything from the sources you name, so long as you skip anything from, say, Liberal America. I give up a lot more than you do, since you’re oinly giving up a bunch of childish ad hominems.

              Meanwhile, here’s a few facts and a little logic–might wanna sit down for this:

              To believein the “Southern Strategy,” we’d have to assume that Nixon, who had spent his entire career fighting against segregation and segregationists, suddenly switched to the opposite side–even though the states of the Deep South rejected him… maybe that’s because he selected Spiro Agnew, who handily whipped the strongly segregationist Democrat Mahoney, but that’s beside the point, since it was probably actually his work in desegregating the trade unions and establishing the first affirmative action system.

              In any case, it would have to assume that the Democrats in the South suddenly switched to the Republican Party (even though the vast majority of their leadership stayed right where they were at), even though the Republican party had been fighting against segregation for decades. Of course, they suddenly turned not-racist back in ’76 when Carter won the South, then racist for four years, then not-racist for 8 years for Biilzebubba, then racist again…

              We would also have to believe that the party of Woodrow Wilson and FDR were closet Republicans just waiting for the right chance to jump ship.

              In other words, we would have to assume and believe a lot of ridiculous bullshit.

            15. Travis Hayes says:

              Are fucking joking? This next bit is from Nixons chieg political strategist, from an interview in the NYT: 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.[1]

              So, please, stop outright lying. There was and is a Southern Strategy.

            16. Yes, but it may have been a survival strategy because the GOP has been on the wrong side of history for awhile now and some of their think-tankers saw the writing on the wall and decided that for the GOP to survive it needed a coalition no matter what the consequence. It is hard for me to imagine Evangelicals siding with Catholics with Godless corporations with fiscal conservatives, with radical Neocons with hate groups, with small government proponents, with Jewish Zionism… and in the process they have alienated the future.

            17. It’s a process. As soon as LBJ signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act he KNEW that the Dems lost the South and by the time Reagan was done, the south was firmly in the hands of the GOP. It has been a problem for the Republican party to have to pander to the old Dixiecrat’s form of hatred. It may have backed them against a wall they might not be able to extract themselves from.

              The GOP is in trouble when you have a Republican/Dixiecrat like Lindsey Graham saying it is better to vote Dem that vote for Trump. He knows Trump is not a real Republican. He is something all together different. He is that hate and fear that will flow to whomever will give it a voice and comfort and the less educated one is the more likely one will go with that flow. I said likely, it is not an absolute.

            18. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -As soon as LBJ signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act he KNEW that the Dems lost the South-

              Because the racists were going to leave the party of segregation and all hop over to the party that fought against it.

              -and by the time Reagan was done, the south was firmly in the hands of the GOP.-

              Except the way the South went for Bill Clinton once Reagan was out of office. When I suggested we turned racist, then not-racist, then racist again, then not-racist again, I was being sarcastic.

              -It has been a problem for the Republican party to have to pander to the old Dixiecrat’s form of hatred.-
              Nope. The old Dixiecrats never voted for the Republican party. We had to wait for them to die out.

              -The GOP is in trouble when you have a Republican/Dixiecrat like Lindsey Graham saying it is better to vote Dem that vote for Trump.-
              Lindsey graham is a dixiecrat now? Graham was 10 years old when the Civil Rights act was passed, and he’s known most for his leftism.

              -He knows Trump is not a real Republican.-
              Lindsey Graham doesn’t get much right–but this is one of those “duh” moments. Of course Trump isn’t a real Republican. He admires Planned Parenthood, supports socialized medicine, thought Obama and Hillary were doing a great job, and thinks it’s great that the government can take whatever it wants to help out its supporters. The man’s a liberal.

            19. Sadly those “sources” are more propaganda than factual news. It’s like believing all is well in Stalingrad Dec 25, 1942.

            20. Buck Shot says:

              How do you know it’s a lie when you fail to observe truth yourself? Just sayin

            21. Mr. Outer Limits says:

              I know deniers have nothing but lies because the facts PROVE that they’re wrong. The facts that I have and I’ve posted. So I have the facts, the science, and the truth on my side, and that’s been PROVEN. You mopes have only proven how wrong you are.

            22. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              Right Wingers don’t need facts, science, data or logic, they have “emotions,” theories and conspiracies.

            23. jim says:

              that is truly funny, you do realize you just spoke completely out your ass. democrats are the politics of emotion. don’t believe me google it. Obama has been feeding on emotions his whole presidency. i am not a republican so i see this a little clearer. take off the rose colored glasses.

            24. Damn dude, you really did swallow the whole load. I know your not a Republican your something else. You dislike Obama above EVERYTHING else. Do you think concerns for climate change and our contribution has no basis in science or we have been rather unconstitutional with Guantanamo…

            25. Theories? They have faith and faith alone will save you.

            26. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              Did Santa bring you a new gun or a toothbrush?

            27. Buck Shot is shooting blanks leave him out, he’s a waste of time.

            28. Buck Shot says:

              Your polish damn Hitler missed one. Where u live I’ll come say that one on one face to face. I’ll make you suck on my big black dingus. Real nice like like your wife did……Bitch

            29. martin woyzeck says:

              Yep, that is correct. Either way you look at it, the entire rightwing i.e. repubs, libertarians, christian right, teacrappers are paranoid ,brainwashed conspiracy theorists, and are uneducated/ignorant, as well as violent, bigoted evil beings.
              You’ve got it correct

            30. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              One of these days, you’ll learn that childish slander is not a substitute for facts.

            31. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Posted by the guy who has yet to post anything resembling a “fact”

            32. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Posted by the guy who proves, yet again, that lies about his opponent are the only resort he has.

            33. Ed Hino says:

              jade helm is an exercise conducted by specal ops in several states to condition the troops to terrain they will be operating on possibly in the m e or eurasia why they have to be fine tuned in shape and ready to go bengazi was cia operation remote cia operations yes the cia operates world wide and what you know about any thing

            34. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Uh…. let’s go with some coherence next time….

            35. martin woyzeck says:

              See you throw back comments like the last one, yet you can’t show evidence of any truth that you say.
              Because you say the words truth and fact, doesn’t mean they are

            36. martin woyzeck says:

              Wrong. Are you for real.
              You’re naming real things.
              You’re not saying the conspiracy theories you nutcase rightwingers have created about them. You really need to get real.
              Benghazi was an event, but the rightwing’s lies about it, are not true.
              And FEMA camps are not used like internment camps, as you paranoid like to believe.
              Wake up ,little sheeple kenny

            37. nevada_geon says:

              How do you type comments with your head planted in your ass?

            38. Buck Shot says:

              I was about to ask you the same!

            39. crude but funny. Triumph the Insult Dog would give you a high-five.

            40. Tom says:

              Are you saying Benghazi is a conspiracy theory? I trust the soldiers who were there not you.

            41. Recoloniser says:

              There is, of course, the alternative possibility that you are not stupid, but plain evil.
              Just sayin’.

            42. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I suppose that’s a possibility for every, Recon–but I don’t believe that refusing to buy into blatant slander makes me evil either.

            43. Nicholas Lussier says:

              The fact that this is a print article and not a spoken report mean that this “blatant slander” is actually “blatant libel” but, the burden of proving these statements to be “libelous” falls on the accuser not the author, so, put up or shut up, as they say. But since it’s been months since you made your accusations and you have yet to post one iota of evidence to support your improper accusation of slander, I doubt you have any proof.

            44. cheeflo says:

              Actually, the burden of proving these statements to be true falls on the author, who is asserting them. All of this is opinion anyway, with just enough fact thrown in to create an appearance of credibility.

              You’re right about slander and libel, but don’t you think you’re just quibbling, rather than addressing the actual comment? The article is simply bullsh!t.

            45. martin woyzeck says:

              What part of the article is bullshit?
              You’re doing the same as kenneth.
              Most of it is opinion, or a viewpoint, the author never said no, which means he wasn’t (and didn’t) state facts, but how he sees it, so that shows kenneth is an idiot, and doesn’t know what slander or conspiracy theories is,
              do you fit in the same category

            46. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -You’re doing the same as kenneth.-
              Posting basic facts that you can’t handle, and which you cover up by spewing tons of childish slander.

            47. martin woyzeck says:

              You keep saying that, but still haven’t proven it’s slander

            48. Michael J. Motta says:

              What is “random slander”? Do you know what “slander” means? I rest my case.

            49. cheeflo says:

              Um, he said “blatant slander,” not “random slander.” Do you know what “blatant” means? I rest my case.

            50. Michael J. Motta says:

              Actually he said both (in different places).

            51. martin woyzeck says:

              Doesn’t matter, it’s obvious kenny is throwing out a lot of words he heard, but doesn’t know what they mean.
              Have you noticed he hasn’t been able to point out what is slanderous?
              Only crying ‘slander’, ‘conspiracy theories’…..nice try

            52. martin woyzeck says:

              Well then kenny, point out what’s slanderous, and prove that it is.
              No, rightwing sources though, as we know they’re all liars

            53. bigdog says:

              Not accepting it doesn’t make it untrue.

            54. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Nope. The fact that it’s dopey bullshit with absolutely no evidence to back it up, in an obvious attempt to play the race card, makes it untrue.

              My refusal to accept it just means that I have a stronger dedication to the truth than you do.

            55. Robert Nelson says:

              That’s how you do it. Call him an idiot, uneducated, stupid racist bigot. That’ll shut that guy up. I mean you have no better argument then that anyway.

            56. martin woyzeck says:

              Rightwingers are not worth an argument.
              They’re both too uneducated to create an intelligent debate, as well as has been filled with lies ,fabrications and conspiracy theories from rightwing media liars.

            57. Robert Nelson says:

              I can tell by your grammar, that you’re so intelligent that not even a liberal could win in an argument with you. If I were you, I would just drop the mic and walk away(very quickly, so you don’t look”stupider” than you already do. Just sayin’.)

            58. Tom Fisher says:

              We are coming for fascist republican scum, we will buy guns and use them just like you fascist traitors want to use them except against fascist republican traitors

            59. Renae C. Olson says:

              Uh, no we won’t.

            60. Blondmyk says:

              Perhaps that’s the problem. We’re bringing books to a gun fight.

            61. They are some aspects of fascism with these people and they have no idea how they are traitors. I hope we don’t have to put these traitor in their place like we did at Appomattox.

            62. Are you doing your bit to sound stupider too?

            63. Buck Shot says:

              Alot like your pathetic sentence structure. Your new name is doo wop!

            64. sammy says:

              Thats all you have? Sad!! Get a life!!

            65. It’s “a lot” not alot. I make typos all the time and my spelling sucks, a lot like you.

            66. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              Not all of them. There are plenty of educated, greedy, racist, powerful Right Wing bigots. They’re the ones that manipulate the poor ones for their own gain.

            67. th0mas says:

              Who manipulates you?

            68. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              I’m not “manipulated.” For one, I’m educated. Secondly, I’m engaged. I know the facts, data and statistics. I base my decisions on sound evidence. Folks on the Right base what they believe on “Fox News,” heresy, conspiracies and things they heard.

            69. Taiji_2 says:

              Not all; but the stupid ones vastly outnumber the intelligent few.

            70. sammy says:

              Sounds like all the hatred and ignorance comes from small minded liberals. Nothing substantive been written by you small minded liberals.. You are perhaps regressive in thought but certainly not progressive. Do You actually repeat these lies you have been taught and have been bamboozled with? Sucks to be you!!!

            71. Howie Miles says:

              When Republicans in our congress are publicly claiming that the government is going broke. And they need to cut social programs to balance the budget. In the mean time they are behind closed doors planning increases to the military budget and tax cuts for the ultra rich! That is what voters call “BAMBOOZLED”:! How do you like me now SAMMY?

            72. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              Don’t forget Republicans never cut Ag or Big Oil subsidies. They also vote for every weapons program and cut out exemptions for their lobbyist pals in Big Tobacco, Pharma, Big Chemical, Big Coal and Big Water. I just wish the knobs that voted for Republicans had to suffer the consequences.

            73. Greta Renee Houston says:

              You. You. You. That is all that you got.

            74. fbear0143 says:

              I guess you think that Thomas Jefferson ws the original “small minded liberal.” He certainly was liberal, but far from small-minded. He is the originator of the philosophies of many modern liberals, AND he was a southerner and a slave holder in his time. Still he was a liberal. That’s why conservatives hate him so. I am proud to claim him as a fine thinker and model for true liberalism. As for you, you wouldn’t recognize real liberalism if it hit you in the ass. The right wink propaganda has so perverted what it really is.

            75. Mike Rocket says:

              Real liberalism, Jeffersonian liberalism if you will, is a thing of the past. Today’s liberal, as evidenced repeatedly in his thread, just likes to shout down dissenting opinion unless of course he can prevent it from being spoken in the first place.

            76. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              What points have your scored? Dazzle us with your arguments, proof and science. Oh, that’s right, you don’t have any.

            77. bobhope71 says:

              If a racist, foulmouthed, narcissistic jackass moron like Trump is getting votes and has the (god, help us!) theoretical possibility to become the president of the US then we can all kiss the world goodbye…
              But that’s what happens when hillbilly intellectual challenged idiots are allowed to vote!

              Yeah… and why not throw in Sara Palin as the minister of defence and watch the world go up in flames…

              Where do the republican find these soggybrained fools???

            78. bill says:

              People like you that think that everyone BUT you is stupid are too blinded by hate to ever see reality.

            79. Mike Rocket says:

              Which party do think would put up the bigger fight if voting required passing a competency test?

            80. th0mas says:

              Quite a prejudice statement!

            81. rejectrepublicanlies says:

              Coming from a Right Winger, that’s rich. Your leading candidate insults Mexicans, Muslims, blacks, the handicapped and women. That’s just the short list. The GOP is the party of Christofascists, racists, homophobes, misogynists, bullies, violent extremists and bigots. Then, there’s a dark side.

            82. th0mas says:

              Thanks for proving my point!

            83. martin woyzeck says:

              What’s your problem rob, you’re insulted as you’re one of them too? Can’t take the truth?

            84. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Can’t take the truth?-
              Why don’t you try it and see?

            85. sammy says:

              That was mature!!

            86. How can you take what you can not see?

            87. God says:

              Those are all the facts he needs

            88. that is correct, his uninformed beliefs are all the facts he needs. Check out Buck Shot, he’s A LOT like that.

            89. Buck Shot says:

              I bet your parents hate it ALOT that you survived. You wife liked it ALOT we she was with a real man. Go play computer games city boy your mama is gonna laugh at you….ALOT

            90. Tan Danglesworth says:

              There is no argument that could possibly shut that guy up or change his mind. The idiot, uneducated, stupid racist bigot description is fact, not opinion.

            91. He may have never formed an original opinion that was not told to him by the hate mongers he gets his misinformation from.

            92. jonathan says:

              WELL the argument is in the article which was stated as “too long to read.”

            93. You are correct but also realize the frustration some have when one constantly comes up again this kind of ignorance. It does test one patience.

            94. jim says:

              lol .check you own grammar before you call someone an idiot. so someone is stupid because they believe other than you do? arrogance .no one is better off after 7 years of the Dems in charge. if you believe otherwise you are dishonest or plain ignorant. personally i believe you fall under the latter. if you really want to try and win this argument state your case. fair warning i am not republican and i understand economics . please try.

            95. Taiji_2 says:

              The proper way to deal with a stupid people is to simply ignore them.

          2. Jessie Henson Long says:

            Me either. I am college educated and was on the dean’s list.

            1. Rev Billy Sundae says:

              Did you go to one of those tree huggin, hippie colleges? One of those PC palaces where a “womans right to choose is her own” even if that means murdering babies?

              You need to repent of your heathen ways sinner. Or burn in HELL you hippie scum!

            2. Jessie Henson Long says:

              You are a sick individual.

            3. martin woyzeck says:

              Hey rev, you’re another lowlife christian murdering scumbag.
              Yep, most definitely it’s up to the woman to choose, not some idiotic christian male rev who likes little children
              There is no such thing as hell or god or jesus, you moron so hard to burn in whatever that is

          3. CleverBev says:

            The inability to read and judge accurate information, based on history and not slander, doesn’t make you “uneducated” either. It does, however, make you ignorant, lacking in judgment, and wanting in critical thinking ability. And that’s just how the Republican establishment likes you. They will feed you a truckload of “silliness,” though I have another name for it, and you will swallow it because it confirms your view of yourself as “better” than someone who’s different than you. The wealthy Republicans are definitely laughing all the way to the bank, and if you’re not one of them, then, Donald Trump (Mr. four-time bankruptcy declarer) and his ilk don’t have to pick your pocket. You’ll do it for them yourself.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -The inability to read and judge accurate information, based on history and not slander, doesn’t make you “uneducated” either.-
              Before telling me what I can and can’t do with it, why don’t you actually present some.

              -They will feed you a truckload of “silliness,” though I have another name for it, and you will swallow it because it confirms your view of yourself as “better” than someone who’s different than you.-
              One of these days you’ll learn that silly, childish slander is not a substitute for facts.

              – and if you’re not one of them, then, Donald Trump (Mr. four-time bankruptcy declarer)-

              I’m not a fan of trump–but nice try with the guilt-by-association, there. Come on back when you have a few facts.

            2. martin woyzeck says:

              How about if you finally present some facts kenneth as to your claims. I have yet to see any

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Holy shit, kid, how many dozens of posts have you made about me? Mebbe you need to see a doctor.

            4. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Holy shit, kid, how many dozens of posts have you made about me? Mebbe you need to see a doctor.”

              *looks up thread at the scores of posts by Kenneth.

            5. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              And find them in the middle of a thread where we “argued” back and forth (if my continually telling you to stop lying and you continuing to do so anyway counts as an “argument.”).

            6. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Or, apparently, you’ll find them on completely different websites, where you follow me to spew more of your childish slander.”

              Funny this is the same claim you made about the other fellow, got any evidence to back up your claim?

            7. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Yes, and I provided several quotes from you doing just that.

              If I leave it at that, you’ll probably just lie about it again, so lemme go dig ’em up:

              “Translation: “I’m a racist ”

              “[Hitler] certainly talks like you.”

              “quite racist.”

              “Actually you’re racist, sexist views are those of a fascist. Just like your hero Hitler.”

              “Facts equate to socialism to fascists such as yourself.”

              “Ha and you’re a misogynist,”

              So just how many lies do I have to catch you in before you give it up?

            8. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You’re taking quotes out of context of the discussions we were having.

              When you say things like institutional racism doesn’t exist or feminists want men to hate them, those are sexist-racist things, and yes I am going to stand up and defend minority groups, no matter how you speak out against them.

              What other websites have I followed you to? I’m fairly certain we have only interacted on the Discuss site.

            9. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Oh, hey, missed one.

              -You’re taking quotes out of context of the discussions we were having.-
              No I’m not. You made dishonest, personal attacks, and claiming “out of context” doesn’t change the facts.

              -When you say things like institutional racism doesn’t exist or feminists want men to hate them, those are sexist-racist things,-
              No they aren’t. Simply claiming something doesn’t make it true–especially when it’s you making the claim.

              -and yes I am going to stand up and defend minority groups,-
              You’re not defending a minority group. You are, yet again, lying.

              -no matter how you speak out against them.-
              And I didn’t speak out against any minority groups. You are, yet again, lying… and I know, saying that over and over again gets redundant, but so do your lies–so I’ll offer again to quit calling you out on y our lies if you quit making them, but we already know what the answer will be.

              -I’m fairly certain we have only interacted on the Discuss site.-

              Off the top of my had, at least two threads here and the ChicksontheRight site.

            10. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Off the top of my had, at least two threads here and the ChicksontheRight site.”

              Tell me does the “ChicksontheRight” use disquss for its comments?

            11. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              No one else seems to think so. Yet a number of people have questioned your ability to bring evidence to the discussion, and have questioned your motives. Its been clear to me for some time that you’re here to sow distention, and broadcast misinformation, and its nice to see many others on other Disqus boards agree.

              Have a great day Kenneth, and Happy holidays.

            12. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -No one else seems to think so.-
              Nobody else on a liberal site seems to thin playing the race-card in lieu of facts is bad. I daresay that says about y’all than it does about me.

              -Yet a number of people have questioned your ability to bring evidence to the discussion, and have questioned your motives.-
              Instead of actually addressing my comments and dealing in facts or logic. Ad hominems are easier, after all–especially when your position is untenable and you know it.

              -Its been clear to me for some time that you’re here to sow distention, and broadcast misinformation,-
              If I’m broadcasting misinformation, how come you’re the one who’ve been caught in one lie after another?-

          4. martin woyzeck says:

            The reichwing, especially libertarians and teacrappers are the king of lies and conspiracy theories.
            Now for thinking you’re educated, point out specifically what is false, and prove it.
            Btw, you just being from the rightwing automatically makes you uneducated,and stupid……without you making stupid comments, as you have

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              When you have something other than silly lies, childish ad hominems, and reductio ad hitlerum, try again.

          5. martin woyzeck says:

            And please define conspiracy to us, it’s obvious you don’t know the word.
            You’ve just heard the word from your lying conspiracy theorists like alexjones, jesseventura,etc.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I haven’t read anything from alex jones of Jesse Ventura.

              Come back when you have something other than silly, childish slander to bring to the table.

          6. Deborah Marshall says:

            Yes it does prove it otherwise. If you were reading this article would change your opinion.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I read the article. It was a whackass conspiracy theory not only lacking in facts but thoroughly designed to avoid facts.

            2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “read the article. It was a whackass conspiracy theory not only lacking in facts but thoroughly designed to avoid facts.”

              Translation: “I’m a racist who is scared of what my status will be in the event that civilization isn’t dominated by white culture, please quit challenging the status quo because that scare me.”

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              You need to learn how to translate.

              Most translations don’t involve making up a statement that you want your opponent to say because you can’t handle the facts.

              So put down the race-card and come up with a real argument….

              … if you can (and I think by this time we both know you can’t).

            4. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Can you shout “race card” any louder? Since its a neutralizing term meant to take agency away from minorities, it’s quite racist. Pretty sure I hit that on right on the head.

            5. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Can you shout “race card” any louder?-
              Can you play it any blatantly?

              -Since its a neutralizing term meant to take agency away from minorities, it’s quite racist.-

              No. It’s a term meant to show that you’re engaging in vicious slander, which means it’s not racist no matter how much you wish it was.

              -Pretty sure I hit that on right on the head.-

              You didn’t–you just lied again. That’s understandable–you can’t handle any facts, and so you obviously have no resort but to blatantly slander your opponents–but that doesn’t change the facts.

          7. Tom Fisher says:

            Yes, it does it makes you an enemy to be gotten rid of you and every piece of fascist crap associated and spawned by you. It’s time to stop talking to republican fascists and start dealing with them the way we did in the 1940’s

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Among people who are not psychotic, refusing to buy into dishonest conspiracy theories does not make me an enemy, and anybody who feels I need to be “gotten rid of” because of my political views (much less any children I may have!) needs to take a few courses in history, the Constitution, and basic decency.

              Now why don’t you quit playing the race-card and come up with a real argument?

              … if you can, that is.

            2. jewelbell5 . says:

              Come on, old man, bring it. You sure like to sound tough.

          8. God says:

            Yes it does. You dismiss science but believe Faux News

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              First, I don’t dismiss science, and I don’t watch Fox News. If you had any facts, you wouldn’t have to lie.

              Scond, when Fox News has been caught splicing tape to produce racist statements or slandering sitting presidents with false documents, as the Leftwing media has, then perhaps your comment will have some merit. Until then, “haha, your news source is way more honest than mine!” probably isn’t the biting insult you intended it to be.

          9. How about Duped? Ignorant? Sore loser? Inebriated? Because you are just plan wrong to no see some of the truth of it.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I’d be happy to see the truth of it, if there was any in there. In the meantime, just toss out some more ad hominems–I’m sure eventually they’ll sway my opinion instead of making it clear that the facts don’t support your position and you know it.

        2. Lance Griffith says:

          Who founded the democratic party? who went around and tortured, murdered, raped and destroyed property of conservatives, black and white, adults and children, who did not agree with the so called liberals? the kkk! Feeling liberal still? Who is the queen of the liberals? who started planned parenthood? who said blacks are a disease who should be exterminated from the planet along with all minorities? margaret sanger. still feeling liberal? hhhmmmm, sanger gave and received awards from adolf hitler, more liberalism.
          Liberals, just admit it, you don’t know the history of your racist party, you would be ashamed to call yourselves liberal if you actually read your parties history. Yes, everything you believe is a lie, WAKE UP!!!YOU ALSO, RHINO REPUBLICANS!!!!

          1. Mr. Outer Limits says:

            Love it when defeated wingnuts drag that debunked meme around.

            The Democratic party is no longer home to the white racists down South. And the white racists have NOTHING to do with liberals. When your “arguments” are 50 – 100 years old, then you know you’re on the losing side.

            1. Lisa Bragg Leavitt says:

              White Democrats still support the death of more black children than any group in the world and have been the reason for the continuance of slums that keep African Americans in low employment, low educated areas … but they call it “Government Assistance” … sneaky sneaky.

            2. Mr. Outer Limits says:

              Thanks for showing that you anti-choicers not only are lacking anything resembling an argument, but you’re fairly racist as well.

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Except that she didn’t actually say anything racist.

              Thank ~you~ for showing that the Left continually plays the race-card because they have nothing on substance.

            4. Mr. Outer Limits says:

              Yes, she clearly did. Thanks for PROVING what an idiot you are by saying so.

              Man, I love it when defeated wingnut morons like Kenny Boy double down and prove their ignorance and their racism a the same time. Thanks for LOSING on that point.

            5. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              No, she didn’t. Nothing in her post is even remotely racist. You are plain and simply lying. I can understand that–reality just doesn’t support your position, and so you have to viciously slander your opponents in lieu of actual substance–but seeing as I don’t need to do so, I’m not going to play along.

              Perhaps you could put down the race-card and pick up a real argument….

              …if you can.

            6. Mr. Outer Limits says:

              I love it when wingnuts like you just LOSE and LOSE to liberals like me. You’re proving you have no clue, as well as no argument.

              Reality is on my side…that is obvious to all intelligent people. Thanks for losing so badly, and for you LYING as you did.

              “White Democrats still support the death of more black children than any group in the world” – statement that can only come from a WHITE RACIST. There is NO debate about this.

              “and have been the reason for the continuance of slums that keep African Americans in low employment, low educated areas … but they call it “Government Assistance” – statement that can only come from a WHITE RACIST. There is NO debate about this.

              It is a WHITE RACIST talking point that the Democrats “want” to keep blacks poor…so they are “beholden” to them. The FACTS refute this. The statement is an example of WHITE RACISTS projecting their state of mind onto the issue.

              It is a WHITE RACIST talking point that Democrats “want” to keep blacks in poor public housing, when in fact intelligent people know that both blacks and public housing are hewed into the same ghetto areas by….wait for it….WHITE RACISM.

              Kenneth James Abbott….another wingnut defeated by a liberal with the facts. It will be REALLY FUNNY to see you respond with more wingnut denial when I’ve blow you away…again.

            7. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -I love it when wingnuts like you just LOSE and LOSE to liberals like me.-

              If I’m the one losing, how come you’re the one throwing out silly, childish ad hominems in lieu of arguments or facts?

              -Reality is on my side..-

              If that was the case, you wouldn’t need to play the race-card.

              -Thanks for losing so badly, and for you LYING as you did.-

              Except I haven’t told a single lie. I actually have facts, so I don’t need to go around playing the race-card.

              – statement that can only come from a WHITE RACIST. There is NO debate about this.-

              There’s no debate about that, alright. It’s plain and simply bullshit, and you have absolutely no evidence to back it up.

              -statement that can only come from a WHITE RACIST. There is NO debate about this.-

              See above. If you actually intend to win an argument, you need somethinig besides “you’re a racist.”

              -It is a WHITE RACIST talking point that the Democrats “want” to keep blacks poor.-

              Yet again, you are full of shit. Come up with some evidence, some tiny scrap of proof that this statement is a “white racist talking point.” It’s not, of course, and you know it, so you can’t–and you won’t.

              -It is a WHITE RACIST talking point that Democrats “want” to keep blacks in poor public housing-

              And yet another blatantly dishonest claim without a single scrap of evidence to back it up.

              -Kenneth James Abbott….another wingnut defeated by a liberal with the facts. –

              I wasn’t defeated, and you did not present a single fact.

              Just a side note, here–using all-caps doesn’t make a phrase true.

              I challenged you once, and you utterly failed that challenge–but I enjoy watching you fail, so I challenge you again: Put down the race-card and come up with a real argument….

              …if you can (and let’s face it, we both know you can’t).

            8. Mr. Outer Limits says:

              Again, being a defeated wingnut moron, Kenny Boy comes back with a larger heaping of FAIL, and is just LOSING to a liberal like me over and over again.

              I am WINNING and you are LOSING. It’s obvious to everyone. But it’s fun to throw it in your face, and watch how you can’t deny the TRUTH of it. Denying a FACT like that just proves what a chump you are- way to go, Kenny.

              Reality is on my side, and you have nothing to refute that. So you LOSE there. I’m not playing the “race card”, so you LOSE there. You are playing the white racist card, so you definitely LOSE there.

              You have told LIES, so you LOSE there. You have NO FACTS on your side, so you LOSE there.

              You backed up white racist statements. Ergo, you’re agreeing with white racist lies. So you LOSE. This is so obvious that I am really killing you now, and there is NO debate about it.

              Not only do I know that “the Democrats want to keep blacks poor” is a white racist talking point, ALL intelligent people know it. The only ones who count. So I have everyone on my side agreeing that is a white racist talking point- and it SO OBVIOUSLY is- and you have no one but other defeated white racists on your side. What a total BEAT DOWN for Kenny boy, and there is NO question that he LOSES again.

              Oh, same goes for the white racist talking point of “Democrats want to keep blacks in poor public housing.” AGAIN…it’s so obvious that all intelligent people agree with me, and none of them agree with you. You LOSE and lose big again.

              So you were totally defeated with the previous post- everyone agrees on that. It gets really funny when you keep denying FACTS like that. And I’ve defeated you with that post. PLEASE deny the obvious so you have me kicking your sorry butt all over the place over it.

              I have all the FACTS- that is undeniable- and you have NONE, so your claim just confirms how dumb, wrong, and in denial you are. Thanks for LOSING there.

              You offered no challenge. I bested you with every post, and you LOST to me with every post. It’s comic when defeated wingnut morons like you not only post rubbish that has liberals like me kicking your butt in, but then you deny what’s obvious to everyone.

              Keep it up Kenny boy….tell me again that you didn’t lose, that I didn’t win, and that you have the facts (though it’s obvious all of that is wrong). It doubles my victory and your defeat.

            9. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Again, being a defeated wingnut moron, Kenny Boy comes back with a larger heaping of FAIL, and is just LOSING to a liberal like me over and over again.-

              -I am WINNING and you are LOSING.-

              -so you LOSE there-

              -so you LOSE –

              -t’s so obvious that all intelligent people agree with me, –

              One of these days y ou’ll understand that if you want to win an argument y ou actually have to bring some facts of logic to the table. You don’t get to just declare you won–especially when all you have is the race-card and the capslock key.

              When you have something other than silly, childish lies, come see me.

            10. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              The argument has already been made, evidence collected, cataloged, and presented. The issue is you are afraid to confront the truth, you argue from ignorance then resort to name calling. If that doesn’t work you start in with the projection argument where you claim everyone is “ignoring the facts you’re presenting” (I’ve failed to see a single shred of scientific evidence presented by you) and “making ad-hominems” (You have been the one name calling, then denying that there is any negitive implication in using words like “thug”. “liberal”, and “feminazi”)

              Racism is real, you denying its very real, scientifically documented effects is racism.

              The race card is a real argument, you should’t be justifying the systemic negative treatment of minorities in America, or anywhere else for that matter.

            11. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -The argument has already been made, evidence collected, cataloged, and presented.-
              So far all you’ve catalogued is a bunch of false accusations.

              -The issue is you are afraid to confront the truth-
              That would explain why I argue with you instead.

              -you argue from ignorance then resort to name calling. –
              This is a direct lie. It is you, not I, who have resorted to name-calling. Which is why I can find many such from you and your allies, if need be, but you have to take non-insults and pretend they are.

              -then denying that there is any negitive implication in using words like-
              Ooh, let’s see….

              -“thug”.-
              I have called you or anyone else here a thug, nor have I denied that there is any negative connotation to the term.

              -“liberal”-
              “liberal” is a political designation. You keep trying to paint it as an attack, but your claims are still completely dishonest.

              -“feminazi”-
              At no time have I called you or anyone here a feminazi, nor have I defended the term at all. I’m not even sure ~why~ you decided to lie about this particular term.

              -Racism is real,-
              And I never said it wasn’t.

              -you denying its very real, scientifically documented effects is racism.-
              Good thing I didn’t do any such thing.

              – you should’t be justifying the systemic negative treatment of minorities in America, or anywhere else for that matter.-
              And I’m not. You, in turn, shouldn’t be lying about your opponents in lieu of actual facts or argument.

            12. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Dude, you have supported these views on many threads, I pulled quotes directly form your comments.

              Troll troll troll all the day long.

            13. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Dude, you have supported these views on many threads-
              I didn’t support those views on any thread. You are, as usual, a liar. Which is why….

              -I pulled quotes directly form your comments.-
              There’s not a single quote in your post.

              -Troll troll troll all the day long.-

              That certainly explains y our behavior. It’s certainly comforting to think that you’re just saying childish, dishonest things in order to get a rise and that this isn’t actually how you normally operate.

            14. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              I have attempted to carry on a reasonable discussion, provided sources, given you the benefit of the doubt. Sadly after you continued to use the same trollish teniques

            15. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -I have attempted to carry on a reasonable discussion,-
              No you haven’t. You’ve been playing the race-card, among other silly slander, from your very first post.

              -provided sources,-
              i.e., quoted fellow whacked-out socialists who took a break from ranting about the Bohemian Grove

              -given you the benefit of the doubt.-
              On what? You’ve been falsely calling me a racist from nearly the beginning–that’s me, personally; you’ve been applying that dishonest label to conservatives in general from the beginning.

              -calling everyone who disagrees with you a socialist or a liar:-
              I keep offering you the deal–quit lying, and I’ll quit calling you out on it. So far, you keep refusing it… but the offer’s still out there. If you want me to quit calling you out on your lies, you know what to do.

              -and just being generally argumentative-
              Such as when I slandered you as a racist, or broke out the ol’ Reductio ad Hitlerum, or…

              ..no, wait, that was you.

              -It’s pretty obvious that you really didn’t come for a discussion at all, just to stir up trouble-
              So it’s my fault you’ve been spreading vicious, childish slander all overthe place? Nice try, but I’m not buying it.

            16. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I did no such thing, and what you posted isn’t a quote. You are still lying.

            17. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Wow, called a liar for the what 20th? 30th? time.

            18. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I keep making the offer–I’ll quit calling you out on your lies, if you quit telling them.

              It’s not my fault you consistently refuse.

            19. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Like I stated before, If you have some evidence you would like me to review then present it. Otherwise I am forced to accept the views of generations of historians, and thousands of modern academics, who all generally agree about the nature of capitalism and the adoption of neoliberal ideology among the corporate class in the late 60’s into the early 70’s to fight the growing worker and racial equality that was a result of civil rights and unionization.

            20. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              And like I stated before, I have and you lied about it.

              Mostly because you want to believe a few socialist hacks instead of actual historians. It’s easier for you to play the race-card than it is to deal with facts.

            21. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              ” few socialist hacks”

              The majority of college professors.

            22. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              No one else seems to think so. Yet a number of people have questioned your ability to bring evidence to the discussion, and have questioned your motives. Its been clear to me for some time that you’re here to sow distention, and broadcast misinformation, and its nice to see many others on other Disqus boards agree.

              Have a great day Kenneth, and Happy holidays.

            23. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              He pointed out lots of facts, you failed to do the research that would make that clear.

            24. martin woyzeck says:

              Yes, what she said was very racist

            25. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              No. She didn’t mention race in the slightest. You can’t simply take non-racist statements, label them racist, and thus dismiss them.

          2. DrMJG says:

            What the article did was show that there was a total turn around of positions since Truman integrated the army. As one old enough to vouch for the basis of this article, I suggest more than dismissing the article if you wish to support your position. Otherwise show how, in the framework of this time period this article speaks about how you are still the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt (conservation of the environment) and Fighting Bob LaFollette (against big business exploiting farmers, labor)

            1. michele1240 says:

              Teddy was also the President that signed the Sherman Anti Trust Act into law!! He firmly believed in the value of labor and the important s of our lands and resources. As the founder of the Bull Moose Caucus he is the original Progressive!!! He is as far from today’s Republican as you can get!! sorry, I just love Teddy!

            2. jontx11 says:

              They are no longer and haven’t been the party of Lincoln or Roosevelt. They like to think they are but they are not.

            3. fel121 says:

              One of the most succinct and logical statements I have seen in a comment section online in a very long time, thank you good sir, there is still hope for humanity.

          3. michele1240 says:

            oh Lance your so wrong it hurt my eyes to read your post.

            1. (侍) says:

              And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out…….

            2. michele1240 says:

              so better I be blind than Lance not be ignorant. that is so conservative of you little asian character so no one would ever know who you are.

            3. (侍) says:

              We are all born blind, it is only through your own arrogance that you choice to stay that way. To the eyes of gaki like you water is viewless

          4. martin woyzeck says:

            Oh no, the moronic reichwingers who can’t be in present day and throws out the stupid ‘KKK were originally democrat’. Come on…..get real, you idiot.
            Btw Planned Parenthood is a great thing. Are you going to throw out the lies about Margaret Saenger?.
            You lowlife scumbag, it’s libertairans, teacrappers, christian right, repubs who murder ,rape, create wars, mass shooters, massacres, full of hate violence, bigotry, racism, sexism, anti-semitism, homophobia,etc.
            You white christian reichwingers need to be exterminated

          5. ChannelSixtyNine69 says:

            So you just read the article and still didn’t understand what was written. Here it is in a simplified form. The Democrats started pursuing racial equality in the 1940’s. It disaffected the Southern vote, so they all switched over to the Republicans, WHO ACCEPTED THEM WITH GLEE. Because principles don’t mean anything to The Right, it is all about power for power’s sake. Isn’t it?
            As far as liberalism goes, it is everything opposite to what you have said, again, you have your politics ass up like most righties do. Can you name the awards Sanger gave and received from Hitler? Did you get all of your information from the right wing pro life L.E.A.R.N site?

        3. Deborah Marshall says:

          Indeed!

        4. Touché and he still don’t get it. No hope for this silly bastard.

      2. BBQB5 says:

        You just made the point of every clear thinking citizen who understands how the dumb are manipulated by the rich to vote time and time again against their own economic well being.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          By refusing to vote for more debt and class warfare on the basis of false accusations, I’ve proven something about dumb people being manipulated?

          Might wanna rethink that one….

          1. matureamerican says:

            We can’t fix your kind of stupid.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Since “my kind of stupid” is based on facts, why fix what works?

              Instead, how about you drop the ad hominems and come up with a real argument?

              … …if you can, that is.

            2. michele1240 says:

              one can not argue with one that does not understand the word “fact”. it is to close to the definition of insanity, you know doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Kind like voting for conservatives.

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -it is to close to the definition of insanity, you know doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.-
              Like continually spewing ad hominems in lieu of argument, even though it didn’t work the last time a liberal poster did it?

            4. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Complains of ad hominems, calls others “liberal”.

            5. Gman says:

              Is the word “liberal” an insult?

            6. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              It is within the context he used it sweetheart.

            7. Gman says:

              Ahhhhh, yes …. context … that thing you couldn’t recognize four months ago. Gotchya. You libprogs usually own the liberal label with pride. What happened? Did your dissonance finally evaporate?

            8. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              From thread 4 months ago: “Read “Deer Hunting for Jesus”, it’s a good ethnography that’s puts the facts in the article above into context.”

              So you can lie all you like but luckily all the comments are preserved.

            9. Gman says:

              You wrote, “From thread 4 months ago: ‘Read “Deer Hunting for Jesus”, it’s a good ethnography that’s puts the facts in the article above into context.'”

              This is (no bullshít) at least the fourth time you’ve mentioned that book by the batshít crazy, leftist, lunatic, kook-fringe, self-described pro(re)gressive, Joe Bageant. I’ve already told you what orifice of yours in which to put that book. I’ve also told you I wouldn’t read that book for the same reason why I’d never read a Limbaugh book, but I see you would and cite it as a credible source in a discussion. Your confirmation bias compels you.

              You wrote, “You need to prove that I don’t understand context as opposed to just claiming its true sans evidence.”

              Already proven to you. The fact that you have just as hard of a time recognizing proof as you do recognizing context is a you problem. I’m not your dâmned professor, nor am I your daddy. Your lack of capacity to conduct your own due diligence is also a you problem.

              I have observed that your lacking is both broad in scope and profound. Here is a small sample of your quotes in this feed:

              “How is this relevant? Emotional responses are nearly imposable to measure”

              “No, you used a discussion board to use a bunch of racial epitaphs yourself.”

              “You must of not picked up on the fact that you were playing the Grammer nazi card in the comment I replied to.”

              “Those are fields based on science that are embraced buy the left and discounted by the right.”

              “Exactly, my sarcastic rebuttle clearly shows…”

              “… his theorys of understanding how people deal …”

              and, if that wasn’t bad enough, you did it again here:

              “… addressed the fact that Freud’s death has nothing to do with the validity of his theorys.

              With the understanding that you lack the capacity to recognize … well … anything, can you at least recognize the commonality in these comments of yours? This display of yours reveals a pattern, not simply anecdotes.

              You’ve also said, “… it’s religitards who subscribe to magical thinking.”, yet, a few comments removed from this one, you asserted, “As a Buddhist I am more concerned…”. Did you just call yourself a “religitard”? Don’t get me wrong. I don’t mind your self-deprecation. It’s quite amusing.

              For one who touts his own academic prowess, you’re clearly a very stupid individual who can’t muster up a writing level beyond the third grade. You keep telling others to read certain books for the purpose of introspection and enlightenment. Well, I have a recommendation of my own … specifically, for you. First, Sophistical Refutations, and second, “Topics, both by Aristotle, because not only do you write at the third grade level, you argue at the at that level as well.

              In conclusion, I’ll throw you a bone. My original statement was, “Ahhh … I see. Subjective, perceived ‘institutional racism’ of political opponent > actual racist behaviors and speech caught on video. Got it.”

              The contention is your failure in your subsequent rebuttals to consider the existential prepositional phrase in my statement which qualified my entire argument.

              HINT: there were only TWO prepositional phrases in my statement. Do you think you can figure it out which one now, imbecile? I really don’t care either way, TBH.

              There was a reason I ceased engaging you, fool. Mark Twain said it best … and no, you lazy âss. YOU figure out the Twain quote to which I have referred here. Like I said, I’m not your professor. I’m done engaging your insipid âss. You bring a Q*tip as a weapon of choice to a intellectual gun fight.

            10. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Trolled.

            11. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              “Don’t get me wrong. I don’t mind your self-deprecation. It’s quite amusing.” Priceless!

            12. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “This is (no bullshít) at least the fourth time you’ve mentioned that book by the batshít crazy, leftist, lunatic, kook-fringe, self-described pro(re)gressive, Joe Bageant”

              He’s a social scientist that I have met a few times. Nice guy, does good work. Comparing him to a shock jock like Limbaugh reveals your lack of objectivity. One is, you know, an actual scientist who is respected by his colleagues. give me a break.

              “Already proven to you. The fact that you have just as hard of a time recognizing proof ”

              I don’t recall you ever providing proof of any kind. No linked journals, no statistics, nothing, I’ve provided several textbooks (College textbooks) that you dismiss out of hand. That’s your right, but it leads me to believe that you have a critical lack of understanding of the issues Im being discussed. (like how the right wing controls the media and uses religious wedge issues to convince the impoverished to vote against their own best interests)

              Oh I’m published, so your puny attempt to critique my grammar is yet another example of your lack of understanding of context. (news flash: comments on a blog are not where you expect people to care about grammar. Most of those were posted from my blackberry , half drunk while I troll fools like you)

              “Ahhh … I see. Subjective, perceived ‘institutional racism’ of political opponent > actual racist behaviors and speech caught on video. Got it.”

              ” Sophistical Refutations, and second, Topics, both by Aristotle, because not only do you write at the third grade level, you argue at that level as well.”

              Not only have i read them, I pointed out a number of fallacies you made, and showed you how you were misusing the proof by assertion fallacy, that started this emotional appeal of yours. (another fallacy by they way)

              “Mark Twain said it best … and no, you lazy âss. YOU figure out the Twain quote to which I have referred here. Like I said, I’m not your professor. I’m done engaging your insipid âss. You bring a Q*tip as your weapon of choice to an intellectual gun fight.”

              He has a number that would apply to you.

              Better to be silent and be thought of as a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

            13. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “This is (no bullshít) at least the fourth time you’ve mentioned that book by the batshít crazy, leftist, lunatic, kook-fringe, self-described pro(re)gressive, Joe Bageant”

              He’s a social scientist that I have met a few times. Nice guy, does good work. Comparing him to a shock jock like Limbaugh reveals your lack of objectivity. One is, you know, an actual scientist who is respected by his colleagues. give me a break.

              “Already proven to you. The fact that you have just as hard of a time recognizing proof ”

              I don’t recall you ever providing proof of any kind. No linked journals, no statistics, nothing, I’ve provided several textbooks (College textbooks) that you dismiss out of hand. That’s your right, but it leads me to believe that you have a critical lack of understanding of the issues Im being discussed. (like how the right wing controls the media and uses religious wedge issues to convince the impoverished to vote against their own best interests)

              Oh I’m published, so your puny attempt to critique my grammar is yet another example of your lack of understanding of context. (news flash: comments on a blog are not where you expect people to care about grammar. Most of those were posted from my blackberry , half drunk while I troll fools like you)

              “Ahhh … I see. Subjective, perceived ‘institutional racism’ of political opponent > actual racist behaviors and speech caught on video. Got it.”

              ” Sophistical Refutations, and second, Topics, both by Aristotle, because not only do you write at the third grade level, you argue at that level as well.”

              Not only have i read them, I pointed out a number of fallacies you made, and showed you how you were misusing the proof by assertion fallacy, that started this emotional appeal of yours. (another fallacy by they way)

              “Mark Twain said it best … and no, you lazy âss. YOU figure out the Twain quote to which I have referred here. Like I said, I’m not your professor. I’m done engaging your insipid âss. You bring a Q*tip as your weapon of choice to an intellectual gun fight.”

              He has a number that would apply to you.

              Better to be silent and be thought of as a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

            14. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Heh. The context is “he wants it to be an insult, because then he can try to equate my comment with the dozens of ad hominems he’s hurled out left and right.”

            15. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              “Liberal” is a political designation, not an insult. Nice try.

            16. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Republican and Democrat are the political designations, liberal is what republicans call democrats as an insult.

            17. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              No.

              Republican and Democrat are political parties.

              Liberal, conservative, moderate, and others are political designations.

              Dude, you can’t really believe “liberal” is an insult–why are you trying so hard? All it does is make the rest of us aware that you don’t have an argument and you know it.

            18. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              I don’t think you understand context very well. Any word can be used as an insult, darling.

            19. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I understand context well enough to know that it doesn’t make a false claim true. You use ad hominem attacks because you need them–you don’t have any facts to back up your petty hatreds.

              I don’t use them because I don’t need them. Pretending that I did is not unexpected–this isn’t by a long shot the first time you’ve lied to cover up your lack of a real argument–but it’s not fooling anyone.

            20. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “I understand context well enough to know that it doesn’t make a false claim true. You use ad hominem attacks because you need them–you don’t have any facts to back up your petty hatreds.”

              First of all, I have yet to make personal attacks, what I have done is point out the racist/classiest nature of your neoliberal rhetoric.
              You’re pretty well proving that you don’t really understand how context works at all.

              “Pretending that I did is not unexpected–this isn’t by a long shot the first time you’ve lied to cover up your lack of a real argument”

              Please show evidence of me lying.

              Whatever you say, darling.

            21. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -First of all, I have yet to make personal attacks-
              And again, this is a lie.

              I have shown evidence of you lying over and over again. When you have something ~other~ than lies, come see me.

            22. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              By all means present these personal attacks. I’d be more than happy to hear your complaint.

              You have yet to provide anything that disputes the facts presented in the article, or any of the sourced material I have provided. All you do is level insults and call people liars. Its quite childish really.

            23. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -By all means present these personal attacks. I’d be more than happy to hear your complaint.-

              First of all, I’m not complaining. Personal attacks is all you have, so I suppose you can’t be blamed for using them.

              Second of all…..

              “Translation: “I’m a racist ”

              “[Hitler] certainly talks like you.”

              “quite racist.”

              “Actually you’re racist, sexist views are those of a fascist. Just like your hero Hitler.”

              “Facts equate to socialism to fascists such as yourself.”

              “Ha and you’re a misogynist,”

              So just how many times do I have to catch you in before you give it up?

              -You have yet to provide anything that disputes the facts presented in the article,-

              Except to point out that it doesn’t meaasure up to basic common sense.

              -All you do is level insults –

              Except here in the real world, where I challenge you to find one such insult.

              – and call people liars. –

              I don’t call people in general liars. I point out that you’ve lied repeatedly, but we can cut a deal on that if you want–you quit telling silly, childish lies, and I’ll quit calling you out on it.

            24. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Your claim was that I used Ad hominims to make my case, pointing out your racist/misogynistic behavior by showing how the language you use is inflammatory is not a personal attack.

              Once again your back to the “liar” card. Produce some of this peer reviewed evidence that disputes the article above.

            25. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Your claim was that I used Ad hominims to make my case,-
              Which is pretty blatantly true.

              -pointing out your racist/misogynistic behavior-
              Which is non-existent.

              -by showing how the language you use is inflammatory is not a personal attack.-
              Showing me the language I use is inflammatory wouldn’t be a personal attack. However, telling nasty lies about me is–and that’s all you have.

              Don’t get me wrong, I’m not terribly offended–after all, I’ve had discussions with socialists before, and vicious lies is all any of you have–but I’m still going to call you out on it. Speaking of which….

              -Once again your back to the “liar” card.-

              That’s because once again you’re back to lies. Tell you what–you quit lying, and I’ll quit calling you out on it. Deal? … Yeah, that’s what I thought.

            26. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Your claim was that I used Ad hominims to make my case,-
              Which I proved.

              -pointing out your racist/misogynistic behavior by showing how the language you use is inflammatory is not a personal attack.-
              Except when the racist/misogynistic behavior is completely nonexistant and you’re simply lying about it–which is the case here.

              -Once again your back to the “liar” card.-
              That’s because once again, you’re lying. If you don’t like hearing about your lies, you could always quit telling them–just a thought.

              Warning, though–when you quit playing the race-card, you’ll actually have to start dealing with some facts and logic. If you’re not up to that, I suppose it may be easier for you to keep lying.

            27. Rev Billy Sundae says:

              “[O]ne” needs to shut her whore mouth, get off the computer, get back to her domestic responsibilities, and pay attention to her babies and husband, which is the obligation of all good god-fearing women.

              Quit your heathen ways you harlot! A vote for a hippie-liberal is a vote for the devil and the end of this great nation. A woman like you, who is full of vile hatred, and who embraces the evil ways of the world; condemns her offspring to a life of wanton sin and shames her husband.

              You need to keep out of politics, which is men’s business and repent for your whore sins or burn in hell!

            28. michele1240 says:

              I would pay good money to have you speak to me like that face to face. Run along child, your opinion is not worthy of adult debate. Go ask Mama for some warm milk, you obviously need a nap.

            29. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -I would pay good money to have you speak to me like that face to face.-

              And i’m sure other people would pay good money to have you speak to them face-to-face as you do:

              “kenny boy”

              “well I think your a paid troll so anything you say is irrelevant.”

              “yeah well fuck you and everyone like you.”

              “it must be very hard to breath with your head so far up your ass.”

              “They refuse to recognize original thought because it aint their cousin!!! lmao”

              “You follow a hollow god that is filled with hate, demanding of riches and only proud of you when you make others suffer under your tread.” (I especially love how everyone who’s not you is “hateful”!)

              “I as an employer would NEVER hire a person educated in the south.”

              “these are the descendants of terrorist, treasonous, Aristocracy lovers. They did not want to fight the English for independence and only joined the fight when the British messed with their bottom line.” (blatantly untrue, as well as offensive; not only were Southerners shooting at British troops in 1771, three years before New England businessmen were writing tepid letters to King George telling him that we’ll be good bitches if he’ll just be a good pimp, but the South gave, and fought, far more for independence. Likewise, when we got tired of the English enslaving American sailors and started the War of 1812, New England threatened to secede while the war was going on, and refused to send troops–even though most of the enslaved sailors were New Englanders!)

              “of course this is just sepeculation based on my very low opinion of your intelligence.”

              “your ignorance is truly spectacular. can you dress yourself?”

              “*pulls out xxx strength troll be gone and sprays vigorously*”

              “I am sick and tired of these asshat terrorists not being arrested! Why the hell is this not on the news being exposed for what it is, domestic terrorism??? ” (of course, the reasonthey weren’t arrested is because they had nothing at all to do with terrorism–but who was expecting honesty at this point anyway?)

              “screw these rich asshats!!”

              “your 22 years young and while yes your brain has finally fully developed and your cranial cavity has finally closed….. your lack of life experience makes it hard to take you seriously.”

              “Personally I find you to be a bully and a bore.”

              “the GOP will not be happy untill this is nothing but a country of slaves for the 1%.”

              “your either completely ignorant or a liar.”

              “misogynist much little timmy?”

              “nobody in the Progressive Dem. Party every wanted or demanded free health care,” (OK, that one wasn’t an attack–but seriously, holy cow….)

              “Please keep your opinion to yourself until you have some grasp on the subject at hand! Screw reasonable”

              “Your very easily duped apparently.”

              “you are totally delusional. you really need to step away from the rightwing propaganda machine.”

              “Just be truthful and say you hate the pres cause he is black, at least you would be being honest.”

              “gee CRUDCUTTER, i can tell your highly educated so your opinion truly has value.” (y’know, normally I’m not too concerned about spelling, but if you’re going to disparage someone else’s education, you might wanna check out that whole your/you’re thing.)

              ” I would never ever hire a person educated in the south or midwest!!”

              “wow, mental midget much? girl you really need to stop fighting your desire for black men and just go for it”

              “how stupid are you anyway?”

              “seems religion and murderous scociopathy go hand in hand” (and what’s y our religion?)

              “Tea Party Member tend to be the stupidest, least educated, bigoted of them all.”

              “ignorant puppet boy… MORON…” (same post, so I gave ’em one line.)

              “use your computer to find out how stupid you are.”

              “please die out soon…. and if there IS a god you have not reproduced.”

              Physician, heal thyself….. maybe some warm milk and a nap?

          2. scottrose says:

            But who is it, really, who votes for “more debt”?

            Clinton left office with a budget surplus. Bush waged his illicit Iraq War without raising taxes to pay for it, hence, the Bush debt, which Obama has steadily been reducing as the stock market goes up.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Clinton left office with a budget surplus.-
              Which came from playing with the social security numbers.

              -Bush waged his illicit Iraq War-
              Except it wasn’t illicit.

              – hence, the Bush debt, which Obama has steadily been reducing-

              No–and not just because it’s the deficit, not the debt, that’s been declining.

              Obama’s deficit has just recently come down to the level it was at before he took office.

            2. Rich says:

              Your stupidity is beyond repair. Killing yourself is the only solution. Do so.

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Someday you’ll discover that childish insults are not a substitute for facts.

            4. Stu Johnson says:

              And maybe, just maybe, someday you’ll find out that your racist, class warfare thinking, is no substitution for facts. You get that class warfare exists, but is a war on the middle and working class being waged by the big corporations and their owners.The truth is that the deficits in this country are caused by the constant tinkering with tax rates so that we pay for what they need to make more money. The truth is that the debt of war gets passed on to the taxpayers, while any profits from war are reaped by the military/industrial complex that Eisenhower warned about. Most liberals, make the mistake of blaming just the Republicans. The Democratic party, under the current leadership (a zionist bigot who thinks Jews marrying outside of their faith is vile and disgusting and a host of Clinton Democrats what worship Wall St and the too big to fail banks), are not liberal, nor are they progressive. All Republicans think that they are voting for liberty, yet they are actually voting for their corporate masters to be free to oppress us with limited government interference. You want progressive? Check out the 1956 Republican Party Platform. It is EVERYTHING you folks on the right are against. But the focus of it is common sense, creating a more level playing field for working class people. I know, the political conversation in this country ignores the working class, but we do still exist. And if we start spending more money, the fat cats are better off. Prosperity is born from the people who actually know how to work a shovel, and actually sweat for their pay. But the idiots we live next door to walk around looking for one rich man or another to bend over and grab ankle for. Me? I stand up straight. What is your posture?
              As for the article, where the author is terribly wrong is saying that the northern whites who to the south were less racist and more moderate. Not my experience from living 56 years in the south. In fact, most of them were disappointed that the towns and cities were far less segregated than what they were used to. Now,3 months after my 56th birthday, I’m finding that the north is far more savagely racist than anything I experienced in my home state of SC. Maybe, it’s different in the bigger cities but here in Buffalo, the different areas of town are fiercely segregated and you best stay on the side of town that your people live on.

            5. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -And maybe, just maybe, someday you’ll find out that your racist, class warfare thinking, is no substitution for facts.-

              Put down the race-card and pick up a real argument….

              If you can.

            6. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Actually his argument is valid, social problems like racism and classism are well documented.

              If you think you can prove otherwise then by all means, publish, go through peer review, and prove it.

            7. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              His argument is a silly, emotionally polarized ad hominem, made in a sad attempt to cover up the fact that the socialism he advocates is absolutely horrible on a political, economic, and moral level.

              And look up “appeal to authority” someday.

            8. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “His argument is a silly, emotionally polarized ad hominem, made in a sad attempt to cover up the fact that the socialism he advocates is absolutely horrible on a political, economic, and moral level.”

              Then by all means publish your rebuttal and get back to me. Until then your meaningless drivel is exactly that.

              Pointing out good peer reviewed science isn’t an “appeal to authority”. You just hate it since it paints you and the ideology of greed that you worship for the evil scourge it is.

            9. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Then by all means publish your rebuttal and get back to me.-
              Well, the rebuttal so far is “It’s a crock of shit–and you, as usual, are a liar.” Not terribly complicated, but it works, especially since you don’t actually have any evidence to back up your blatantly dishonest claims about my “racist, class warfare thinking.”

              -Pointing out good peer reviewed science isn’t an “appeal to authority”.-
              It’s also not even remotely what you did.

              -You just hate it since it paints you and the ideology of greed that you worship for the evil scourge it is.-

              One of these days you’ll learn that childish slander is not a substitute for facts.

            10. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “One of these days you’ll learn that childish slander is not a substitute for facts.”

              You’re not a capitalist? That is an ideology of greed, the pursuit of wealth for its own sake.

              “Then by all means publish your rebuttal and get back to me.-Well, the rebuttal so far is “It’s a crock of shit–and you, as usual, are a liar.”

              That’s not a rebuttal, that’s an emotional reaction.

            11. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -You’re not a capitalist? That is an ideology of greed,-
              The “ideology of greed” that built Western Civilization. But let’s not forget the “evil scourge” part you added in there.

              “That’s not a rebuttal, that’s an emotional reaction.”
              Maybe you need to look up the term “emotion.”

              “It’s nasty” would be an emotional reaction. “It’s mean” would be an emotional reaction. Even “it’s an ideology of greed” and “evil scourge” would be an emotional reaction. “It’s a crock of shit” has to do with the lack of facts behind your claims–which is why all you have is a blatant appeal to authority and a lot of ad hominems.

            12. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              That’s why scientists write extensively about these phenomenon, because they don’t exist.

              “The “ideology of greed” that built Western Civilization. But let’s not forget the “evil scourge” part you added in there.”

              Capitalism is a system, people built civilization. But don’t let facts change your mind.

              “It’s a crock of shit” not an emotional reaction? it’s certainty not an argument as you claim. if you have any evidence to prove the claims your making, by all means present it.

            13. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Capitalism is a system, people built civilization.-
              People who just, by an amazing coincidence, happened to be capitalists. Unlike the socialist, for whom it’s a major accomplishment when they slowly destroy something instead of quickly destroying it.

              -But don’t let facts change your mind.-
              Try posting one or two, and we’ll see.

              -It’s a crock of shit” not an emotional reaction?-
              No. Do you not understand the term “emotional”? If not, then you should look it up ~before~ you start tossing it around. Then again, knowing a claim isn’t true hasn’t stopped you in the past.-

            14. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “People who just, by an amazing coincidence, happened to be capitalists.”

              Civilization began 10,000 years ago, capitalism didn’t show up until after feudalism, about the 1,700’s , that’s less than 3% of human civilization. try again.

            15. Gillian Cameron says:

              So, Kenneth, why DO poor whites tend to vote Republican? It’s certainly not in their interest to do so.

            16. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              First of all, because we tend to approve of freedom and Christianity, and the Left is firmly against both.

              Second, just how is freedom not in the interests of someone who’s poor? It’s not the right who are driving jobs away in droves. It’s not the Republicans who are busy crippling various industries, and it’s surely not the TEA Party that’s helping large corporations shut down competition like Uber and AirBnB. What’s not in our interest is to vote for an ever-increasing government that will ensure we and our children stay poor forever.

            17. fel121 says:

              What part of this article is a conspiracy theory?

            18. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              That would the the theory about a massive conspiracy to make Democrats leave the party that fought for segregation and join the party that fought against it, by appealing to their racism.

              Supposedly, the party of Eisenhower, McCarthy, and Patton were actually liberals, while the party of FDR, Wilson, and Margaret Sanger were conservatives.

            19. America47000 says:

              Let’s not forget that Obama is measuring the decline in the deficit by comparing the current figure to the number from his first year that had been temporarily inflated due to several large bailouts. It only started to drop as a percentage of GDP after Republicans gained control of the House in 2010 and hampered him from fully implementing his agenda.

            20. nevada_geon says:

              “……..Clinton left orifice with a budget surplus.”
              ROFLMAO.
              No wonder this formerly great nation is circling the drain. Fkn dog sh!t for brains.

            21. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I have to wonder if the part about Clinton’s orifice was intentional.

          3. peccary says:

            If you would bother to read what Lee Atwater wrote about his Republican party before he died you would change your mind.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              I did. Lee Atwater spent his later years viciously slandering people he’d worked with.

            2. Stu Johnson says:

              Really? Did you ever meet him? I did. And while you are almost being factual, it wasn’t his later years but his last few months of life that he apologized to his political opponents (my friend, and reformed Dixiecrat Tom Turnipseed in particular).When he was in Columbia, he often ate at a place I tended bar at in when I was at the University of South Carolina. My impression of him was that he would have been just as vicious of an operative for the other side were they to pay him more money.He was a vile, petty, piece of shit. Any recanting of his, was due to his superstitious religious belief that he could repent and enter heaven.

            3. fel121 says:

              And why do you think that was?

          4. michele1240 says:

            kenny boy the reason we have debt is because the Republicans keep lowering the tax rates of the rich and shifting the tax burden of the country onto the shoulders of working people. You are told they will lower tax’s and they do…..for people that you work for, not for you, and if you get some nominal tax break you will find some “fee” has gone up to make up for the short fall, so hence it still comes out of your pocket. Meanwhile the dude that you work for gets a REAL tax cut and suddenly finds $1000’s more in their weekly pay check or in the breaks he will get to claim. His business will park there profits outside the country so they don’t pay tax’s even if their trucks bust up the roads you drive on, your going to have to pay for those repairs via “fees” you pay at the Department of Motor Vehicle’s when you register your car, you boat, your bike, your trailer 5$ bucks here, 20$ there. But hey your boss’s company at least didn’t have to pay anything right??? Do you get it yet? The rich 1% have been waging class warfare against the middle and lower class’s for 40 years now, so what your saying is you would rather they just keep slapping you around instead of fighting back. Well, I’m NOT cool with the abuse most of us have suffered because conservatives have sold us to the richest asshat they could find. Hope you wake up and join the revolution and help take our country back from the rich, so it will work for all of us again.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -kenny boy the reason we have debt is because the Republicans keep lowering the tax rates of the rich and shifting the tax burden of the country onto the shoulders of working people.-

              No.

              The reason we have debt is because we keep spending money we don’t have.

              -ou are told they will lower tax’s and they do…..for people that you work for, not for you-

              Because nobody deserves a break but me.

              -and if you get some nominal tax break you will find some “fee” has gone up to make up for the short fall, so hence it still comes out of your pocket. –

              Evidence?

              We could go through the whole thing, but it’s repeating the same inane claims that socialists have always used to slander anybody more successful than them.

              Amusingly, if I thought it was so great for the rich to get richer, I’d support Obama and the Left. Under their care, wages have fallen, employment has fallen–but corporate profits and the stock market have risen. So if my party has “sold us out to the richest asshat they could find,” how come the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer on YOUR watch?

              Learn a little bit about how economies really work, and maybe you won’t peddle a constant stream of class-warfare bullshit. You’ll be happier when your entire worldview isn’t based on petty, dishonest hatred.

            2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Learn a little bit about how economies really work, and maybe you won’t peddle a constant stream of class-warfare bullshit.

              Learn a little bit about how economies really work and maybe you’ll learn a little something about our classed society.

              “Who rules America” by Domhoff is a good start.

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              “Who rules America” is not a source to learn about how economies really work.

              It is, however,a good source to learn about how whack-ass hatred-based conspiracies work (I especially like the extra note about the Bohemian Grove!).

            4. fel121 says:

              God they really have you programmed well.

            5. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              They’ve programmed me so well that all I can do is spew ad hominems, false accusations, and claims of “propagand….”

              No, wait, that isn’t me. Oooooops.

            6. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Really, it breaks down how the corprate rich exert economic control over the goverment via lobbiests.

              Please quote the parts of the book that seem hatefull to you. You saying it doenst make it true, however if you can provide some evidence to back up your claim…

            7. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Really, it breaks down how the corprate rich exert economic control over the goverment via lobbiests.-
              Like I said, conspiracy theory.

              And considering you’re the one making blatantly slanderous accusations, perhaps demanding I provide evidence isn’t the way you want to go…..

            8. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              How can something observerable and proveable be a conspiracy? Don’t corporations give money to lobbyists? Don’t those lobbyists then influence politicians? Pretty simple causal chain to follow.

              No evidence? I would work on that. I’m quoting from textbooks written by scientists, and your crying like a petulant child that I have no “evidence” priceless.

            9. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -How can something observerable and proveable be a conspiracy? –
              Sure, if it’s completely unobserved and unproven–especially if it’s blatantly ridiculous.

              -No evidence? I would work on that. I’m quoting from textbooks written by scientists,-
              No you’re not. You’re quoting from a hack book written by a socialist.

              -and you’re crying like a petulant child-

              Which is why i’m over here throwing around ad hominems and spewing class-hatred, because…

              No, wait, that ain’t me…..

            10. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Sure, if it’s completely unobserved and unproven–especially if it’s blatantly ridiculous”

              Don’t believe the evidence, publish and prove it wrong. until then you’re a shill.

            11. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -The evidence is in the text book by Domhoff.-

              No. A bunch of whackass claims, including the Bohemian Grove, are in the “text book” by Dornhoff. No doubt I could peruse several books filled with further whackass theories, but when I “try to read a book” I prefer non-fiction.

              -” (which is why we have the highest tax rate in the world, because corporations love paying taxes!)”

              Lie-

              Normally when you call something a lie, it’s supposed to be something that’s not blatantly true. Then again, you’ve been confused about that part for some time, judging by your posts.

              -Don’t believe the evidence, publish and prove it wrong. until then you’re a shill.-

              That’s already been done a few dozen times–but nice work combiningthe Appeal to Authority and the ad hominem into one big lump of Fail, there.

            12. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “No. A bunch of whackass claims, including the Bohemian Grove, are in the “text book” by Dornhoff. No doubt I could peruse several books filled with further whackass theories, but when I “try to read a book” I prefer non-fiction.”

              All the information is well sourced and passed the peer review process. You saying something doesn’t make it true.

              “Normally when you call something a lie, it’s supposed to be something that’s not blatantly true. Then again, you’ve been confused about that part for some time, judging by your posts.”

              Actually you’re the one who has lied repeatedly, Like alluding to a well sourced piece of scientific literature as “fiction”.

              “That’s already been done a few dozen times–but nice work combiningthe Appeal to Authority and the ad hominem into one big lump of Fail, there.”

              Where is this evidence that proves Domhoff wrong? you have yet to provide anything of significance.

            13. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -All the information is well sourced and passed the peer review process. You saying something doesn’t make it true.-

              So you’re not trying to pass off Bohemian Grove conspiracy theoriesas fact?

              -Actually you’re the one who has lied repeatedly,-

              Even though you can’t find a single one of them.

              -Like alluding to a well sourced piece of scientific literature as “fiction”.-

              Which it is indeed.

              -Where is this evidence that proves Domhoff wrong? you have yet to provide anything of significance.-

              Well, there’s basic common sense, for a start. It’s kind of amusing that eeeeeeebil corporations somehow rule the country with the highest corporate tax rate in the world.

              These eeeebil corporations that run America have set it up so they can’t build any power plants. Does that actually make sense to you? These eeeebil corporations shut down the Keystone Pipeline (is it flowing through the Bohemian Grove?) and spent trillions on welfare–if that really make sense to you, I posit that says more aboutyou than it does about me and my supposed “lies” when I dared to refer to the mad ravings of a whacked-out conspiracy theorist as “fiction.”

            14. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Well, there’s basic common sense, for a start. ”

              common sense isn’t, nor is it evidence, try again.

              “Actually you’re the one who has lied repeatedly,”

              You realize that every one can see this tread and its quite easy to read up and see the numerous lies of yours that i have copy pasted and then debunked.

              ” I posit that says more aboutyou than it does about me and my supposed “lies” when I dared to refer to the mad ravings of a whacked-out conspiracy theorist as “fiction.”

              You mean to say “well respected college professor” and yes it does say a lot about you when you think our educators are publishing “fiction” and the other scientists in charge of reviewing the work are in on it. That makes
              you the conspiracy theorist.

            15. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -common sense isn’t, nor is it evidence, try again.-
              Not for y ou, perhaps.

              -You realize that every one can see this tread and its quite easy to read up and see the numerous lies of yours that i have copy pasted and then debunked.-
              Except that I didn’t lie and you didn’t debunk anything.

              -You mean to say “well respected college professor”-
              No, I mean to say exactly what I said. Tell me more about the Bohemian Grove….

              -and yes it does say a lot about you when you think our educators are publishing “fiction” and the other scientists in charge of reviewing the work are in on it. That makesyou the conspiracy theorist.-

              Do you even know what that term means?

            16. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              I also love that you think neoliberalism is a conspiracy theory, despite the mountains of evidence supporting it.

            17. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              What I love is that tyou couldn’t come up with a single shred of these “mountains of evidence”–plus the fact that I said nothing about neoliberalism, just your whackass conspiracy theory that eeeeeebil corprations are controlling the government (which is why we have the highest tax rate in the world, because corporations love paying taxes!).

            18. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              The evidence is in the text book by Domhoff. Or you could peruse “the future of freedom” by Fareed Zakaria. Or “a brief history of neoliberalism” by David Harvey.
              The main point is to try to read a book.

            19. FightForYourRight-HispanicCons says:

              Hahahaha! So we don’t have a spending problem we have a revenue problem? It takes a special kind of… ok, willful ignorance to believe this. You could tax the rich 100% and could not cover what democrats like Sanders want to spend… Lady, it’s spending problem

            20. fel121 says:

              And the biggest expenditure is your wish to rule the world with 200 military bases on every Continent and aircraft carriers and subs in every Ocean.
              Slash Military spending 40% and reinvest in American infrastructure and education, the only problem with this is there would be no more stupid people to vote Republican.

            21. FightForYourRight-HispanicCons says:

              Man I’d hate to be someone like you, and “generalizing” like you do is a symptom of being conditioned. Brain-washed if you will… Blissfully enjoying your ignorance, are we? The United States faces very serious national security threats from numerous sources including Islamic terrorism, which is spreading rapidly throughout the world and seeks to establish “sleeper cells” within America’s borders; Communist China’s extensive military build-up and expansionist designs; and fascist Russia’s intimidation and invasion of sovereign neighbors. Would you like me to go on? I’ll give you this, assuming you feel this way; our government has a hard time being efficient with our money in just about every facet of spending. If you respond to this comment please, please refrain from facile arguments… I will suffer the fool, gladly.

            22. fel121 says:

              OK, I wont respond.

            23. fel121 says:

              “HispanicCons” most of your right wing friends wouldn’t pi$$ on you if they found you on fire in the street, what drives you to align yourself with a party whose modern day acolytes were born out of a strategy of bigotry? Though the message of smaller government and less taxes is an appealing one, it should be clear to even the most dull witted individual that the modern day Republican party believes in neither, but is merely an arm of the well connected and wealthy.

            24. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              Again with the generalizing.

              You’ll be surprised with the fact that 70% of my family are conservatives so the only pissing we do is on idiocy like yours.

              One thing you are forgetting is this country, this country that my parents choose over their country of origin was established to be a small government for the people not the other way around.

              You have to ask the question why would people choose to come to this country? Because it is better than the one, they left.

              Answer this question; why is this country better than the one my parents left?

              When we “conservatives” ask for a smaller government is implied that we want an efficient government not bloated like we have today. And as far as taxes are concerned, how much longer can we increase our debt?

              I had predicted around the time of our current president’s re-election, that by the time he left office our debt would be around 20 trillion, and people like you thought I was loony. Guess what? We are on track to meet my prediction

            25. fel121 says:

              Another brain dead right wing r’tard, maybe ith you stopped listen to bullsh!t on right wing radio and read a fvcking book or a news paper you wouldn’t be so fvcking stupid.

              The real cost of G.W.’s wars were never accounted for, so when they were put on the books of course the debt would skyrocket, but you don’t believe any of this right, this is all liberal goofy talk to a mindless conservatard.

              Stop talking to me dude, you are really to fvcking dumb to live, if you climbed a fence into any other country in the world, you would have starved to death by now, just keep living in your right wing dream world and the next time a Republican President is elected you can go relax and have a few taco, secure in the fact that all is right with the world.

            26. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              Hahahahahahah! Why so testy? I didn’t mean to make you feel so inadequate… Hahahaha! Thanks man, I enjoyed the laugh (honestly I did lol).

            27. HigherGround/Blk Conservative says:

              Ignorant people like you can’t help but blame Bush. I was not really a fan of Bush myself, but I think him a better president than the one we have now…

            28. Tom White says:

              HAHAHA! This is freaking funny! You rant and rave, insult and ask to be left alone. Pathetic. I guess your narcissistic tendencies has a hard time when someone points out your limitations. Can you say narcissistic personality disorder?

            29. fel121 says:

              I have two words for you Paco “supplemental appropriations”…

            30. Gman says:

              You replied to a Latino with, “I have two words for you, Paco…”

              … and yet, another demonstration of liberals being the filthy racist ones.

            31. michele1240 says:

              tell me dude, what part of government do you want to shrink? you want to get rid of oil rig investigators? how about some of the biggies, like the Dept. of Commerce, who really gives a fuck about helping small business owners gain access of financing right? not that one? ok maybe you dump all the agra inspectors and just let anything be sold on our grocer shelves. then tell farmers to go fuck themselves cause no new loans or no help with crop insurance, dang…ok not that one…. maybe we should tell all the public defenders that they are no longer needed to serve poor folks,….. ok now I am talking right??? get rid of all those pesky welfare workers right?? am I on to something now?? yeah well fuck you and everyone like you. Countries our size or big and messy and expensive and the reasons that folks immigrate to the US is as varied as the folks that come here. However that said, If we were not so busy being the worlds police man, judge and executioner (all paid for with our tax dollars) we would have ample money to take care of all our people in every way needed and we would still be saving money annually.

            32. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              Why so hostile, dude? To answer your hostel question I would say that every part of our government must function efficiently. If the amount is adequate to any of the examples (we can “disqus” later to the worth of some of the programs you mentioned) that you gave, you keep it as is. Unfortunately that is not our reality. And I do have a Libertarian point of view on our foreign policies. We can’t overlook the fact that not only are democrats guilty of voting for their own interest, their own power, but republicans, career politicians gladly join in on the mêlée. I know your issue and the issue of people who believe that we should have a utopian statism… Oh, the allure of political demagogues… Here’s to Liberalism; the source of–and solution to–all of life’s problems! The increase of governmental power in an increasingly authoritarian and centralized federal Leviathan, abounds. It can’t be helped for its the nature of the beast… I apologize for my rambling, but it is what it is.

            33. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              Answer: They immigrate mostly for economic betterment and freedoms… self-determination

              Next question: How can America allot so much personal freedom?

            34. Tom White says:

              I know! But I’ll let Michele 1240 answer.

            35. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -tell me dude, what part of government do you want to shrink?-

              Do you truly believe there’s nothing in the government that can shrink?

              -how about some of the biggies, like the Dept. of Commerce, who really gives a fuck about helping small business owners gain access of financing right? –

              Small business owners can’t get loans without government helping them out?

              -ok maybe you dump all the agra inspectors and just let anything be sold on our grocer shelves.-

              Like we did back when food was cheaper.

              -then tell farmers to go fuck themselves cause no new loans or no help with crop insurance, dang.-

              Farmers can’t get loans without the government doing it?

              -maybe we should tell all the public defenders that they are no longer needed to serve poor folks,-

              Whydon’t you pay them, if you think they’re so important?

              -yeah well fuck you and everyone like you.-

              Ew. Just ew.

              -Countries our size or big and messy and expensive-

              But apparently a bunch of bureaucrats can fix our problems.

              -and the reasons that folks immigrate to the US is as varied as the folks that come here.-

              Which means precisely……?

              -However that said, If we were not so busy being the worlds police man, judge and executioner (all paid for with our tax dollars) –

              And other fictional issues.

              -we would have ample money to take care of all our people in every way needed and we would still be saving money annually.-

              If we had no military at all our government would still be wasting a disgusting amount of money–most of it doing things that it has no right to do.

            36. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Ever read 1984? terrorism is the war that can never be won against the enemy that can never be seen.

            37. michele1240 says:

              it must be very hard to breath with your head so far up your ass.

            38. HigherGround/Blk Conservative says:

              Yes, it takes a special kind of [stupid] to believe michele1240’s statement

            39. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              We have an inequality problem.

            40. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              We have an inequality problem?… Actually, last Sunday while driving a few of my younger judo team members to a judo tournament in my 2013 top of the line Honda Odyssey a though about “inequality” popped into my mind. A BMW X5 7 seater probably fully loaded, was next to me on the freeway. Since I like that specific model, I wonder if I should get one of those. I think I can swing it being that it’s probably no more than 15 to 20 k more than my Odyssey. “Why can’t I have one? It’s not fair,” I thought to myself, but then I noticed a person next to me in a 1990s Honda Previa looking at my van probably thinking the same thing. Is it inequality, or is it just reward?

            41. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              What does your story have to do with social stratification? Anecdotal observations are great, but unless you can use those observations to prove that the poorest members of our society have just as many rights and freedoms as the richest members of our society your personal stories don’t carry much weight.

            42. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              Ok, but you didn’t mention “social stratification,” you only mentioned “inequality,” and I thought my personal story addressed it adequately.

              Then allow me to tell an other personal story to address this: My parents were part of the middle-class in Mexico; my father being a journalist/church minister and my mom a nurse.

              He was asked to help with a Spanish ministry in Los Angeles California… To make a long story short they decided to stay.

              Now under the “Social Stratification Dominance hierarchy theory,” there is where my parents were supposed to stay. Now only a low-wage minister and not being able to speak English, prosperity was probably out of the question.

              Twenty years later, some good investments and many kids later, they were worth around 5 million dollars.

              Under what I’m assuming is your definition of inequality in this country this is not supposed to happen.

              I have an other personal story I could share with you if you’d like?

            43. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Under what I’m assuming is your definition of inequality in this country this is not supposed to happen.”

              First, allow me to point out that inequality is a precursor to social stratification. That is to say that without some form of inequality social classes don’t form and elites are unable to differentiate themselves from the commoners as much.

              Second, there is some class mobility but that mobility doesn’t imply that inequality doesn’t exist. Only that the system is more fluid than a stricter caste system.

              At the expense of sounding repetitive you can tell all the stories you like, but unless you can use those observations to prove that the poorest members of our society have just as many rights and freedoms as the richest members of our society your personal stories don’t carry much weight.

            44. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              Ok, dismiss another applicable personal story that goes to prove a true “Social Stratification Dominance hierarchy” does not exist in this country. I know what, why don’t you look to countries like Saudi Arabia where Dominance hierarchy exist and compare it to ours?

            45. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Personal stories aren’t science, they’re subjective.

            46. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              So is your science…

            47. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              No science is objective, that’s the whole purpose of peer review. Anyone can read what’s published and if they disagree publish their rebuttal.

            48. FightForUrRightHispanicConserv says:

              No science is subjective to liberals… The end justifies the means.

            49. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Science is a process.

          5. Ernest Crunkleton says:

            No need to rethink anything, your ignorance of social problems shows unequivocally that your views are based on propoganda produced by the corprate media. You claim that observable patterns like climate change and social inequality are “conspiracies”.

            You prove there are masses of ignorant people being manipulated by being one.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -No need to rethink anything, your ignorance of social problems shows unequivocally that your views are based on propoganda produced by the corprate media.-
              Considering the “corporate media” is solidly liberal, perhaps my fictional ignorance simply shows that I make my arguments based on facts instead of tossing out childish ad hominems.

              Y’know–unlike you.

            2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Considering the “corporate media” is solidly liberal”

              HAHAHAHA, best bit I’ve read all day.

              Owned by rightwing corporations, yet somehow is liberal. lol.

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              According to every study done on the subject and also common sense.

              You can deny obvious facts if you want–it’s sort of hard to support socialism otherwise, after all–but don’t expect the rest of us to deny them with you.

      3. Kenneth F. Martin says:

        That’s intellectually dishonest, and you know it.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          Yes, blatant silly slander like the “Southern Strategy” conspiracy is about as intellectually dishonest as it gets.

          1. ArthurFrayne says:

            Except that “Southern Strategy” is a real thing. Lee Atwater himself said as much.

            1. Brad R says:

              You realize Atwater died like 25 years ago? And his politics ceased being relavent in the 70s when Carter won the presidency?

            2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              What does that have to do with the accuracy of his statements?

            3. Brad R says:

              Because we quit following that strategy when Carter swept the South.

            4. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              So the republican party has rescinded it’s use of racism to garner votes? It seems like that practice is still in effect.

            5. Mr. Outer Limits says:

              Total bunk. Thanks for proving how wingnuts like you get everything wrong.

              As in….who did the “Willie Horton” ad for George H.W. Bush? Lee Atwater. What year was that? 1988. Thank you.

            6. DrMJG says:

              Check your time Frame: Atwater worked for Reagan’s campaign, developed the welfare Queen, meme, and made sure RR’s first speech was in MS and used many phrases to raise up the anti-civil rights feeling in the South. One thing to deny but another thing to indicate you are not a student of history.

            7. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Liberals love to call the “Welfare Queen” speech racist–for the same reason that they usually break out the race-card; because they can’t handle the facts–but that doesn’t actually make something racist.

              Likewise, not only is it not just dishonest but silly to imply that Reagan made a speech in the state of Mississippi to stir up racists, Reagan didn’t make his first speech in Mississippi.

            8. Stu Johnson says:

              That goes to show you have a very selective memory and little understanding of how politics really work.

            9. ArthurFrayne says:

              Uh… he was an advisor to Reagan. i.e., the Southern strategy was developed to unseat Carter. And if you think the same thing isn’t going on today, you are really fooling yourself. The whole GOP game plan is to tap into the prejudices of their potential voting base.

            10. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Except that Lee Atwater took a hard left turn (under the effects of a brain tumor) and spent the latter part of his life slandering everyone on the Right.

              The entire idea is silly. You’re basically saying that Nixon, the president who desegregated the schools (yes, it became law under Johnson, but it took Nixon to actually make it happen), imposed the first affirmative action quotas, and spent his entire political career fighting segregation, decided to invite racist Democrats to join the party that ended segregation… and racists accepted (despite only supporting Republicans in elections where almost the entire country did, and supporting both Jimmah and Biilzebubba by large majorities–guess they must have turned racist, then not-racist for four years, then racist for twelve, then not-racist for eight….). Who do you expect to actually believe that? Quit playing the race-card and come up with a real argument….

              …. if you can.

        2. Brad R says:

          Kenneth, you are the one being intellectually dishonest. Obama jacked the deficit way up…almost 1.5 trillion at the peak and over 1 trillion for several years. Now that he has cut his overspending down to Bush-era levels (GW Bush highest was only 450bn), you are patting him on the back?!

          Bush was a disaster I never thought we could top, then Obama does the impossible and adds TWICE as much to our debt as Bush did. Between Bush and Obama, we have done damage to our economy that will take decades to repair – if future politicians even care to try.

          1. Ronald Wilmore says:

            Two wars started by Bush that will ultimately cost taxpayers 7 trillion dollars has everything to do with the mess O’bama inherited. No worries mate Dick Cheney did make 39 billion in profits on a no bid contract to rebuild Iraq ., I know in the narrow conservatives mind that some how this is O’bama’s fault. You all need a dose of heavy reality,

            1. DrMJG says:

              AND Bush kept the war “off books” the major part of the raise in 2009-2010 was fully putting the actual cost of the war, including interest paid to China ON the record.

      4. Jim in Texas says:

        There’s plenty of hate to go around, both conservative and liberal. Your response does as much to stoke it as it does to call attention to it. (And it also completely avoids addressing any of the points in the article.)

      5. Steven Nein says:

        Damn, the republicans don’t even believe in sex let alone masturbation! And just what ideas do you have to help the poor in this nation? more tax cuts and tax breaks for the rich and more corporate welfare?

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          -Damn, the republicans don’t even believe in sex let alone masturbation!-
          That’s just weird. I’m not sure if you thought a claim lik that was funny, or if you thought it was an effective insult, or if you just typed random letters into your keyboard.

          -And just what ideas do you have to help the poor in this nation?-

          Cut regulations. Quit screwing up every business from the corporations you claim to hate all the way down to lemonade stands. Quit taking massive chunks of peoples’ money away from them in taxes. Y’know, basic common sense.

          1. Steven Nein says:

            Hey, You got part of that statement right. It was an insult in the fact that your party believes that abstinence is the best form of birth control and it would follow that masturbation should be much higher in your party, but that just ain’t the case is it? I would venture to wage a bet that as many republicans children get abortions as democrats children. Back to the subject. Cut regulations, and I mentioned the repeal of Glass-Steagal. How did that work out? Do you mean screwing up the 60,000 or so manufacturing companies that went out of business costing American some 3 million jobs because of the republican policies to give tax incentives and tax breaks to corporations to send those jobs overseas because of lower wages. Also, allowing these corporations to have corporate offices in the Caymen Islands so that they do not have to pay taxes into the American Treasury. I call this treason and un-American, and to top it off your party yells about the debt we have! How in the world can this debt be paid down with reduced income? Corporations pay a net effective tax rate of 11%! I would love to pay that rate. Your party endorses this nonsense that you call common sense. You talk about taking people money away from them. Your party tells us that some 47% of the American people are takers and pay no or little in taxes which makes your comment absolutely wrong. Then your party allows the richest of the rich to pay some of the lowest tax rates in this country. How does that square with you common sense thinking?

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Hey, You got part of that statement right. It was an insult-

              My statement is that you may well have thought it was an insult, but it sounded a bit more like word salad.

              -It was an insult in the fact that your party believes that abstinence is the best form of birth control-

              Because people get pregnant without having sex all the time…..

              -I would venture to wage a bet that as many republicans children get abortions as democrats children.-

              And I’d love to take you up on that bet.

              -Cut regulations, and I mentioned the repeal of Glass-Steagal. How did that work out?-

              Pretty well. It was forcing banks to make bad loans that caused a problem.

              -Do you mean screwing up the 60,000 or so manufacturing companies that went out of business costing American some 3 million jobs because of the republican policies to give tax incentives and tax breaks to corporations to send those jobs overseas because of lower wages.-

              No, I mean events that actually took place.

              -Also, allowing these corporations to have corporate offices in the Caymen Islands so that they do not have to pay taxes into the American Treasury.-

              Except if a corporation has its corporate offices in the Cayman Islands, it still has to pay US taxes on the money that it earns in the US.

              -I call this treason and un-American,-

              Then I suggest you look those terms up before you start throwing them around.

              -and to top it off your party yells about the debt we have!-

              Because it’s not like we have an issue with runaway spending, or an…

              Oh, wait, it is like that. It’s exactly like that.

              -ow in the world can this debt be paid down with reduced income?-

              With less spending. This ~should~ be obvious.

              -Corporations pay a net effective tax rate of 11%! I would love to pay that rate.-

              So would most corporations, I’m sure, because that sounds like more of your bullshit to me.

              -Your party tells us that some 47% of the American people are takers and pay no or little in taxes which makes your comment absolutely wrong.-

              How does relating a fact make us wrong? I think now I understand your posts a lot better….

              -Then your party allows the richest of the rich to pay some of the lowest tax rates in this country. How does that square with you common sense thinking?-

              The same way other fictions do.

      6. martin woyzeck says:

        Well kenneth , you’re proof of reichwingers being of the lowest scumbag class of people….or is it animal.
        Go take your second amendment and place it in your mouth

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          If I’m a scumbag, then why are you the one expressing deathwishes and stalking?

          Seriously stalking–I’m startin’ to think you got a crush on me, kid.

      7. Mikaele Baker says:

        Kenneth, I’m a pretty strong Liberal, and while I’d love to discuss political history (I happen to accept most of the claims of this article, though it is somewhat misleading at times), I’m mostly just commenting to apologize for the behavior of my fellow Liberals. Ad hominem attacks against someone based on their political beliefs isn’t very Liberal, and does nothing to spur discussion or advance our goals.

      8. bigdog says:

        Please, show us something…anything…to disprove this.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          Such as the fact that it was Republicans who ended segregation? Or the fact that Nixon was one of segregation’s most ardent opponents? Or the fact that the voters who supposedly embraced the Republicans out of racism supported Carter and Clinton? Or the fact that you have absolutely no evidence and you’re obviously playing the race-card in a sad attempt to distract from the facts?

      9. rejectrepublicanlies says:

        Can you disprove or refute anything that’s enumerated in this article? Please point to credible sources.

      10. Jeff Walker says:

        Kenneth, I’m not interested in exchanging insults with you. I found the article frustrating in its assertion that racism is the driving force behind GOP success in the South without better supporting evidence. Your analysis is too concise for me to get a handle on the exact criticism of the article. Could you explain to me, someone who likely doesn’t share your assumptions, what you found wrong with the article? Or could you provide an alternative explanation for the realignment of the southern states and why the Republicans appeal to a demographic that is dominated by older, white, male voters? Would you characterize Republicans as not being racist, as seen by the presence of black people, such as Condoleezza Rice, in positions of authority? Or would you say that their attitudes are not racist, just reflecting a difference between whites and non-whites, as reflected in justice Scalia’s musings that diversity programs may do a disservice to students of color by thrusting them into situations that are not well suited for their abilities, as he reflected on the admissions politics at the University of Texas? Thanks.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          I’ve put it elsewhere, but the basic assertion in the article doesn’t make sense….

          It holds that white racists fought to defend segregation… this is indeed true, but here is where we leave the realm of common sense–because the “Southern Strategy” conspiracy holds that Richard Nixon (who spent his entire political career fighting against the system of segregation, suddenly switched gears and invited all the racists in–and, in turn, the racists who had been battling the Republicans for decades (and losing) suddenly decided to accept that invitation–and, motivated by their racism, left the party that defended segregation and joined the party that fought it.

          That’s how Nixon swept the South in 1972… but to cover it up, he also swept the West, the Midwest, the West Coast, and all of the Northeast but Massachusetts. But those racists suddenly, magically, turned not-racist in 1976, when they elected Carter…. Then racist for 12 years in 1980 (Reagan, like Nixon, cleverly disguised this by winning massive majorities in the rest of the country as well), then not-racist for 8 in 1992, then racist for 8, then sorta halfway.

          The other reason is thatit’s simply untrue. Polls made it clear throughout the 80’s and 90’s that the Republicans were attracting the young voters–the older people who’d been voting Democrat all their lives kept right on doing so, pretty much until they died out. We tend to think of the South’s switch from Democrat to Republican as everybody simply swapping sides on signal, but that’s not how it went. Indeed, most of the prominent figures in the segregation movement remained with the Democrats. Yeah, Strom Thurmond switched sides in the late 60’s or 70’s (can’t remember exactly which), but the vast majority of the segregation crowd remained loyal Democrats right up to their deaths.

          Also, keep in mind that the 60’s and early 70’s is when the Democrat Party became a parody of itself. Open support for socialist terrorist groups like the Weather Underground and the SDS (Keep in mind that Bill Ayers, an open, unrepentent socialist terrorist, not only holds a prestigious spot in academia, not only remains a powerful name on the Left, but actually launched the career of our current president from his living room.). NAMBLA was making public marches, abortion was legalized, homosexuality removed from the list of disorders, “free love” became an idea that people actually took seriously (not to mention wife-swapping), various drugs became mainstream–it was a pretty natural time for loyal Democrats to look at their party and say “wait a sec, what the hell am I involved in?”

          Republicans have for a long time given positions of authority to black people Condoleeza Rice is a prominent example, because she was also the first female secretary of state–and also because of the constant, often racist, attacks she suffered from the Left–but in short, black people have always been welcome in our ranks. It wasn’t Republicans who blatantly slandered Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas as over-sexed black men, after all.

          As far as attitudesreflecting a difference between whites and nonwhites, we don’t believe in such a difference. Scalia’s musings were turned into a general statement about all non-white students, but they simply weren’t. Diversity programs make it possible for some students of color to get into universities they aren’t actually qualified to join–that’s a direct, deliberate result of requiring lower SAT scores, for example. When a student of any color who is not Harvard material is pushed into Harvard anyway, he or she is going to have a difficult time and may well not graduate. Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams have been making note of the same thing for years before Scalia mentioned it.

      11. Westwoodman says:

        Actually if you want to see who’s still stoking the hatred, bigotry, and racism just look at the candidates the GOP is running. Yeah, that’s pretty obvious to everyone. It’s equally obvious that the GOP has indeed become the open and obvious spokespersons for everything…EVERYTHING…that is wrong with our society.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          Well, that would explain why the GOP is out there playing the race-card instead of coming up with actual facts….

          No, wait–that’s you. How about you put down the race-card and come up with a real argument?

          If you can…..

      12. God says:

        It’s pure fact for you low IQ, racist cons that hate everyone better and smarter than you and your party of hate. Your red states collect 85% of the public welfare and then give the rich tax breaks and corporate welfare. Deal with the facts

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          If you want me to deal with facts, how about presenting some instead of a series of childish ad hominems?

          Quit playing the race-card and come up with a real argument….

          ….if you can.

      13. Lenny says:

        What part of it don’t you agree with? Dog whistle politics, in which politicians attract white voters by appeal to them with racially coded and loaded language, is an obvious tactic that Republicans have been masters of. There are any number of phrases they will employ, like constant reference to the “middle class” or “crime” or “welfare,” which are all designed to produce racial tension and resentment.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          Well, let’s start with that. when someone isn’t saying or doing something racist, it means they’re not doing or saying something racist. But without accusations of racism Left might actually have to defend their policies, so they pretend that we’re using “code words.”

          It’s a crock of shit. “Middle class,” “crime,” and “welfare” mean “middle class,” “crime,” and “welfare” respectively. They’re designed to do exactly what they’ve done for centuries; name things.

          “Dog-whistle politics” is just an excuse for calling people racist and not having to provide any evidence to back it up.

      14. David Franks says:

        “this collection of blatant, rather silly slander”
        Please do provide specific examples, and explain how they are slanderous and/or silly.

      15. DesertSun59 says:

        Bravo. You proved the point of the article.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          The point of the article was that the Left uses blatantly false accusations of racism in a sad attempt to detract from their complete lack of facts and reasonable positions.

          Doubtless that wasn’t the point the author intended–but it’s badly written.

      16. Greta Renee Houston says:

        Why did you read it? Did it get you stoked?

      17. kevin says:

        Pretty much nailed it, including Lee Atwater; an amoral political genius who was a whore to the highest bidder. Enter the GOP. Did you know that Lee Atwater died of brain cancer? I call this karma.

      18. Gennadiy says:

        Liberals? Hate? What planet are on? Just watch a few republican political adds.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          Because it was Republicans who thought it was funny to accuse the Palins of incest and figured Justice Scalia’s death was a good time to hope Thomas is next….

          Or was it? Was it a Republican who publically wished that Jesse Helms–or his grandchildren–would get AIDS? Is it Republicans screaming “racism” every time someone dares to criticize them? Is it Republicans on this very thread with such loving rejoinders as:

          “Rightwingers are not worth an argument,”
          “We are coming for fascist republican scum, we will buy guns and use them just like you fascist traitors want to use them”
          “They are some aspects of fascism with these people and they have no idea how they are traitors. ”
          “The idiot, uneducated, stupid racist bigot description is fact, not opinion.”
          “Cuz alexjones told you, or jesseventura, mikeadams,ron paul, the kockbros, or any of those nazi rightwingers”
          “There is, of course, the alternative possibility that you are not stupid, but plain evil.
          Just sayin’.”
          “Actually you’re racist, sexist views are those of a fascist. Just like your hero Hitler.”
          “you american right are dumbfucking morons.”
          “Your stupidity is beyond repair. Killing yourself is the only solution. Do so.”
          (I could have easily tripled this list, but I didn’t want to quote one troll, so I stuck with no more than one quote per person.)

          Liberals, hateful? Naw, I must be dreaming.

          1. Gennadiy says:

            Just the venom in you rant makes my point even more fitting. Go go agitate your FOXNews buddies dumbass

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              Did you notice all that venom was in quotation marks? The venom in me rant (sic) is ~liberal~ venom.

              And you proved my point about hateful liberals by spewing ad hominems in lieu of facts… just like, as the long selection of quotes proves, liberals have to.

            2. Gennadiy says:

              You you mentioning fascism several times and Hitler in reference to progressive thinkers, I consider it pretty venomous dude. Do you know how close xenophobia is to fascism? The top of the list of Republican candidates so far is wearing xenophobia as a badge of honor. so good luck with that in the general election. As for you calling me troll, look in the mirror, judging by the history of your posts that is all you do all day long my friend.

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -You you mentioning fascism several times and Hitler in reference to progressive thinkers, I consider it pretty venomous dude.-
              Again–did you notice the quotation marks?

              These things: ” ” denote that I’m putting in someone ELSE’s comment.

              I didn’t mention fascism or Hitler, and the statements I quoted were not in reference to profressive thinkers.

              – As for you calling me troll, look in the mirror,-
              Tell you what–I’ll look in the mirror, and you look at my posts, because I didn’t call you a troll.

              Are you actually not getting this, or are you doing it on purpose?

      19. fbear0143 says:

        I grew up in North Carolina and this piece is as accurate as it can be. I lived and voted during the Wallace years, I saw the effects of the Johnson era and the great society legislation. I was in high school when desegregation began in my town. I don’t know that you think you know, but I can tell you, s an old white man WITH a good education and powers of observation, that you are dead WRONG when you talk about lies. You are doing what we wishful thinking to justify your bigotry. Thank God my parents did not tolerate this kind of self satisfying denial. It sounds like W. E. Debnam’s wishful thinking in his bigoted little booklet from the ’50s.
        Never, never blame he “liberals” for your brand of hatred and intolerance. It won’t work.

        1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

          -I grew up in North Carolina and this piece is as accurate as it can be.-
          There’s no way to source that or back it up. However….

          what we do know by the numbers is that Jimmy Carter carried North Carolina, and by a wide margin. Did they suddenly turn not-racist, only to turn racist again a few years later?

          -You are doing what we wishful thinking to justify your bigotry.-
          Here in the real world, you’re doing what we call ad hominems in calling your opponent a bigot without a shred of evidence to bbak it up.

          -Never, never blame he “liberals” for your brand of hatred and intolerance. It won’t work.-
          Of course it won’t work–the hatred and intolerance you speak of is nonexistent. We just blame the liberals for falsely accusing us of it whenever y’all don’t have any facts to support your argument.

          1. fbear0143 says:

            I think I know ad hominem attacks when I see them. I wrote and taught rhetoric or more than 40 years. Yours is an argument without a shread of documentation. You assert your ideas and expect people o accept them only because you said so.
            I EXPERIENCED much of the development of the Southern Strategy as it became necessary. I was voting when Thurmond and Talmadge wee sill democrats. That platform is historically documentable asa part of th Republican National Committee’s plan to move the South into its fold. A brief summary is in Wikipedia, of yo do not want to take the time to find more “dignified” sources. The information there, is accurate, however. You can deny and deny, but that’s your problem.
            I grew up a Democrat in the South because it was tradition among families like mine, average, generally educated, working class families. As things began to change after desegregation and John’s signing of the Civil Rights acts, some of my less educate family move to the right because the republican strategy left room for their racism. Others of us, like many in my state who had final been able to go to college for the first time, or who, like my father, had educated himself through reading almost everything he could get his hands on, remained where we were politically because we were able to see not only the strategy, but also the scheming inherent in those plans. The proof of that is in the obviously bigoted and racist makeup of representatives from those states and of most of those who voted them into office.
            Further, the irony of your ad hominem attack on me because I am “liberal” combined with a complete absence of proof that all the information in the article a lie, simply goes to prove my point, that your illusions of bigotry and hatred blind you to facts. you have no credibility, and were you my student, even if I personally AGREED with you, you would receive a failing grade in rhetoric.

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -I think I know ad hominem attacks when I see them.-
              You should, since your entire argument depends on them.

              -Yours is an argument without a shread of documentation.-
              Says the guy who’s entire argument is personal recollection.

              -That platform is historically documentable asa part of th Republican National Committee’s plan to move the South into its fold.-
              Except it’s not.

              -The proof of that is in the obviously bigoted and racist makeup of representatives from those states and of most of those who voted them into office.-
              Which means your proof is non-existent.

              -Further, the irony of your ad hominem attack on me because I am “liberal”-
              “Liberal” is a political designation, not an insult–and at no point did I call you a liberal. Didn’t you say you know an ad hominem attack when you see one? Either you were lying then, or you’re lying now.

              -combined with a complete absence of proof that all the information in the article a lie-
              Except, y’know, the whole common-sense thing. But I suppose that doesn’t stack up next to your mountain or sources and documents.

              -simply goes to prove my point, that your illusions of bigotry and hatred blind you to facts.-
              Considering my ad hominem attack and my “illusions of bigotry and hatred” are both completely non-existent, you’ve almost made a point.

              -and were you my student, even if I personally AGREED with you, you would receive a failing grade in rhetoric.-
              When you have a better argument than “I saw it, and you’re a bigot” then perhaps I’ll worry about what grade you’d give me. Until then, the fact that you disapprove is a compliment.

              So put down the race-card and pick up a real argument….

              …if you can.

      20. Day2Knight56 says:

        “Nobody who “needs it” as in doesn’t believe this collection of blatant, rather silly slander, will have the gullibility to believe it.”

        It’s not slander if it’s true. It is verifiably true that the majority of poor uneducated whites vote for Republicans. And it is also true that doing so flies in the face of their own economic self-interest.

    3. truth2power says:

      You mean revisionist history brought to you by someone who obviously has done no research on the Democrat party and it’s racist past?

      1. Gman says:

        … nor its racist present, vis a vis Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Robert “KKK” Byrd, etc., all of whom flipped anti-black, racist remarks off their tongue as if it was nothing.

        1. Ubiquitousnewt says:

          Hah, what are YOU smoking? “The Democrats are racist?” …Dude, we have *a black democrat president*. Meanwhile the Republicans can’t get more than 10-15% of the black popular vote. Who DO you think you’re fooling, besides yourself?

          1. Gman says:

            I must be smoking YouTube videos that show the above-mentioned making racist remarks. I understand that destroys your narrative, so please … show us all how you cope with your cognitive dissonance with a maladroit response. I await with bated breath. (LOL! “I can’t be racist! I voted for a black man for POTUS! Oh! And I have black friends!!!! Bwahahaha!)

            1. ResistJerks says:

              Bitch. Barack Obama a Kenyan, Communist, Muslim ( according to the teabagger narrative) ran on the Democratic ticket and won. Give me something equivalent. In the Republitard party. They have their tocken minorities to keep as a front, but they don’t actually have any power.
              Teabaggers have teabagged so much their brains are fried.

            2. Gman says:

              Okay, okay … You’ve CONVINCED ME! It’s PERFECTLY OKAY to be a racist and say racist things … as long as I’m a Democrat. Got it!

            3. ResistJerks says:

              Dude I said those things from the perpective of what right wing conservatives are calling him. I was being sarcastic. I know studies show conservatives naturally have lower IQs…but damn…I didn’t know it’s this bad.

            4. Gman says:

              Unsurprising that you feel the only racist remarks in your rant included only those with which you used to mock whom who feel are conservatives.

            5. BBQB5 says:

              We don`t want you stupid. You are better fitted with the SUCKERS being used by the rich.

            6. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Strawman

            7. Cecile Tourville says:

              You know…….I just believe that the Democrats are the most selfish people on earth…….they want illegals here so they will keep them voting, as they did the blacks, by giving away the wealth of the taxpayers, and continually promising them Utopia……but, making sure they are kept on the Plantation…….ever read Star Parker………she tells it like it is!

            8. Peter J Heaton says:

              um…cecile..tell Me how these illegals get to vote?

            9. Cecile Tourville says:

              They crossed the border illegally did they not? So all that needs to be done …… register…..why do you think the Democrats are against voter ID’s…..if you can vote without an ID……who will know who they are?

            10. Peter J Heaton says:

              If They were to register what do think happen? Try to think …really hard….

            11. Cecile Tourville says:

              They will vote Democratic!

            12. Peter J Heaton says:

              sounds about right.

            13. peccary says:

              Double face palm!!

            14. michele1240 says:

              lmao

            15. ArthurFrayne says:

              Asking her to think is asking too much of her.

            16. Peter J Heaton says:

              Arthur unfortunately there are many who are just as obtuse as cecile.

            17. michele1240 says:

              lmao dude, its like talking to stumps!! hell they only thing these conservative Einsteins can do is repeat buzz words like illegals, welfare queens, etc. They refuse to recognize original thought because it aint their cousin!!! lmao

            18. michele1240 says:

              I would add that conservatives have the same bullshit going on with woman, have one or two tokens then legislate against us constantly!

            19. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              The you-tube watching political expert. They must not teach logic on those videos or you would realize that comparing a few flippant remarks to the established practice of institutional racism is a false comparison fallacy.

            20. Gman says:

              Ahhh … I see. Subjective, perceived “institutional racism” by political opponent > actual racist behaviors caught on video. Got it. Nice proof by assertion fallacy.

            21. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              If you don’t think institutionalized racism exists. We really don’t have any more to discuss. Since my “assertion” is backed up by dozens of sociological studies, like the stanford prison experiment. Wage and applicant studies all over the US showing disproportionate hiring practices. Or ones showing minoritys being incarcerated at a rate far exceeding their demographic.

              What you claim is merely a political talking point is in fact evidenced by scientific data.

            22. Gman says:

              Nobody claimed racism (institutionalized or otherwise) does not exist. We were juxtaposing the two major political parties. When did the discussion expand to our entire society, again? Try to stay focused, Scooter.

            23. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You claimed it was subjective and a “proof via assertion fallacy”. Unless I am mistaken that fallacy rests on the idea that my assertion is not backed by evidence. And is more akin to propaganda than a valid phenomenon that the effects of which can be measured.

            24. Gman says:

              Prepositional phrases are important. Given the profound degree of pretentiousness and sanctimony with which you have addressed others that do not goosestep to the left’s old, tired talking points and rule book, it is surprising that you either missed the prepositional phrase, showing a lack of cognizance, or didn’t miss it, yet chose to continue on the premise that it never existed, showing your interest not in addressing a point, but making your own. If you can’t keep up, stay home. Shalom.

            25. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Prepositional phrases are important.”

              Only if you’re quibbling over grammar.

              “Given the profound degree of pretentiousness and sanctimony with which you have addressed others”

              Strawman, assumes you are privy to my intentions

              “the left’s old, tired talking points”

              Like climate change, human rights, and racism?

              “you either missed the prepositional phrase, showing a lack of
              cognizance, or didn’t miss it, yet chose to continue on the premise that
              it never existed”

              If I have misconstrued your argument then by all means point out the error. Miscommunication happens all the time, and the context under which misunderstandings take place is much more nuanced than the false dilemma you are proposing.

              ” showing your interest not in addressing a point, but making your own.”

              Yes this is called a discussion, your points are easily shown to be invalidated by some research into social phenomenon.

              “If you can’t keep up, stay home”
              “Try to stay focused, Scooter.”
              “show us all how you cope with your cognitive dissonance”

              yet

              “Given the profound degree of pretentiousness and sanctimony with which you have addressed others”

              Project much?

            26. Gman says:

              “Only if you’re quibbling over grammar.” Truncating the qualifier that contextually shapes my entire point isn’t merely a grammar problem, nor is having an issue with such oversight “quibbling”, when the very inclusion of the qualifier invalidates your entire subsequent argument.

              “Assumes you are privy to my intentions.” I’ve made no such assumption. Your comments to others have been pretentious and sanctimonious. It’s observable, rendering your intent irrelevant. I do understand, of course, that this is subjective.

              “Like climate change, human rights, and racism.” … weren’t you just objecting to strawmen?

              “If I have misconstrued” … it’s not a matter of taking my argument the wrong way. You missed the qualifying prepositional phrase, then based your entire response on a premise that would only be valid by such omission.

              “…your points are easily shown to be invalidated by some research into social phenomenon.” … I suppose if you take what I’ve said, omit a few things, change a few words around, and then define my points for me, then yeah, I can see how you’ve come to that conclusion, as would I under those circumstances.

              Lastly, I’ve never made the argument that I *wasn’t* pretentious, nor was I critical of your pretentiousness. My point was that since you have displayed pretentiousness, it was surprising that you missed a prepositional phrase which contextually qualified my entire statement. This isn’t the first, nor the second time you have attributed arguments to me that I have never made. When one party in a discussion creates the arguments for both sides, it’s no longer a discussion. The prepositional phrase is still there, I have not deleted it. Shalom.

            27. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “The prepositional phrase is still there, I have not deleted it”

              Then by all means point out what you are referring to.

            28. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              I don’t create the the platforms that the political parties choose to adhere to for ideological reasons. If you think pointing out that there is a quantifiable difference in the way they (the 2 major political parties) view racism, climate change, and human rights issues is a strawman, by all means troll on.

            29. michele1240 says:

              *stands and gives Ernest a vigorous applause*

            30. Stu Johnson says:

              Actually, the institutional racism in this country exists out side of politics as well as inside. And neither party could be seen as doing anything but perpetuating it.

            31. Stu Johnson says:

              Youtube? Ha Ha. Must be true if it’s on youtube. Sound silly? If not, you are fucking stupid.

            32. Gman says:

              So, let me be clear, Einstein. YOU think that video of the above-mentioned filthy libs themselves spewing racism where you can see and hear it is NOT credible, but your opinion based on your confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance is? LMFAO

          2. Rob M says:

            Our black president got 95% of the black vote, that sounds racist to me.!

            1. matureamerican says:

              Because minorities SO want to vote for the party that calls them leeches. I would, wouldn’t you?

            2. CleverBev says:

              Rob M., please do the research and find out how much of the black voting population voted for John Kerry, Al Gore, and Bill Clinton, all white, to the best of my knowledge. Blacks have voted Democratic by a huge majority since the 60s, and I’m betting that you know that already. I may as well say that nearly 100 percent of whites voted for white Presidential candidates before 2008. Well, didn’t they?

          3. FightForYourRight-HispanicCons says:

            You are an idiot backed by 18 idiots who up voted your ignorant comment. The democratic party is racist. Just look at their presidential candidates (old and white). I don’t think you’ve noticed the diversity of the Republican candidates. Lol!

        2. BBQB5 says:

          Wow that is the dumbest comment here congrats ,STUPID !!!!

      2. Amy says:

        You know, you really tip your hand when you use “Democrat” as an adjective.

        1. Gman says:

          “Democrat” is quite appropriate, as there is not much democratic about the party.

          1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

            Fortunately your opinion of what it means to be democratic is not needed for the process of electing our parties delegates and government officials.

          2. J Ascher says:

            Much more so for the lack of republicanism in the Republican party!

            1. Gman says:

              You’ll find no defense of the Repubican (misspelling intentional) Party from me, that’s for dämned sure, although your “Much more” assertion is purely subjective.

          3. Amy says:

            Thank you, tell me more of what Rush told you to parrot, because it’s SO original and we’ve never heard it before.

            1. Gman says:

              Superb strawman. Sorry, I don’t listen to that blowhard, nor do I watch FoxNews, you know, that channel that always gives Karl Rove a platform to display his stupidity. I get my news from AJA and RT, and occasionally MSNBC when I have a need to laugh at clowns. $100 says you get yours from Jon Liebowitz and the DailyKos.

            2. Amy says:

              Wrong. We don’t even get Comedy Central in our cable package. You’ll have to try harder.

              And please explain how the much-parroted “there’s nothing *democratic* about the Democrats” is an original idea you came up with on your own.

            3. Peter J Heaton says:

              I bet you don’t know that KOS is the Persian word for cunt.

            4. Gman says:

              I did not, in fact, know that. I was wondering why ol’ Moulitsas chose that name for his hategroup. A propos, I suppose.

            5. Peter J Heaton says:

              Let Me put that in context Common curse is “keeram to kos e kharet”
              keeram = My dick
              to= inside
              Kos = cunt
              khaharet = your sister

              cute huh…maybe You can use it.

            6. Gman says:

              Indeed, but it’s very unlikely I’d ever use it, as I would be completely unable to follow through with such a proposal. The thought of copulating with the sister of one of these libprogs is, to put it in a civilized manner, unappealing.

      3. BBQB5 says:

        The Democrats in the south used to be conservative racist until the 60`s when they became RETHUGS over the equal rights amendment you dummy !!! You idiots always try this argument only to be showed up for your lack of history knowledge, DOPEY !!!

    4. Jeff says:

      Guess you never heard the saying: “Better to remain silent and thought a fool then to speak and remove all doubt”..but in this case, you arrogance speaks volumes.

      1. channa says:

        Talking to yourself again?

    5. Artist in Resonance says:

      Todd, just because you’re intimidated doesn’t mean others are. Keep working on that attention span. You can strengthen it with use. You’re not afraid of work now are you?

    6. Citizen says:

      Nobody “needs this” opinionated crap.

    7. Susan Rivera says:

      Totally agree – hence the title “uneducated” Whats the answer, they deny facts, continue to cut education so that they CAN be informed. Has anyone seen a Civics Class lately in HS, I haven’t and I live in the NJ/NY. Keep’em stupid and you keep your position. This is so frustrating.

    8. maybe the article is not for “them” but for “us” to create a better understanding of what we are all up against so that in the future we can discover a cure for this phenomena. We are so divide in this country right now and it has happened before. How a small number of land gentry was able to inflame nearly half the country into going to war to protect their human property is still beyond my comprehension. I have more in common with a poor dirt farmer in the south than I ever would with a northern industrialist.

  5. Techutante says:

    What causes this? Only having two options causes this. You’re with us, or you’re against them! The enemy of my enemy is my ally, because there’s nobody else to vote for! Down with the dualocracy!

  6. Dorian Mode says:

    Hay did you hear about Obama Setting off a nuke in Texas.

    1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

      He’s been trying to take it over for some time now, just ask Alex Jones.

  7. julianenglish says:

    Excellent piece. Well-researched and written. Thanks. One small correction, though. The southern strategy was not the brain child of Lee Atwater. It was Nixon’s response to George Wallace. No modern President had won the presidency without the south. Wallace demonstrated that the old New Deal coalition was dead. A lot of nominal democrats in the south were, in fact, very conservative. They were disaffected, down right angry as hell about the civil rights movement (much as they are today about the extension of full equal rights to LGBT). Nixon realized he could absorb most Wallace supporters by injecting race into the equation. His promise to “restore and order” was understood by southerners to mean, “get those scary black people off the streets.”

    1. Donise says:

      ‘Nominal Democrats in the South were in fact, very conservative’
      Can we please call a spade a spade? They were racist. There. We need to talk in simple terms to be effective. It’s bad enough we have trolls spouting hate and divisiveness, right minded folk should be able to tell it without euphemisms.
      After all, if we are intelligent enough to read this article, then,….

      1. frankly2 says:

        They were conservatives who were fiscally conservative, patriotic, supporters of the military, believers in free market capitalism and reduced government intrusion into the marketplace, believers in being self reliant and personally responsible and believers in having a work ethic and believers in the American dream. Racism in the south is widespread but it was not the basis for the switch to the republican party. Keep in mind that the republicans voted by a larger margin for the Civil Rights Act than the democrats did.

        1. emeraldcity987 says:

          Although I am a liberal, I’d like an article that explores more of your ideas. While I agree racism is a serious issue I don’t think it’s the only reason poor whites choose to be Republicans.

          One article I read posited that Republicans would rather no one get help, say with food stamps, if it stops one person who doesn’t deserve help from getting it. I don’t understand that ideology but I’d like for researchers to explore it.

    2. Gman says:

      “Well researched”, yet, offered no citations or sources. LOL

      1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

        There were hyper links to sources throughout the entire piece, you’re straight up lying. SMFH

        1. Gman says:

          … none of which supported the claim of the headline, nor the prevailing narrative that Republicans are the inherently racist ones. SMFH

          1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

            Read “Deer Hunting for Jesus”, it’s a good ethnography that’s puts the facts in the article above into context.

            1. Gman says:

              That’s more than once that you’ve plugged that book on this feed.
              Nah … I would never consider reading Bageant, just like I would never consider reading Limbaugh, and for the same reason.

  8. Steven Nein says:

    Many of the comments below have no relevance to this article! The jest of this article is so very true! This is not just a problem in the South, but in rural America today! Tax cuts for the richest Americans and regressive taxes for the poor and middle class Americans has produced a declining middle class and an oligarchy that is running this country and now are being aided by a right wing supreme court that tells us that money is free speech and the more we have in the political system the better off we are! Who is representing the poor and middle class anymore? We have political policies that continue to help the rich and the big corporations write the rules and influence all politicians with money to their lobbyists while screwing the poor and middle class and this author is exactly right on target, the poor whites are all voting for the republicans who are screwing them!

    1. Buck Houston says:

      What article? That’s not an article. That’s a projection of the goblins in every stock comic book mind of the left.

      You people have no substance.

    2. robb32 says:

      and of course importing illegal while giving them TAXPAYER funds to live the dream…

      1. niner says:

        And how did you or your family come to America? Were you all illegal as well? and are you not partaking of all of the “free stuff” in America? at my tax contribution to the US Treasury? Again, blind takers all voting republican! Must be a nice game to play for these people! Deny deny deny and lie, lie and lie while abusing the system! A huge problem for America!

        1. Gman says:

          The term “illegal” implies a state or federal statute was violated. My grandparents arrived in 1918. Tell me, Einstein, which statute did they violate?

          1. Steven Nein says:

            It’s quite amazing that under President Reagan, these workers from Mexico were not considered illegal and were encouraged to come into this country to get paid very low wages to do super hard physical labor and now through the right wing propaganda machine, they are all illegal! If you call the soup lines “free stuff” go right ahead! You are a self centered all for me immoral hypocritical person who apparently has not needed help in your life, or lost your job or got sick and could not afford healthcare and forced to go through bankruptcy so, I am Einstein Nein and you are one unethical immoral moron!

            1. Gman says:

              o.O

        2. Lou Cifer says:

          Liberals are the ones demanding all the free stuff at the public expense and voting for whoever they think will give them the most. You should be voting for who you believe will defend US independence and sovereignty, defend and obey the Constitution and defend their individual rights and freedoms. Elected and appointed officials are all citizens with temporary government jobs, it is not in their job description to police the world, to create tax payer funded programs that aren’t authorized by the Constitution, to vote themselves raises and grant themselves more public funded benefits while they perpetually increase taxation and public national debt to the point it is mathematically impossible to repay it. The Republicans and Democrats parties both should be banished from US politics forever. Globalist swine.

      2. Melinda Craig says:

        Actually they don’t get benefits. but never allow facts get in the way of your bigoted beliefs. Check a fact every now and then, or choose to remain ignorant. It’s really up to you.

        1. Ronald Lambert says:

          So, there are no illegals in the country who are getting housing? Food stamps? None of their children out going to our public schools? Wake the @#$% up!

          1. Melinda Craig says:

            Fact check is your friend. Fox is not

            1. RonzoL61 says:

              Sorry to disappoint you, Melinda, but I don’t watch Fox news, or listen to Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hamnity.

            2. Melinda Craig says:

              Ok Storm Front, The Conservative Doghouse. Take your pick

            3. Ronald Lambert says:

              Never heard of them. How about a good upringing and simple common sense?

        2. chief says:

          Wow you are an idiot with that one statement. ITIN number for illegals to pay taxes cost the U.S $4 billion in Earned Income Credit.

      3. Candice White says:

        robb32 you are what the article is referring to an uneducated ignorant racist white

      4. Alisoquoladi says:

        Rob32..from my point of view you or your ancestors are ALL illegal aliens. No difference what so ever. The People wanted to share their bounty but you folks decided to steal it all. At least most Mexicans have a considerable amount of Native lineage and are native to the land. Unlike most of the people saying to the Mexicans to go home.

        1. Gman says:

          “… a considerable amount …” … and what “amount” might that be, oh Grand DNA expert?

          1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

            All, unless they interbred with the Castilian Spaniards who murdered millions and stole the natives land and resources.

            1. Gman says:

              … right. Because we all know that interbreeding could NOT have happened. After all, it didn’t happen with the NAs … nor in Sicily with the Moors … nor in East African countries during the Arab Conquest … nor practically everywhere else in the history of civilization after invasions/conquests. /sarcoff

            2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Hyperbole much?

              Some did interbreed, but not the majority of the population.

            3. Gman says:

              Source? Citation?

        2. Ronald Lambert says:

          The difference is that at the time the Euopeans fist came to this country, there was no Government and there were no laws. Now there are.

          1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

            There were huge civilizations here with substantial social investment in the land for a thousand years before Europeans arrived. Cahokia, Haudenosanee, aztecs, incans, the Souix. All of these cultures numbered in the hundreds of thousands to millions in population, and had complex social hierarchies. Complete with laws and rules for how they chose to be governed.

    3. frankly2 says:

      Which policies do you think help the rich and hurt the rest of us? The SCt did not say that money was free speech. I assume that you think that democrats are helping the poor and the middle class but the middle class is better educated, harder working and more successful and votes by a significant majority for the republicans. In fact the smarter you are the more likely you are to vote for a republican.
      The less education you have, the less success you have had, and the younger and more inexperience you are the more likely you are to vote for a democrat. Where do you fit in Steven?

      1. cruhs says:

        Poor/middle class Republicans constantly vote against their own self interest unless they are still thinking trickle down economics is going to work. After nearly 40 years. “Someday….if only we give it enough time.” Not very smart….

        1. Cecile Tourville says:

          Socialism works so well…….GREECE……and soon Italy, France, England will follow………wait until they run out of rich people’s money. No way has any society gotten richer by making the rich poorer!!!!

          1. emeraldcity987 says:

            Norway, Sweden, Canada, etc…and the problem with Greece isn’t their socialism it’s the banks.

            No one is trying to make the rich poor. There are a lot of rich people in Democratic Socialist countries. There were a lot of rich people here before there was “trickle down” economics.

            1. Cecile Tourville says:

              Why have all the corporations moved to foreign, Bill Gates, GE, so many others also. It is our Corporate tax rate that chases them out……the highest in the world. Here we go again……..can we not reach a happy medium? If not then…….All the DePardieus as in France will move to Russia. High taxes destroy a country.

            2. Steven Nein says:

              You righties all want to proclaim America as the greatest nation on earth, but do not want to protect it by investing in it! Under Eisenhower, the top tax rate was 92%! The owners of the companies did not want to take money out of their companies because of this top rate! The country did fine and money was reinvested in their companies and taxes were paid into the US Treasury! Now the republican party has allowed corporations to avoid paying taxes and cut taxes for the very richest Americans while building massive debts because of lower revenues and unpaid for wars because of cutting taxes while fighting two wars, and increasing military spending by over $400 billion per year since 2001! If the corporate tax rate is driving these corporations out of America, great! Let’s get back our 50,000 or so manufacturing businesses that we decimated because of conservative tax cuts and loopholes for the big corporations! How can it be that the republicans cannot see the massive corporate welfare that is taking place here in America and how this country is being ran by these huge corporate entities? and want to lay the blame on socialism? The income inequality of at the highest level since 1930! Should that not tell us something? We need some mega changes in this country, and until we purge the conservatives out of congress, this will not happen!

            3. model94 says:

              Confiscation of money through exhorbinant taxation
              is not “investment”. Have you ever witnessed the output of a government employee?

            4. Steven Nein says:

              I would like to have witnessed your output and your contribution to helping this nation move forward! I am a rancher and farmer and know what work really is and also provide food for many Americans! I also use the FSA, a damned government ran office which has helped me to be able to provide more food for the American people, but to you that is all bad because your are just to damned stupid and ignorant of reality and you are so set in your so called conservative ideology that you are clueless as tothe reality in this world!

            5. model94 says:

              Those on the left have an incredible inability to understand this basic point.

            6. Cecile Tourville says:

              What is it with these people…..they just do not get it? When you have a high tax rate as here and in France, people move out……….in the US why do people move out of NY, NJ, CT, MA……….end up in FL? You would think these dingbats would get it………..my house in NJ…………from 1969 to 1986….. property taxes went from $850/year to $2,350/year. The home I purchase was $189,000 in 1997 went from 3,200 to 5,600 in 2003……….what is one to do……but move out of the state!

            7. Ronald Lambert says:

              You left out a few that aren’t doing so well. Cyprus, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Venezuela… Thay are all in financial trouble for the same reason Greece is. They continue to spend money they don’t have.

            8. model94 says:

              The problem with Greece is simple: not enough working people supporting too many non-working people. That has nothing to do with any bank. If I am not correct, feel free to invite all of your extended relatives to live with you, on your dime. Our banks, after all, are ok. It should work out great for you.

          2. ResistJerks says:

            Yawn. The reason why Greece is in trouble is because of Wall Street vulture capitalist hedge funds like Goldman Sachs. Keep drinking the corporate kool-aid.
            The rich use the media to tell the middle class to hate and blame all troubles on the poor while they rob us blind. These poor ass people like Cecile fall for the carrot on the stick. They think one day they’ll eat the carrot and become rich, and when that happens they want all laws in place to protect their riches.
            Honey, you will never become rich. The ruling class won’t give you access into their private club no matter how much cheerleading you’re doing for them. Use and discard is their motto.

            1. Cecile Tourville says:

              Dearie, how do you know I am not rich?

            2. ResistJerks says:

              You’re not. Rich people don’t waste time on here. They have partying to do in the Bahamas. They might pay mindless sheeple like you 50 cents to post bull shit and troll.

            3. model94 says:

              I have to give you credit, that is the most incoherent comment I’ver read this year. Nice job.

            4. ResistJerks says:

              Gaslighting the facts. That’s all conservatives are good for.

            5. ResistJerks says:

              It is incoherent for those with low IQs like you. Unfortunately there are many like you and they vote conservative. Studies show lower IQ people have conservative views.

            6. model94 says:

              Nice. You managed triplicate redundancy in a mere three sentances. However, you were able to avoid swearing. Keep working at the writing, and I will keep working on making my way with such a low IQ.

            7. ResistJerks says:

              I need to spell things out because I cannot give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re capable of understanding an idea, if it isn’t repeated.

            8. Steven Nein says:

              It was a given that this would be incoherent to you! I would like to have you interpret this to us to see how little of this you understand! Those blinders you have on must be huge!

            9. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Your reading comprehension must be severely lacking then, too much mainstream right wing media and very little education I assume.

          3. BBQB5 says:

            Every example you have used are typical RW BALONEY pushed on FOX that you SUCKERS for the rich regergitate like trained monkeys on sites like this. STFU you tool of the rich who don`t give a shit about you !!!! Those countries especially England have used AUSTERITY to try to dig out of the hole the RW BANKERS put us in. Prime MinisterThatcher the mother of AYN RAND ideology started it all dopey in England. Read a history book you moron !

            1. Steven Nein says:

              Thank you for your comment!

          4. Steven Nein says:

            Do you mean the socialistic military industrial complex that sucks up all of the money from a country so that we cannot even repair our socialistic infrastructure or pay working class people a living wage, and pass conservative policies that create tax havens and loopholes for the corporations and the rich so our jobs can go overseas because we do not want to pay a living wage here in America? These conservative policies cut this nations revenue stream as our nation is falling apart! We have a greedy capitalistic corporate and rich peoples oligarchy that are not paying their share into a system that made them rich, and this must change! Socialism is not the problem! When we send our jobs overseas, tax revenue decreases as well, and this has caused this nation to be on a downward spiral because of Reaganomics, and this must change as well!

        2. Gman says:

          Funny, others think that blacks and Latinos vote against their self interest when pulling that lever for the Ds. LET. ME. GUESS. You’re right and they’re wrong, just because … amirite? LOL

          1. Betty Jarrell says:

            Look at the major cities that have been run by democrats for decades and tell me that they’re voting for their self interest. If liberal policies worked then how come cities run by Democrats have highest crime, unemployment, poverty, corruption,

            1. Gman says:

              Exactly. Every major city in the U.S. that is ran by Dems is ran into the ground. Liberals are entitled to their own opinions, I just wish they didn’t think they were entitled to their own facts.

            2. ResistJerks says:

              New York, LA, Chicago, Seattle, Miami are huge urban centers home to the richest people on Earth. What are you talking about? These centers are cutural, educational bastions. You people are really pulling stuff out of your asses without thinking it through.
              No wonder you conservatives live in a bubble where you make up your own facts. Damn that bubble is thick.

            3. Gman says:

              So adroit, so poetic. That’s an awfully pretty red herring ya got there 😉

            4. ResistJerks says:

              Lol. Ok. Can you use your brain or all you can do is copy-paste cliches like red herring, logical fallacy, ad hominem etc, and further prove how big of a bubble headed cliche you conservatives are?

            5. Gman says:

              “Cliches”, huh. Got it. Thanks.

            6. Ronald Lambert says:

              Chicago has the highest murder rate in the country. And the strictest gun laws. How’s Detroit doing after 50 years of Democrat control, hmmm? How about Baltimore? New Orleans? Memphis?

            7. Steven Nein says:

              You righties always mention Detroit as an example for how democrats run these cities, but you ignore the conservative policies that shipped millions of jobs overseas and shut down some 50,000 manufacturing companies in that area! This is the corporate welfare we have talked about over and over, but you righties completely ignore reality here! Tax shelters in the Cayman islands and political policies that subsidize corporations to send jobs overseas, and trade agreements that are bankrupting America, supported by the republican party, have caused what we see in Detroit, not the democrats who are trying to rebuild these devastated cities! We have a $500 Billion dollar per year trade deficit which would pay some 10 million workers some $50,000 per year, but the righties say we cannot even raise the paltry minimum wage for $7.25/hr. to $10.10/hr. and pay our workers a living wage! Reality is certainly not in your vocabulary and total lack of intelligence seems to be the other main obstacle impeding your understanding of any issue!

            8. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -but you ignore the conservative policies that shipped millions of jobs overseas and shut down some 50,000 manufacturing companies in that area!-
              Yeah, we tend not to mention them because they’re completely fictional

              -This is the corporate welfare we have talked about over and over,-
              Offshoring jobs is not corporate welfare. Look up the term, and you’ll find that corporate welfare is an actual thing, not just some epithet to throw at people you don’t like because they’re capitalist.

              -Reality is certainly not in your vocabulary and total lack of intelligence seems to be the other main obstacle impeding your understanding of any issue!-
              And if you had any facts at your disposal, you wouldn’t have to resort to childish ad hominems.

            9. ResistJerks says:

              Do you know which states receive the most aid from the federal government because they’ve been consistently the poorest states in the Union? Mississippi and Alabama. Traditionally the most conservative, racist, Christian states.

        3. Ronald Lambert says:

          So, my best interest is to let Progressive Socialists control every aspect of my life? Sorry, that’s what I’m voting AGAINST!!!

          1. ResistJerks says:

            So you’re voting for Republicans who constantly pass laws to control our most private decisions, hike the taxes for the middle class while giving tax Holidays for the rich, and force their radical Christianity down everyone’s throat where Money is the new God, money over people the mantra, and the tyranny of corporations to rule upon us is unhindered.
            This is what conservatives call “liberty and freedom”.
            They hire linguists and lobbyists that go on FauxNews and aggresively disseminate these new definitions succesfully convincing the poor, uneducated, racist, misogynists to vote against their economic interests because that is “freedom and liberty”. The mindless sheeple are strong in this country.

            1. RonzoL61 says:

              First of all, I’m not a Republican. So, I’m not interested in voting for establishment candidates like Bush or Christie. I’m not especially religious, so that really doesn’t effect how I vote. What I want is simple. I want a smaller, less intrusive federal government. I want our government to govern, not dictate. I want the federal government to live within its Constitutional authority. I waant term limits for Congress.and the SCOTUS. Nobody in office for 20, 30 or 40 years is coming up with any new ideas or is really trying to fix anything. I want a flat or fair tax and lower taxes for EVERYBODY. I want secure borders and strict enforcement of our immigration laws. I want to stop sending money to countries who hate us. Name a single Democrat who supports any of these views?

            2. ResistJerks says:

              That’s how you can tell there’s a privileged white boy behind the keyboard/phone. Gimme-gimme-gimme!
              Nice you have the privilege to demand these things while most black people all they are asking from the government is “please don’t shoot me for being black”.
              As far as immigration, those desperate humans, many of them children, are undertaking a very dangerous journey to escape certain death, violence, poverty, but all you can think of is me-me-me. If you’re so against immigration why don’t you get the fuck out of this country. The first illegal immigrants were white Europeans. They invaded this country and killed the natives. They never applied for “green cards”. No white European asked the natives if it’s ok to come into their country, and now you’re butthurt over the latinos coming into the country without asking permission? They are fleeing violence and running for their lives. What was the white European excuse? Let’s conquer, kill, and enslave them all.

            3. Ronald Lambert says:

              I’m “privileged”? LOL! That’s pretty damned funny! Gimme? The only thing I want from the government, beyond what I pay taxes for, is for them to leave me the hell alone! When the Europeans came here, there was no government, and no laws. We was done to them was terrible. But nobody in my family tree had anything to do with it. Now we have a government, and laws. and as a soveriegn country, we have evey right to enforce those laws. We can’t save the world. Allowing millions of uneducated, unskilled non-English speaking third world refugees to flood into the country hurts our job market, lowers wages and weakens our country.

            4. RonzoL61 says:

              .
              By the way, you have a problem with Republicans passing laws to control your “most private decisions”, but you don’t have a problem with Democrats passing laws that micro-manage every other aspect of your life? Let’s look at that for a minute. Democrats want to tell you what to drive, what to eat, what you’re allowed to say, what you’re allowed to think… Republicans don’t want you to kill your unborn child, think marriage is between a man and a woman, and many of them think it’s better to execute murderers, instead of warehousing them on the taxpayer’s dime for 50 years. But many of them don’t. So, who’s laws are intruding more into your life?

            5. ResistJerks says:

              Telling a woman what to do with her body is freedom to you. Telling her she is not human enough, and politicians must make decisions concerning her body. Dictating people whom to love and spend the rest of their lives with. Most “murderers” locked in jail were black and many by DNA were exonerated…after their death. Some are”lucky” enough to be exonerated after spending 35 years in jail and released alive. In all these cases, the “murderers” are black. The prison system is a way to control the black/minority populace. Everything you listed, that you think it’s not big of a deal are fundamental decisions that affect the lives of people who are in that situation in the most serious way. Without those decisions, people are not able to control their destiny. The fact that you can write them off so easily as “unimportant” it proves 2 things:
              1) your total lack of empathy
              2) you are a beneficiary of white-male-hetero privilege. This is you “You cannot marry the people you love, women you don’t have a say over your bodies, your bodies are public property….wait what…you want to pass a law which will save millions of $$$ in healthcare costs by limiting the sugar content in sugary drinks? Oh hell no, that is an infrigement of my God given white male hetero privilege.”
              This is why conservatives are thought of as psychpaths.

            6. Ronald Lambert says:

              Apparently it’s the unborn child that is not human enough to deserve your empathy? But a convicted murderer is deserving of mine? How about this? If a murderer is convicted on DNA evidence, can we execute them then?

            7. ResistJerks says:

              Do you understand it is not a child regardless of your pathetic attempts to redifine it. It is an zygote, embryo, and fetus. Most abortions occur at 3 months. Despite what the anti-choice people are telling you, the zygote is only the size of a shrimp. No hands, no feet (I saw the images the antis are spreading). Fyi, anti-choice ads ran by cpc-s were taken down by google and yahoo for containing misleading, un-factual information.
              It is amazing to me that in all this, you divorced the woman from the process. You have no empathy for the woman because you don’t think a woman is a human being who deserves equal right and bodily autonomy like you. We live in a misogynistic culture where women are constantly dehumanized, so no wonder you feel no empathy for the woman and have no respect for her bodily autonomy.
              Lemme make this easy: inside a human’s body, her choice.
              Outside of her body: not her choice.
              And btw, I left this to the end. You cannot be pro-life and pro capital punishment at the same time. That is a total contradiction. Even if one is a murderer, it is still life. You don’t get to redifine life. Are you also a vegan? Animals are sentient being and you contribute to their genocide with each plate.

            8. Ronald Lambert says:

              Of course I can be pro-life and pro-capital punishment. An aborted child is an innocent victim. The murderer is a criminal who knew what the consequences of their actions would be if they were caught and convicted, yet they committed the crime anyway. As far as I’m concerned, by committing the crime, they are accepting the punishment if they are caught and convicted.

            9. ResistJerks says:

              1) It is not an aborted child because something that isn’t born cannot be a child. It is a zygote, embryo, and fetus.
              2) The only victim here is the woman whose personhood is ruthlessly denied by misogynistic a-holes like you. Women’s bodies are not public property, and whatever is INSIDE her body, it is her right to decide what to do with it.
              3) If you kill a born human, regardless what they did, you cannot call yourself pro-life. The fact that you don’t realize the logical fallacy of your statements proves you have a low IQ, and frankly you shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
              You cannot cherry pick definitions to fit your twisted agendas.

            10. Steven Nein says:

              Very well stated! I cannot believe this nation has allowed the republican party to move this nation so far to the right! When will the good old southern white men and the south in general ever accept the fact that they lost the civil war and move forward? Demographics will eventually dictate the direction of this country, but it certainly moves at a snails pace! We do not have a democracy any more, it is an oligarchy and money always rules! Hypocrisy is not a sin and lying is the new norm! Gerrymandering is anti democratic and has allowed the right wing to monopolize the congress! Again, this must change and has to change, but how long will it take? When will the voters get serious and get out and vote for their own best interests? It cannot happen soon enough for me!

            11. model94 says:

              I’m missing this Republican majority thing. When? Even Reagan was dealing with a Democratic house and senate.

          2. Steven Nein says:

            So you want the conservative neocon military to control your life and cut all of the progressive programs such as SS and medicare and Medicaid and now healthcare so you can keep your guns and pay your taxes to the military industrial complex while pissing on the poor and sick and elderly and the children of the poor? Wow, I’ll bet you are a church going hypocritical Christian as well right?

            1. Ronald Lambert says:

              If you were to read my post above, I mention that I’m not especially religious. It amazes me how much rage you and Mr. Resist put into your posts. You’re posts are barely coherent. You deflect rather than answer simple questions. You rant and insult, instead of converse. What is so hard about having a rational, reasonable conversation?

            2. Steven Nein says:

              You are confusing rage with passion here! I quote many facts and figures because of a financial and economist background. My posts may be a little incoherent to you laymen, but the information is well researched and factual. It is very hard to have a rational reasonable conversation with those who are not reasonable or rational and who are idealogues and so set in their positions they get upset when facts do not agree with their pre-determined positions!

            3. Ronald Lambert says:

              Your posts are incoherent because of the person writing them, not the person reading them.

        4. model94 says:

          Would you care to comment on how well Democratic policies have benefited their constituency? 40% of the eligible workforce in this country earn no living.

          1. Cecile Tourville says:

            Ask him how well Democratic socialism has worked in Detroit, Dearborn, Camden, Newark, Cleveland, etc?

            1. BBQB5 says:

              You mean REAGANOMICS and the republican led trade deals that saw 50,000 factories close durring Bush that hurt big cities leaving them without jobs you punk !!! STFU and then WAKE UP you chump !!!

            2. Cecile Tourville says:

              Do the homework…….Detroit, Dearborn, Camden, Newark, Cleveland, were all thriving cities after WWII…..have been under control of the Democratic party for the last 50 + years……..so these cities were already dead when Reagan was in office…….oh, and by the way GE, and Jeffrey Immel, are O’s……..Big Jobs Czar……so where are the Jobs…….Jeffrey sent them overseers!!!!!!

            3. model94 says:

              Hmm. My recollection is that Mr William Clinton signed NAFTA into law. But, again, I just report what FOX feeds me so you should verify this yourself. I don’t disagree that it was a bad deal though, if that helps. And I won’t call you bad names for being misinformed. It’s not your fault.

            4. Steven Nein says:

              And President Clinton had a republican congress to deal with when NAFTA was passed! He has since stated that this was not a good deal. He was also influence by Robert Ruben who came from Goldmann Sacs I believe, and who represented the corporate world and Wall Street. The democrats really have one arm tied behind their backs in todays political world! With a right wing supreme court making laws like Citizens United to put more money into politics, the dems need to kiss up to the big money of Wall Street and the big corporations in order to compete money wise, while trying to control them on the other hand! This is not a problem for the republicans is it? They just support all of what Wall Street does and side with the big corporations every chance they get! Both parties are beholden to their big money donors, but the republicans have a huge advantage here and the money just keeps flowing into their coffers!

            5. model94 says:

              He signed it willingly. Own it Steve.

            6. Steven Nein says:

              I never stated that he did not willingly sign it. Please read what I stated. He has since stated that it was not a good deal. I do not agree with any President in either party and all issues. This is called independent thinking. I do lean to the left, but assess every issue on its merits as to whether it helps the citizens of the US. This last trade deal is a farce and cannot even have any changes for 6 years. How our congress feels that giving this power to the executive branch is part of their role here is quite amazing to me. They yell about the President making all of these executive orders and then when they get a chance to take control, they fade away. Just like a vote on whether to go to war with ISIS. The republicans are afraid to have a vote on this because it may come back to haunt them in their future elections. What a bunch of losers we have in Washington D.C.

            7. RonzoL61 says:

              Funny how Clinton, not Congress gets the credit when it’s something you like, but it’s Congress that gets the blame when it’s something you don’t.

            8. Steven Nein says:

              I did not give Clinton any credit for doing the NAFTA deal, just for coming out and telling us that it was not a good deal. I would love to see President G.W Bush come out and tell the world that going to war in Iraq was not a good deal, but I do not think that will ever happen. With the congress we have now, they deserve one heck of a lot of blame for the B.S. they have been doing like 59 votes against the ACA, and against Planned Parenthood which stops the need for abortions and shutting down the government. Do I need to go on? Obstruct, obstruct and obstruct some more. No to jobs bills and infrastructure which used to be one of their favorite bills, but with this President, nothing is to go forward! We have a bunch of losers in congress today and they need to be voted out of office ASAP!

            9. Ronald Lambert says:

              Nobody forced Clinton to sign NAFTA. If he thought it was a bad deal, he could have vetoed it. And I agree, the Iraq war turned out not to be such a good deal. And I think you’ll find out in the no too distant future that the ACA will also turn out not to be such a good deal. After the news that just came out about Planned Parenthood selling body parts of aborted children, do you really want to defend them? And as far as shutting down the government goes, I’m all for it! The less the government does, the better off we all are! As far as jobs go, the only jobs the government creates are government jobs. And those are a net loss because they are paid with tax dollars. The more people there are working in government, the less money there is to go to things like education and infrastructure.And I agree we have a bunck h of losers in Congress. That’s why I support term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS. Nobody in office for 20, 30 or 40 years is coming up with any new ideas or is really trying to fix anything.

          2. ResistJerks says:

            The problem is Democratic policies are not passed because the Republican controlled Congress and Senate would never allow anything to pass that benefits the middle class. Obama has put forth a jobs bill over and over again. The Republicans filibustered it. If you don’t believe me that Republicans and some conservative Democrats always sabotage the working people in order to give corporations more power, cut out the middle man, (aka news outlets, where things are aired through a filter) and go straight to the source and watch the bills that come up in the House and Senate and see who votes for what. Just to give you a glimpse, the Republicans have blocked a Veterans bill over and over again while touting how patriotic they are.

            1. model94 says:

              “jobs bill”.. sigh. One does not require a “jobs bill”. When corporate taxes are the highest in the world, guess what happens. When industries are held hostage to progressive shangri-la ideals, guess what happens. It isn’t rocket science. You cannot crucify corporations and at the same time expect them to be healthy and hire people. Develop a small amount of independent thought, will you?

            2. BBQB5 says:

              You really believe coporations are paying higher taxes here you fool??? GE and many other multi billion dollar corporations pay little or nothing in federal and state taxes due to the rigged tax code you dummy !!

            3. model94 says:

              US Corporate tax rates are the highest in the world. That isn’t up for debate. The outcome of such a policy is what the discussion is about. And by the way, Immelt is pretty tight with Obama. So don’t look to conservatives for your frothing over GE.

            4. Steven Nein says:

              You really do not read information very well or cannot assimilate it through your hard head can you? What do you not understand that the net effective tax rate that corporations pay is 9%? Do you understand what NET means? When 75% of corporation pay no taxes, it does not matter what the Hell the tax rate is! It is your republican party that support these big corporations and their tax loopholes and allowing them to have their office in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying this 35% rate! If only they would pay this 35%, the US Treasury would be in much better shape and could even pay down some of the debt your party puts on the American people! (G.W Bush, HW Bush, R. Reagan)

            5. model94 says:

              We are in agreement Steve. If the rate wasn’t 35% they wouldn’t be avoiding it.

            6. Steven Nein says:

              If they had to pay they the 35% rate like many working class Americans have to pay, this nation could pay down some of its debts and maybe even start to repair its aging infrastructure. This rate is not to high if American wants to continue to be the greatest country on earth. We are falling behind on about every measure because of political policies of austerity and our huge military spending and huge trade deficits. I wonder just how long this can continue before our elected officials are forced to come to their senses and change the direction of this country.

            7. Ronald Lambert says:

              And what did Obama, Pelosi and Reid do to fix the tax code when they had control of Congress?

            8. Steven Nein says:

              This is one of the most worn out ignorant questions ever asked by the righties! Have you ever heard of the FILIBUSTER? I swear, I wonder how you righties find the bathroom door in the morning? You people are so shallow and when you make such ignorant apathetic comments, it only proves your lack of any intelligent dialog! It is people like you that are voting republican and for obstruction and for moving this nation backwards. You have no vision or ideas to help move this nation forward, just an hatred for one black President!

            9. Ronald Lambert says:

              Funny, they passed Obamacare without a single Republican vote. I’m pretty sure they could have done the same with the tax code.

            10. ResistJerks says:

              Dumbass, most corporations pay 0 in taxes thanks to loopholes. GE, Bank of America, Oil companies, Apple (richest corporations in the world) not only they don’t pay a dime in taxes, but they receive billions of dollars in subsidies and tax credits. The biggest welfare queens and moochers in this country are corporations. Socialism for the rich, Capitalism for everyone else. In the 50s corporations paid half of the taxes, now they pay 11% of total taxes. When corporations receive tax holidays, they hoard their cash in the Cayman Isalands, they do not invest it back in the country, and the middle class picks up the bill. When Republicans say tax cuts, they only mean billionaires and corporations, not the middle class. In 2011 when the Bush tax cuts were set to expire, the Republicans only meant to extend those cuts to the billionaire corporate class. It was Obama and the Democrats who fought to extend it across the board.
              You think I have no free thought….boy you’re drinking some serious neuron damaging kool-aid to be this dumb.
              Funny how the conservative troll commenters here perfectly prove the point of the article. These people are probably living paycheck to paycheck, or may be unemployed, yet here they are defending their masters. They are hoping the masters will throw them some table scraps. I assure you they won’t. You will NEVER become part of the wealthy class no matter how hard you troll liberal sites to defend your masters. Some people just have this need to suck the Kochs in hopes of rewards, instead of standing on their own two feet and demanding their human rights be respected. The conservatives cannot rise above Master-slave hierarchical mentality.

            11. Steven Nein says:

              Thank you for these comments as well! The righties just do not know enough to make informed decisions and you are exactly right, this shows in their comments!

            12. model94 says:

              Why must reasonble people suffer such crudeness? Clean up your grammar and tighten up the writing a little bit. You come across as being incoherent.

            13. ResistJerks says:

              Seriously that’s the best you can do? Grammar? Lol. Typical lazy conservative. Cannot read beyond one sentence but feels qualified to criticize my grammar. Lol wouldn’t expect anything smart from a conservative. Too funny!

            14. Steven Nein says:

              Are you for real? You people just hate to see true facts and figures in writing don’t you? What ResistJerks wrote is very clear and straight forward, so maybe it is your vision or your brain not being able to comprehend what he was telling you!

            15. model94 says:

              It was poorly written, crude, and rambling.

            16. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -You people just hate to see true facts and figures in writing don’t you? –
              Why don’t you give a try and find out, instead of just assuming?

            17. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Learn to spell.

              “reasonble”

            18. Gman says:

              You’re really going to play spelling/grammar/structure Nazį? If that were done to you, there would be red marks all over nearly every one of your comments on this feed. I get pointing out errors when a debate opponent makes them, but for Pete’s sake, at least go back and edit your errors first, lest your credibility be tarnished.

            19. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You must of not picked up on the fact that you were playing the Grammer nazi card in the comment I replied to.

            20. Gman says:

              The only reason why I even engage you on this insipid site is because seem to be the most intelligent one here. (Assessed against your ideological equals like the brilliant, eloquent ResistJerks and against the polished, astute, literary mastery of one named “Steven Nein”, it’s not really saying much.) I digress.
              Again, you offer a rebuttal to an argument I’ve never made. (What’s that? Five? Six times you’ve done that already?) You keep doing that. How incorrigible.
              (sigh) I never claimed I *wasn’t* pedantic. By all means, if you’re *going* to be, then be so, but *edit* and *censor* your own massacred use of the American English language first. That’s all. Capito?

            21. Steven Nein says:

              You really hate it when someone tells it like it is don’t you? If you would quit making misinformed and untrue statements, maybe we would not have to inform you of the truth and reality!

            22. Ronald Lambert says:

              Hmmm… wasn’t the CEO of GE a member of Obama’s cabinet? Funny how Obama didn’t make GE pay any taxes then, huh?

            23. Steven Nein says:

              Yeah, President Obama was trying to reach out to the republicans who have fought every thing he has tried to do and what did he get, bad advice from a big corporation CEO! Wow, who could not see that coming?

            24. Ronald Lambert says:

              In case you haven’t noticed, Obama isn’t big on taking advice from anyone. Obama’s bad decisions are his own.

            25. Steven Nein says:

              What you consider bad decisions or the decisions like the ACA to help millions of people get healthcare! He decision to get our of Iraq is what he got elected on and will save this nation billions of dollars that can be used to improve America. His decision on Iran, to negotiate is the alternative to more war in the Middle East, is that what you are for? If so, tell you right wing chicken hawks to vote to do so! I have never seen a more complaining do nothing congress in my life time, and they have no answers as to how to solve some of the problems, or try and move this nation forward! Just complain about everything! They cannot lead!

            26. ResistJerks says:

              Your point is? Between Romney and Obama, Obama was the lesser of the 2 evils. That doesn’t mean Obama is not a corporate caver.
              We need people like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren in all areas of leadership if we want to see real positive change, where big money doesn’t call all the shots.

            27. GSDgirl59 says:

              No president ever makes anyone pay taxes. That’s not the role of the president. It would be impossible for him to do so, but go ahead and blame Obama anyway. That’s what ignorant people do.

            28. Steven Nein says:

              75% of corporations do not even pay taxes and their net effective rate is 9%! Where in the hell have you been to not know this? Drinking the Fox news misinformation does not help this nation! Corporate income taxes used to be like 35% of the total US Treasury income and now just 11%, so those poor big rich corporations are just getting killed by taxes! You are the one who needs some independent thought! I cannot believe the apathy and misinformation spouted out here by some of the commenters!

            29. model94 says:

              That’s a great response to a position I didn’t take, but you have proven my point nonetheless. Pay attention now: the US corporate tax RATE is the highest in the world. That isn’t debatable. The outcome of the policy has been to drive recorded income out of the US. That anyone would not find ways of lessening a confiscatory tax bill is naive.

            30. ResistJerks says:

              Ah you poor little creature! Bravely defending the downtrodden corporate class. Sniff-sniff.
              Awwww, posters always end up proving the point of an article. Here we have a poor, uneducated, white knight fiercely defending the defenseless billionaire class. Well, I hope they throw you a bone, although I wouldn’t get my hopes up.

            31. model94 says:

              You didn’t pay attention. The normal reaction to confiscatory tax rates is predicatble – it drives (pick one: people, business, tourists) away every time it’s tried. You may argue wouldacouldashoulda all day long, but reality is what it is.

            32. Steven Nein says:

              What in the hell are you talking about here? You conservatives suck on the largess of the US government that our forefathers provided for us and now do not want to even pay for updating this nations infrastructure, because it may take some tax revenue to pay for doing this! How come you are still in this country if this confiscatory tax drives ( you pick it) AWAY EVERY TIME! You really have a problem understanding the English language don’t you?

            33. model94 says:

              You shouldn’t use words that you wouldn’t ordinarily use yourself just because someone esle does.

            34. ResistJerks says:

              Trickle down economics, where rich people pay 0 taxes, forcing the middle class to pick up the tab, has proven to be a disastrous, job killing, income slashing strategy over and over again. Unfortunately, we are plagued with a virus far more dangerous than ebola. It is called the Fact Resistant Virus. This virus infects many people like yourself. It causes them to resist facts and statitics in favor of dangerous ideology, regardless of how many times said facts and statistics prove their ideology wrong.

            35. model94 says:

              you still aren’t paying attention. 50% of the population pay 100% of income taxes. The top 20% pay 80%. How in the world can you make any claim that “the rich pay zero?” But that STILL wasn’t the point of the comment, which is tax revenue always falls when tax rates go up; people and organizations flee them. Tax revenue always increases when tax rates go down. The resulting economic activity more than offsets it the rate. To help make it comprehendible: 80% tax on $ 100 is $80. 20% tax on $1000 is $200. Which is the better situation?

            36. ResistJerks says:

              Today the richest people pay the lowest tax rates in 50 years.This phenomenon occured in the 20s, right before the Depression. In the 50s the rich had a 90% tax rate (which I do not condone btw) but in the 50s, when the rich paid the most in taxes, we became the richest country in the world with the strongest middle class.
              You stubbornly want to stay in your bubble and drink the fact resistant kool-aids.

            37. model94 says:

              20% pay 80%. It’s pretty straight-forward. Blather all you like about “fair share” … but the lowest 50% pay nothing at all (and if you consider public assistance which has gone off the rails, they pay negative taxes). Can’t get much than than, can you?

            38. ResistJerks says:

              Lol, you’re full of shit. Over 90% of income went to the richest 0.1% of people. Logic dictates that they should pay more. However, unfortunately, today corporate taxes account for a meager 11% of all tax intake.
              Do yourself a favor and turn off Faux News. There is life beyond Fox.

            39. model94 says:

              Do yourself a favor and get your head out of your a$$. You can’t even keep corporate / income / FICA taxes straight in that evacuated head. Ignorant and stupid is no way to go through life man. The numbers are correct.

            40. Steven Nein says:

              So, under your great scheme, if you get a pay cut, you will take home more income? Right? This is the Arthur Laffer, Supply side economics or trickle down Reaganomics that has destroying America! You have to do better that this model94, you are making yourself look pretty foolish if you believe this pile of manure!

            41. model94 says:

              Pay cut = more money? This is what passes as logic with liberals. Go back and re-take 4th grade mathematics please.

            42. Steven Nein says:

              If we did not have political policies that allow these corporations to avoid paying this tax rate, you would have a point, but that is not the reality and for you to ignore this reality shows how narrow and shallow your position is!

          3. BBQB5 says:

            Since the 80`s we have used REGANOMIC policies of lower taxes on the rich to magically trickle down to the rest of us in Washington including 2 Democratic presidents that did cut back a bit but still stayed with the low taxes on the rich. You must be taking some strong meds to not realize that, STUPID !! Look at the states of Wisconsin and Minnesota to see just how rethug policies stand up to FDR Democratic policies at the state level. YOU LOSE DOPEY!!!!

            1. model94 says:

              Reagan lowered taxes on everyone, and it worked. Stop looking to others to pay your fair share. And, you still have not answered my question despite the hyperventilating.

            2. Steven Nein says:

              Once again, you prove your stupidity by stating that Reagan tax cuts worked! They did not work and increased America’s debt so rapidly that he had to raise taxes 7 times before he was out of office! Where in the world have you been when it comes to history? Fox News does not check their information and make up their own history, so fools like you can show the whole world just how dumb you are! Here is an answer for you, Mitt Romney made $22 million dollars in 2012! He paid into social security on the first $117K and paid zero, -0- into the medicare Medicaid fund because all of his income was from dividend and interest on his investments. This saved him some $630K by not having to pay into the M and M system! The working class people have to pay on every damned dime of income they earn into the M and M fund and on 100% of their income if it is less than the $117K Now that is fair and just for you ignorant stupid republicans! Does that answer your question? Also, the top 25 hedge fund managers made $11.3 Billion dollars of income last year, that is only $435 million dollars per manager and they pay the capital gains rate of 20% on their income, and you repubs think this if fair and just because of your total ignorance and misinformation! Wake up and do a little research fool!

            3. model94 says:

              You should really stop calling people more knowledgeable than you stupid. Reagan’s tax cuts moved more people from low income to middle class than any action since. What is important isn’t what others make. It’s what you are able to make. Under Obama that has become very difficult.

            4. Steven Nein says:

              Are you implying that you are more knowledgeable than me? Your comments certainly do bot support your claim here! Please list your sources to support your claim that Reagans tax cuts .moved more people from low income to middleclass. Reagan allowed Mexican workers to come into America because they would work for much lower wages! How in the world does this move people into the middle class? You are so far into your conservative ideology that one cannot penetrate your armor! Also, please list your sources that support your last sentence. Under Obama, some 12 Million jobs have been created in his 6 and 1/2 years and you make a statement like your last sentence! Wow! I wonder what it was like under President G.W. Bush when he created just 1 Million jobs in his 8 years? As the great conservative that you are, please support your right wing support of the worst President in America’s history. This last sentence of yours is why you may be called STUPID! The worst recession since the great depression in 2008 was caused as a result of deregulation of the financial industry and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act pushed by the republicans in 1998, but that is probably too much for you to take in at this time, so I will stop here! Quit showing your ignorance and I will stop calling you STUPID!

            5. model94 says:

              I didn’t imply anything. I said it straight out. You can look up the information yourself and choose to believe what you believe.

            6. Steven Nein says:

              Can’t cite your sources huh? Typical republican, if Hannidy or O’Reilly or Limbaugh said it, it must be true. I call it as I see it and have you ever heard of calling a spade a spade? Some of your comments just show a huge amount of bias and ignorance and I will call you out every time when you make such statements. You continue to have real retention problems of what is stated to you verses how you interpret this information. This is where your blinders are restricting your outlook!

            7. model94 says:

              Do your own research Steven

            8. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              If you make a claim, the onus is on you to prove its validity. As a social scientist who has studied wealth inequality in depth, I have never seen such claims validated, only used as talking points in the mainstream right-wing media.

            9. model94 says:

              Social science eh? I’ve always been curious why the term ‘science’ is attached to the term. In my experience that, and teaching, seem to be areas of study with concentrated mediocrety. btw the term “mainstream right wing media” is oxymoronic.

            10. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Insults aside, the media, owned by 6 major corporations, is very right wing.

            11. model94 says:

              Maybe for a CP USA member with a low number membership card. I’m very right wing. I can assure you, they aren’t.

          4. Steven Nein says:

            Yeah, 18% are young students creating debt going to college and 17% are the elderly, and that leaves 9% poor folks or those who have lost their jobs because of republican policies! You repubs just cannot connect the dots and repeat every lie you have ever heard from Fox the misinformation station!

            1. model94 says:

              ah, ok. If you wish to believe that delusion, be my guest. But you are chosing to bury your head in the sand. Retirees are not included in the eligible workforce numbers because (pay attention, this is complicated) .. they are not eligible. They are retired. Students are not included for similar reasons. They are not eligible to work, because they are students. Comprede?

            2. Steven Nein says:

              Are you trying to tell us that the unemployment rate is 40%? If you believe that delusion be my guest. I was referring to the Mitt Romney statement about the 47%ers! which worked out so well for him. Show us your sources for getting this 40% figure them if you you are gullible enough to believe it!

            3. model94 says:

              Steve, again – look it up yourself. Hint: its the FIRST hit i get from Yahoo when searching “workforce participation”. One cannot remain ignorant without really, really trying these days.

        5. truth2power says:

          Better that we should be Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, North Korea, and the old eastern block, perhaps even a supposedly benevolent western Europe. We can spread misery and despair as we gaze upon empty shelves and pat ourselves on the back as we starve people to death all in the name of equality.

        6. frankly2 says:

          So which policies aren’t working. You mean the ones that have led to the fact that the US economy is the strongest economy in the world and that following Reagan’s supply side economics changes to the tax code the US went on the largest and longest economic expansion in the history of the world leaving the US as the wealthiest nation with the largest and wealthiest middle class? You mean those policies were supposed to work so well that you wouldn’t have to work anymore but they didn’t, right?

          1. Steven Nein says:

            You seem to ignore the 8 years under President Clinton on purpose now don’t you? Reagan created massive debt while in office because of his tax cuts and the Clinton administration left a surplus after his 8 years, while Shrub Bush had a $1.4 Trillion dollar one year deficit to hand over to President Obama and war debts that were not even on the books yet! Supply side economics is a myth and a bunch of BS and only helps the rich get richer and the big corporations get bigger and richer. We saw the results of “Free Market Capitalism” back in 2008 didn’t we? You seem to ignore this as well! The greed will never stop and it is quite amazing that the big bad socialistic Americans had to bail out the “Free Market Capitalistic” greedy corrupt money driven system supported by you guessed it, the republican party!

            1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -Reagan created massive debt while in office because of his tax cuts-

              Nothing to do with the Democrat congress that proudly announced his budgets “Dead on Arrival” and pass their own spending, right? I mean, it’s not as if federal revenue nearly doubled under Reagan’s policies, or…

              Oh, wait. They did.

              -and the Clinton administration left a surplus after his 8 years,-

              Created by playing with Social Security’snumbers.

              -while Shrub Bush had a $1.4 Trillion dollar one year deficit to hand over to President Obama-

              This, on the other hand, is blatant bullshit. Whether you believe it or not, you should be ashamed of yourself for repeating it.

              That “$1.4 Trillion deficit” included more than a Trillion of OBAMA spending.

              -Supply side economics is a myth and a bunch of BS and only helps the rich get richer and the big corporations get bigger and richer.-

              Then how come corporate profits and the stock market are climbing, while wages remain stagnant and employment goes down, under Obama?

              -We saw the results of “Free Market Capitalism” back in 2008 didn’t we?-

              Because forcing banks to make loans they know won’t ever be repaid is the very essence of Free Market Capitalism….

            2. Steven Nein says:

              That “$1.4 Trillion deficit” included more than a Trillion of OBAMA spending.
              Really now? What history book are you reading out of? The Fox Spin Zone hand book?
              And, do you really believe that the bankers are that stupid and were “forced” to make these bad loans that would not be repaid? Greed and corruption and that great “Free Market Capitalism” had nothing to do with this financial disaster? Oh, and did mention the repeal of Glass-Steagal? Also, tell me how wars of choice get paid for?, by tax cuts for the rich during these wars? How in the hell do you think the Shrub double America’s debt during his years in office?

            3. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -That “$1.4 Trillion deficit” included more than a Trillion of OBAMA spending.

              Really now? What history book are you reading out of? The Fox Spin Zone hand book?-

              First, are you going to try to tell me that Obama didnt’ spend more than $300 billion of TARP money, and another $800 billion in “stimulus” spending in 2009? If you aren’t, then the $1.4 trillion deficit included more than a trillion of Obama spending. If you are, then you’re a liar–again–and I’m not at all surprised.

              Second, when Fox has been caught slandering a sitting president with blatantly forged documents, or doctoring audio to produce racist statements, then perhaps referencing Fox will have some kind of impact–until then, “Haha, your news source is more honest than mine!” probably isn’t the insult you intended it to be.

              “And, do you really believe that the bankers are that stupid and were “forced” to make these bad loans that would not be repaid?”

              If they were stupid, they wouldn’t have to be forced, now would they? Look up “Community Reinvestment Act” sometime.

              “reed and corruption and that great “Free Market Capitalism” had nothing to do with this financial disaster?”

              Seeing as government forcing businesses to make poor decisions is exactly the opposite of free-market capitalism, that part should be pretty obvious.

              -How in the hell do you think the Shrub double America’s debt during his years in office?-

              Considering that Obama has added twice Bush’s level of debt, perhaps you shouldn’t be laughing about that part just yet.

            4. Steven Nein says:

              The TARP was not under Obama and the stimulus was added to the total debt, not the deficit. Maybe you do not know the difference between the deficit and the debt. You also bit off a lot more than you can chew when you mentioned the Community Reinvestment Act. I am a retired banker and economist and we were under the CRA and made no bad loans and lost very little if any money. You are good at calling me a liar when your numbers and facts themselves are lies. Your short term memory is destroying your mental capacity and ability to face reality and the timing of the events that helped create the debt we have. You do not even mention the worst recession since the 1930’s that President Obama inherited from your party. Two un paid for wars that were not put on the books and tax cuts during those two wars for the rich and more corporate warfare! Please justify that BS for Common Sense!

            5. Kenneth James Abbott says:

              -The TARP was not under Obama-

              Part of it was. Obama personally authorized more than $300 billion of TARP spending.

              -and the stimulus was added to the total debt, not the deficit.-

              the deficit IS money added to the total debt. That’s the definition of the term.

              -I am a retired banker and economist and we were under the CRA and made no bad loans and lost very little if any money.-

              First, I’m always amused when leftists on the internet just happen to be an expert in whatever subject came up–especially when they prove that they have no knowledge of it.

              Second, if you made no bad loans under the CRA, then you broke the law and ran the risk of serious lawsuits.

              -You are good at calling me a liar when your numbers and facts themselves are lies.-

              Except you haven’t been able to prove a single one of them. I’m good at calling you a liar when I catch you in a blatant lie.

              -Your short term memory is destroying your mental capacity and ability to face reality-

              If you had an facts on your side, you wouldn’t have to resort to silly ad hominems.

              -Two un paid for wars that were not put on the books and tax cuts during those two wars for the rich and more corporate warfare! Please justify that BS for Common Sense!-

              I don’t need to justify it–it’s BS

        7. FightForYourRight-HispanicCons says:

          Funny that you would accuse Republicans (I’m assuming you are a liberal) as not very smart for subscribing to a theory that was used successful by President Reagan (I lived it), furthermore “trickle-down economics” is used successfully everyday…

          President Obama did promise change and true to his word, partly; he did it. We just didn’t know that the change he proposed was one of about $20 Trillion in Debt by 2016, over 40% of our population not paying any taxes are unemployed and not looking for work (he likes this it keeps his unemployment numbers down and millions dependent on government), and I said partly because the “hope” he promised never materialized.

          By the way, I’m neither “White,” “Poor,” nor “Uneducated” and I usually vote Republican. I think maybe you are not feeling so smart about now… Feel free to continue this chat. I’m capable and willing to help you further.

        8. RonzoL61 says:

          How’s the Left’s war on poverty working out after 50 years? The percentage of people living in poverty is about the same now as it was in 1967, only now we have 100 million more people than we did then!

      2. Cecile Tourville says:

        BINGO!!! Good comment.

      3. WakeUpAmerica says:

        Please enlighten us. What GOP policy over the last 35 years has helped the middle and lower/working class of the country?

        1. frankly2 says:

          Tax reform in 1982 and 1986 caused the flow of tax revenues from the bottom 50% to go down while the revenue stream from the top 50% went up. The result was the largest economic expansion the world has ever seem and left the US as the wealthiest country in the world with the largest and wealthiest middle class. Today, despite all the negative left wing progressive rhetoric the middle class is better off than it has ever been.

          1. Steven Nein says:

            You are in lala land frankly2! The middle class is better off than it has ever been? Really? Did you flunk economics 101! Did you flunk reading as well? Where do you get your information? Much of the middle class has moved down into the poor class and their wages have not even kept up with inflation for the past 20 years while the top richest 5% of American have seen their incomes increase by 270% over that same period of time! Frankly2, you are a total ignoramus and are not living in the real world. The income inequality is at the greatest amount since 1930, and you make a statement that the middle class is better off than ever! Wow, the light bulb is out up there in your brain sir!

      4. Joe Cogan says:

        Where are you getting this nonsense from? Higher education levels are strongly correlated with more liberal political views, not towards the GOP.

        1. Ronald Lambert says:

          Higher education means more time being subjected to Left wing indoctrination. So, that’s not exactly a big surprise, is it?

          1. Steven Nein says:

            And, the righties want to get rid of the department of education as well! Why is that do you suppose? They are against science and education and about everything else, because if they would get educated, they may see the errors of their ways and they could not pull the wool over the heads of their sheeple so easily!

            1. Ronald Lambert says:

              Jimmy Carter created the Federal Dept. of Education in 1979. Do you think the educational sytem of this country has gotten better or worse since then? Why do we send money that should be going to support our local schools to pay a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington who do nothing but make the system worse?

      5. Steven Nein says:

        Let’s see now, we are talking about education here and you are asking me which policies help the rich and hurt the poor? You are a total moron and if I have to educate you on these policies this shows your ignorance and stupidity and your simple mind when you state that the smarter you are the more likely you are to vote republican! I am a well educated and so called rich man and I vote democratic because of the policies they support which help the less fortunate in this nation, support moral principals, believe in feeding the poor and elderly and the young children in families that have had job losses and sickness and accidents, some that may not have had healthcare because of a pre-existing condition and been forced into bankruptcy. Have you ever heard of the old rich German man that stated “I do not want to be a rich man in a poor country”? The republican want a few billionaires to own our souls and the rest of us to be subservient to these lords! I do not want to waste my time in explaining which policies help the rich and hurt the poor, but if you believe the minimum wage is fair and just for the working class people, you are a republican and if the capital gains tax for the rich making millions of dollars per year is only 20% (it was just 15% under G.W Bush) while a middle class worker making $50 K per years pays at least 28 to 30%, then you are a republican! I could give you many other policies, but it is up to you to figure these out!

        1. Ronald Lambert says:

          The Left has been “helping the less fortunate” for the last 100 years. Have they become any more fortunate?

          1. Steven Nein says:

            Again, you cannot connect the dots here! Political policies that ship our manufacturing jobs overseas because of tax havens in the Cayman Islands and corporate tax loopholes make it impossible for these American cities to make a come back! How is it that you righties cannot see this or want to even try and recognize this fact?

            1. Ronald Lambert says:

              So, why didn’t Obama, Pelosi and Reid fix the tax code when they had control of Congress?

      6. Steven Nein says:

        The middle class continues to shrink because of this nations tax policies and political policies that favor the rich! So, if you believe that the middle class votes more for republicans, fine, but soon they will find themselves in the poorer class and still vote the same way believing that the trickle down has just been delayed as their wages fail to keep up with the costs of living! Oh well, they can just go out and find a second minimum wage job and all will be fine! And, I am an educated fairly well to do middle class American that understands how I got to where I am, but my background and experience in finance and economics drives my understanding of the effects of tax policies and political decisions and SC decisions have on the American work force! Wages have stagnated for way too long and the income inequality gap is the greatest it has been since 1930! How did we get there? Why do we want to continue to worship at the alter of the big corporations and the rich in this nation? I strongly feel that this is wrong and this nation can do a lot better for its citizens!

        1. frankly2 says:

          Explain to me how tax policy is shrinking the middle class. Do you mean the middle class is paying too much in taxes? You are right with respect to Obamacare. Working middle class families are paying much more for health care either through increased premiums or increased deductibles.

          You claim to have an economics background but you say nothing substantive about what kind of tax policy would benefit the middle class. Please explain.

          If you know economics you also know that we have the largest and wealthiest middle class in the history of the world including recent history in the US. We have never had it so good despite the rise in income inequality.

    4. model94 says:

      Half of the country pay no taxes. That is hardly a regressive policy. What percentage would you propose pay nothing to make it fair?

      1. model94 says:

        Steven?

        1. Steven Nein says:

          Again, your statement that they pay no taxes is not qualified! They pay all kinds of sales tax and other taxes but many do not pay income tax because they are making so damned little that they do not show enough income to warrant paying federal taxes. This is what the great trickle down supply side economics has done for America. I have addressed the fallacy that America has the highest corporate tax rate many times before in my comments! The stated rate is 35% but the NET EFFECTIVE RATE that they pay is just 9%! That can be easily looked up as well! The US government is not collecting record tax revenues as a percentage of the growth in total population that it should be. Yes, we are spending more, and why is that? Maybe two wars while cutting the taxes for the rich? This is unprecedented in American history. Cost of $3.5 TRILLION, the wars cost over $3 TRILLION, the military industrial increase since 2001 is some $5.6 TRILLION, and trade deficits since 2000, some $7.5 TRILLION! Let’s see now, that adds up to over $16.5 TRILLION! Please tell me which party did all of this! One thing is for certain, the republican party should never ever be in charge of the budget or economics of running this nation!

          1. model94 says:

            The question is a simple one: what would be a fair distribution of income taxes? The answer is a number, expressed as a percentage of income. it is not a rambling paragraph. What is your number?

            1. ArthurFrayne says:

              Graduated, just like we have now, but with the top earners paying more than the record low they currently pay. Don’t forget, someone making $10,000,000 a year pays only 0.15% payroll tax…. someone making $30,000 a year pays 15%! (for non-self employed 7.5% out of their paycheck, and another 7.5% their employer covers).

            2. model94 says:

              what is your number? Top 20% pay 80% currently. What should it be? Give me a number.

            3. ArthurFrayne says:

              That is a deceiving number to say the top 20% pay 80% – you are trying to make it sound like they have an 80% tax rate, and your number only factors in federal income tax. Lower income people – who spend 100% of their income, are hit harder by things like sales tax and gas tax. The reality is the wealthy have a lower effective overall tax rate than someone making $50,000 due to things like the payroll tax cap and tax shelters which someone living paycheck to paycheck can’t afford to take advantage of. Payroll tax is the ultimate poor tax…. 15%, yet it’s virtually nothing for someone making tens of millions of dollars.

            4. model94 says:

              It is not a deceiving at all, and I “did not make it sound” like anything other than what I said. It is a succinct and simple statement about taxes. The top 20% pay 80% of all income taxes collected. The bottom 50% pay none, btw. I am in complete agreement with you that all other taxes are too high. So, again, what is your number? I ask this of people who hyperventilate about such things and they will not answer the question. A second related question is: what is your moral basis for claiming for yourself and others that which others earn? The government is collecting record revenue overall and record income taxes. The problems we have are not related to them not having enough money.

            5. ArthurFrayne says:

              If I gave you a number I’d be pulling it out of my ass, but all we hear from the GOP is that taxes are too high (on the rich). They are not. Personally I’d be fine leaving the rates where they are, but removing the income cap on payroll taxes in exchange for an overall lower rate.

            6. model94 says:

              Exactly my point, so stop complaining. Payroll taxes = FICA = social security by the way.

            7. Steven Nein says:

              This does not go near far enough! The tax loop holes need to be closed for the rich as well as a much higher tax rate! All model94 can talk about is lower tax rates no matter what! The conservative agenda to keep screwing the poor and working class in America, while the rich get richer!

            8. Steven Nein says:

              You keep asking for a number, I will give you one. Those making over $1 million dollars should be paying at least at the 80% rate. Under President Eisenhower, the top rate was 92% and America did fine! It does not take $200,000.00 to sustain ones basic needs and you can only buy some many play toys! But, under our tax structure, those making big money can get huge tax breaks and pay lower tax rates, what a deal!

            9. model94 says:

              Who are you to define “need”? And who are you to claim what others achieve?

            10. model94 says:

              The top income tax bracket is around 39.6%. Stop deflecting.

      2. BBQB5 says:

        That`s the right wing lie that only the SUCKERS of the rich regergitate. Some Americans pay no FEDERAL TAXES because they make so little except for huge corporations like GE who also pay no FEDERAL TAXED due to the rigged tax code. Those who don`t make enough to pay FEDERAL TAXES pay more in ALL other taxes then those greedy rich you SUCKERS help. WAKE UP STUPID !!!

        1. model94 says:

          “Some” Americans pay no taxes, that is correct. 50% is the number. There are ample sources of information that will verify this. 20% percent of top wage earners pay 80% of the total. US Federal tax code has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. This has forced companies to relocate many operations off-shore. This is a natural and expected outcome that only naive politicians and low information citizens don’t get. Despite this, the US Gov’t is collecting record tax revenue today – more than ever in history. It’s spending even more. You may also find this information easily.

      3. Tim Frewing says:

        The bottom half of this country escape the federal income taxes, but they do pay some of the built-in, hidden taxes on sales, fuel, etc.

      4. Steven Nein says:

        That is a blatant lie and you know it! When you state that they pay no taxes, you have better qualify what taxes you are talking about. I have already addressed the break down of the 47%ers that Romney talked about and here you are raising it to 50%! You did not mention the regressive Social Security tax did you? Why? How about the Capital gains tax? The hedge fund managers making millions are able to just pay this rate. Why? Are these not regressive taxes or do you not understand what regressive means? You want make a bunch of smart ass statements, but ignore the facts and reality of what is going on in this nation! If you do not believe that the rich and powerful have stacked the deck in their favor with their money, your are really blind and maybe just plain stupid! If you want the corporations being the god you want to worship, go for it! What is your point in all of this? If the middle class made more income,. they would pay more taxes wouldn’t they? I have always used Rush Limbaugh as a classic example here. He was complaining about farmers getting subsidies and the poor getting food stamps. So, he is making close to $3 million per month and say he eats $300 dollars of food per month, what percent of his income does he pay for food? Now, let’s take a man making $3K per month. and it costs he $300 to eat per month, what percent of his income goes for food? One hundredth of 1% , .01% verses 10%. This is only 1000 times less that Rush pays for his food! There are basic levels of costs to just survive in this world, so you must think that the poor or middle class should pay more of even the same as the rich? Really? This people also pay all kinds of other taxes in a very disproportionate rate to their income verses the rich! You and your rotten party can just keep believing your lies and B.S. to destroy the middle class and the poor in this country, but this cannot and will not continue much longer! Did you read my comment on the top 25 hedge fund managers making $11.3 Billion last year, which is some $452 million each last year and they pay the capital gains rate of income tax! Wow! This is what you are supporting fool! These are the real greedy capitalists that you support and want them to pay even less in taxes! JC man are you crazy or just greedy or just immoral and want the rich and powerful to keep stomping on the middle class and the poor? How on earth do you justify you and your party’s position on such nonsense and what it has done to the income inequality in this nation?

        1. model94 says:

          income taxes. ` geez man take a chill pill.

          1. ArthurFrayne says:

            Hey, if you don’t want to pay income taxes just get a job that pays less and you too can see how wonderful it is to live a life that doesn’t have to pay income taxes (yet still gets to pay payroll, gas, sales, property/rental, and all sorts of other taxes).

            1. model94 says:

              Wow. that isn’t the point at all Arthur. Liberals insist the rich must pay more. I simply ask “ok, how much more?”. Nobody will answer.

    5. Ubiquitousnewt says:

      “Gist.”
      The grammar here is killing me.

      1. Steven Nein says:

        It must be the facts that are killing you! And your comments and intelligent thoughts are what?

    6. frankly2 says:

      After those tax cuts the “rich” in the US wound up paying a higher percentage of the total Federal income taxes paid than ever in history. Right now the top 25% are paying almost 90% of the Federal income tax. How much do you think they should pay?

      1. emeraldcity987 says:

        Of course they pay the most in personal income tax. They are making all the income. But their overall tax burden is about 30% which is not much more than the poor at 25%. If you think the bottom 50% of Americans who make less than$35,000 a year should get taxed more please tell us which tax break you would like to give up.

        1. emeraldcity987 says:

          Also, personal income tax only makes up 28% of federal tax revenue.

      2. Steven Nein says:

        And the top 25% are taking in about 98% of the income! They should be paying at least 50% on their taxes, and they should not be able to have all of the tax loopholes like interest deductions on their houses or their investment properties, or being able to write of hundreds of thousands in capital purchases for their businesses and they should have to pay on 100% of their income into the social security system like the workers making less that the $117K per year. It is amazing that under the Eisenhower administration, the top tax rate was 92^, Reagan lowered it to 28% and about broke the country before he had to raise the rate!

  9. Jimmy Howard says:

    the “recent article” refered to here was writen over a year ago

  10. RB says:

    Good article. I’ll reference it every time I need to educate another conservative that brings up the fact that the KKK was founded by Democrats.

  11. renegadesix says:

    Right, it has to be racism and not a rejection of socialism. /sarcasm. I hate to break it to you, but some folks prefer freedom over being shackled to the government plantation.

    1. stormkite says:

      Well, since there hasn’t been any evidence of socialism practiced or proposed, racism is a much more reasonable and rational explanation. Especially when things that were just peachykeen when proposed by rightwing sociopaths are suddenly violently antiChristian socialism when proposed by a dark-skinned centrist.

      1. renegadesix says:

        BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Minimum wage hike? Heard of it? Socialism. Obamacare’s employer mandates? Heard of it? Socialism. All of this is incremental socialism as it gives government control over the means of protection a piece of freedom at a time.

        Obama a centrist? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Man, you’re on a roll. The guy who wrote IN HIS OWN BOOK that he “naturally gravitated” towards marxists is a “centrist?” BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        BTW, we haven’t had a right wing government since Uncle Ronny, and things were indeed quite peachy back then.

        1. stormkite says:

          If you had a clue you’d tear it up and eat it.

          1. renegadesix says:

            Oh, I’ve got more than a clue, I’m watching the socialist takeover 1,000 part miniseries.

            1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You should quit driving on roads and pull your kids out of school then, since those are also social services.

            2. renegadesix says:

              I would be happy to see government schools go away. As for roads, they are not a SOCIAL program. They are infrastructure. Nice try, comrade.

            3. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              That’s why there’s no department of transportation. Because roads aren’t built by the state.

            4. renegadesix says:

              Roads benefit everyone simultaneously. Taking away the property of those who work to give it to the shiftless welfare bums who refuse to work benefits only the shiftless welfare bums and the politicians they vote for.

            5. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You claimed roads were not a social program. Your lack of compassion is another discussion.

            6. renegadesix says:

              They aren’t. They are infrastructure — that’s why the benefit everyone simultaneously.

            7. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              So the department of transportation is privately owned? Forgive me then I thought it was ran by the state.

            8. renegadesix says:

              Non sequitur much?

            9. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Exactly, my sarcastic rebuttle clearly shows how illogical your argument is. Roads are infrastructure, of which there are 2 types. Public and private. Although some private roads exist, the majority are public and created by social programs. Which is my point, as long as humans exist in a technologiclly advanced society there are going to be a number of goods and services that are needed by all citizens.

            10. renegadesix says:

              Building a road is not a “social program”. A social program is a giveaway to particular individuals. Infrastructure benefits EVERYONE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

            11. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Social work – Organized work intended to advance the social conditions of a community

              Is road building organized ?

              Does it improve the social conditions of society?

            12. renegadesix says:

              Your made up definitions are irrelevant. Worse, a definition based upon intent is meaningless as it is purely subjective.

            13. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “Your made up definitions are irrelevant.”

              Projection

            14. renegadesix says:

              I cited my definition. You should try it sometime.

            15. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Do you mind if I copy this exchange for my Political sociology class? Your responses are an excellent example of some of the issues Americans face when discussing social ills.

            16. renegadesix says:

              By all means. Do me a favor and try to take classes from people other than avowed Marxists, though. I know it is tough to do in modern universities having earned a doctorate myself, but if you look hard enough you can find one or two.

            17. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You should ask for YOUR money back.

            18. renegadesix says:

              Why? Under your standards I got my money’s worth — 7 years of leftist professors, one of whom made the Communist Manifesto assigned reading.

            19. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Strawman, you have no idea what my standards are.

            20. renegadesix says:

              I’ve got a lot of ideas about them, all of which are based on what you have written here.

            21. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Then what are they?

            22. renegadesix says:

              I’ve given them to you as I’ve observed them. No sense repeating myself.

            23. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Compassion, and acceptance? Nope you haven’t.

            24. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              So you have proof that all my instructors are “Marxists” or is this just more supposition from the “doctor”.

              To be honest I have a number of instructors who disregard Marxist theory (they view it as reductionist since it is based solely on class structure). As a Buddhist I am more concerned by the suffering of my fellow human being, and any thing that reduces that suffering is a good thing IMHO.

            25. renegadesix says:

              The vast majority of college professors are leftist. It is a reasonable conclusion based upon the evidence and my own experience which includes degrees from both public and private universities.

              And if your concern is for the alleviation of human suffering, you would not be a Marxist. Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, etc. — all leftists who caused untold human suffering. Yeah, I know, the “right” people haven’t tried communism. (See Einstein’s definition of “insanity”)

            26. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Citations please anecdotal evidence isn’t evidence at all. Both Stalin and Pol Pot were authoritarians not leftists, but they were quite similar to other Christians you revere like Hitler Torquamada, and Constantine.

            27. renegadesix says:

              They were avowed marxists. And what is it marxists can’t stand? Religion. Nice try.

              “College faculties, long assumed to be a liberal bastion, lean further to the left than even the most conspiratorial conservatives might have imagined, a new study says.

              By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

              The disparity is even more pronounced at the most elite schools, where, according to the study, 87 percent of faculty are liberal and 13 percent are conservative.

              The findings, by Lichter and fellow political science professors Stanley Rothman of Smith College and Neil Nevitte of the University of Toronto, are based on a survey of 1,643 full-time faculty at 183 four-year schools.”

            28. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Scientists are left wing, thanks for proving my point.

            29. Gman says:

              Goodness … I believe you just Godwinned Renegade.

            30. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Presenting leaders like Stalin and Pol Pot (who were military oligarchs) as leftists is just as derailing to a conversion.

              Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it.

            31. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Privatization of public goods is evil. Why should someone get rich providing the basic necessities of life?

            32. renegadesix says:

              Because they work to provide it? Because the alternative is slavery? That’s just two good reasons right off the top of my head.

            33. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Capitalism is economic slavery, and the rich don’t labor so they provide nothing of value. Kinda like you in this discussion thread.

            34. renegadesix says:

              Capitalism is freedom. The freedom to be choose to be your own boss or work for someone else and avoid all the risks that go with it. Socialism is enslavement to the all powerful state.

            35. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You have no clue what socilism really is do you? It’s controll of production by the individuals working in the factory not the state. SMFH

            36. renegadesix says:

              Uh, that’s a big negatory, comrade. The ONLY difference between socialism and communism is that a socialist state will SOMETIMES allow a collective to control SOME means of production. The rest remains firmly in the control of the state.

            37. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              As this discussion progresses, I am beginning to sense that you are unclear about what socialism and communism really are. Do you mind if I ask where you are getting your definitions from? They are clearly diffrent than the ones Marx lays out in chapter 2 page 3 of the maifesto.

            38. renegadesix says:

              I have given you the textbook definitions. How you misinterpret Marx is your problem.

            39. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Please provide the citation then.

        2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

          The populace deserves to have control of the means of production. Not the rich parasites that contribute nothing. You should read some Marx, it would keep you from sounding like such a fool.

          1. renegadesix says:

            Read it. It is evil. Collectivism is evil. You are evil.

            1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Humanism and equality is evil? Not in my world.

            2. renegadesix says:

              Equality amongst slaves is evil, yes.

            3. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              It’s so sad that you consider your fellow human beings as no better than slaves, I think it’s painfully obvious who is evil in this discussion.

            4. renegadesix says:

              I’m the one trying to keep you from enslaving my fellow human beings.

            5. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Really, in what way am I enslaving humans?

            6. renegadesix says:

              By turning control of the means of production — and therefore earning a living — to the government thus making us all wage slaves of the government.

            7. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Read chapter 2 of the “Communist Manifesto” and get back to me on the actual definition of socialism-communism.

            8. renegadesix says:

              I don’t have to. I just gave you the definition. That you falsely and disingenuously misinterpret Marx is not my problem.

            9. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Please provide a citation for your “interpretation”.

            10. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              What part of Marxist theory is evil? The English said the same of Gandhi when he urged the people of India to overthrow their colonizers. The rich seem to think they have the right to exploit others for their own personal gain. The needs of the many outweigh the wants of the few. Most athoritarians disagree with this assessment, but that’s what makes them athoritarian, the desire to impose their will on others.

            11. renegadesix says:

              The part where you don’t own anything. The part where the government controls everything. The part where Stalin sends millions their deaths in the gulags. The part that the theory always turns into in practice.

            12. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Marx mentions none of those things. You should try actually reading him next time.

            13. renegadesix says:

              You should try reading an entire post before responding. Read the last sentence.

            14. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              There has never been a democratic socialist country so his theories have never been put into practice. (the ussr was a military oligarchy with a state controlled economy, marist theory calls for the means of production to be controlled by the workers themselves not the state)

            15. renegadesix says:

              My point, exactly. It is not possible. You socialists/communists are authoritarian by nature and can’t help but set up reeducation camps and gulags.

            16. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Your “point” is a pair of logicial falicies. First mistake in your reasoning is an appeal to tradition. Your basicly saying saying it’s not possible since it has never been done. With that sort of logic no progress would ever be made, no new social systems would ever have been developed, no technology, ect. since new ideas are devoloped and put into practice all the time, this is clearly not the case.
              Second, labeling progressives as athoritarian is a strawman, youcan look at any political spectrum chart and it will show that athoritarians exist on the right side while those in favor of freedom and liberty exist on the left.

            17. renegadesix says:

              Insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. The natural result of giving any governmental entity that much power is totalitarianism. It flows just like water going down hill.

              Talk about a logical fallacy. First, labeling “progressives” as authoritarian is a FACT not a strawman. It is the left that sent people to “reeducation camps”. It is the left that gave us political correctness. It is the left that is using the power of government to run people out of business because they don’t want to make a gay wedding cake (can we say “slavery” boys and girls?).

              Second, that there have been right wing authoritarian governments does not in anyway make my statement illogical. That’s the “my sister got a cookie too” fallacy.

            18. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              insanity

              n. noun
              1. Severe mental illness or derangement. Not used in psychiatric diagnosis.
              2.
              Unsoundness of mind sufficient to render a person unfit to maintain a
              contractual or other legal relationship or sufficient to warrant
              commitment to a mental health facility.
              3.
              Incapacity to form the criminal intent necessary for legal
              responsibility, as when a mental disorder prevents a person from knowing
              the difference between right and wrong.
              4.
              Incapacity because of a mental disorder to participate adequately as a
              defendant in criminal proceedings or to understand the imposition of a
              criminal punishment, particularly the death penalty.
              5. Extreme foolishness or irrationality.
              6. Something that is extremely foolish, distinctly irrational, or wildly excited.

              Try again.

              “It is the left that sent people to “reeducation camps”.

              Provide citations please.

              ” It is the left that gave us political correctness.”

              You mean human rights?

              ” It is the left that is using the power of government to run people out
              of business because they don’t want to make a gay wedding cake”

              failure to provide a service because of race, creed, gender, social status, sexual orientation, or religious belief is bigotry.

              “Second, that there have only been right wing authoritarian governments makes my statement illogical. That’s the “I don’t know what fallacies are so I’m just going to show my ignorance by making something up” fallacy.”

              Fixed it for you.

            19. renegadesix says:

              I prefer Einstein’s definition. But “try again” is what you leftists have been doing since Marx, with the same invariable results — totalitarianism.

              “You mean human rights?”

              Funny, I thought those rights included free speech and freedom of religion — two things that political correctness does not tolerate.

              Regardless of whether a refusal of a PRIVATE person to do something for someone else comes from being too busy or just not liking the person, it is that person’s RIGHT not to do it. Forcing someone to work for another is a hallmark of slavery.

              You calling something a logical fallacy doesn’t make it one. You do not disprove that A has B characteristic by showing that C also has the B characteristic.

            20. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              “I prefer Einstein’s definition.”

              Citation please.
              One persons statement doesn’t trump the accepted definition of society

              “Funny, I thought those rights included free speech and freedom of
              religion — two things that political correctness does not tolerate.”

              You are free to have an opinion and free to practice any religion you like, however to participate in society you have to respect the rights of others who don’t share your dogma.
              That includes serving others of differing faiths, races, genders identities ect….

              should atheists be allowed to not serve those who still believe in primitive myths?

              I say no, you still have to respect others even if you don’t agree with them.

              “Regardless of whether a refusal of a PRIVATE person”

              Actions cease being private once they move into the public sector ie businesses.

              “You calling something a logical fallacy doesn’t make it one. You do not
              disprove that A has B characteristic by showing that C also has the B
              characteristic.”

              Overspecialization, please show how this has relevance regarding my statement.

            21. renegadesix says:

              Says the guy who insists upon Marx’s definition over the modern dictionary definition of socialism. Hypocrite much? That’s a rhetorical question, hypocrisy comes hand in hand with being a leftist.

            22. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Perfect! More rants just like this.

            23. renegadesix says:

              Translated from the leftist: “You just handed me my intellectual ass, I can’t refute what you said, so I’m just going to write something inane.”

            24. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              All the logic and reason in the world wouldn’t put a dent in the cognitive dissonance you’re waving around In here.

            25. renegadesix says:

              All the logic and reason in the world would lead to the demise of all leftist thought.

            26. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Nope most liberals are scientists, it’s religitards who subscribe to magical thinking. #Malinowskied

            27. renegadesix says:

              Most liberals are scientists? Really? Got some proof of that? Most of the liberals I know wouldn’t know the scientific method from the latest tofu recipe.

            28. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Evolution, climate change, atheism. science!

            29. renegadesix says:

              And that proves that most liberals are scientists how, exactly?

            30. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Those are fields based on science that are embraced buy the left and discounted by the right.

            31. renegadesix says:

              And…how does that prove that most liberals are scientists? Do most liberals have degrees in those fields?

              Here, let me let you off the hook. Study carefully what you wrote, it is backwards from what you meant.

            32. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Now you’re claiming to read my mind. More magical thinking from the “doctor”.

            33. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              We are just going to have to agree to disagree. Despite our difference ideology I wish you all the best.

            34. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Socialism
              NOUN
              a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

              Nope dictionary definition is the same as Marx’s

              Where was your definition from again?

            35. renegadesix says:

              Just realized what the problem is. Because I put links in my responses to you, this page flags them with “pending”. This is the definition I posted earlier and it comes from Merriam-Webster (without the link):

              socialism
              noun so·cial·ism ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm

              : a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies

              Full Definition of SOCIALISM

              1

              : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

              2

              a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
              b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

              3

              : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism andcommunism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

            36. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              It’s not surprising if you consider that the politically powerful seek to reorder language to reflect elitist ideology. Just like in our other conversation where you try to equate being a homosexual with being a child rapist. It’s pure fallacy of course, but you scream it loud enough and for long enough a few ignorant people will start to buy it.
              A good example of this is in the book “Deer Hunting for Jesus” where the author lays out how the right wing controlled media uses religion to convince the masses to support policies that are contrary to the best intrests of the people.

            37. renegadesix says:

              “Just like in our other conversation where you try to equate being a homosexual with being a child rapist.” Now THAT is a strawman.

              “A good example of this is in the book “Deer Hunting for Jesus” where the author lays out how the right wing controlled media”

              And THAT is hilarious. The only thing funnier is that fools believe that with precious few exceptions the media is composed of anything other than leftist extremists.

            38. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Corporate media is left wing? You certainly have a strange definition of what is considered left wing.

            39. renegadesix says:

              Depends upon what your definition of “corporate media” is. The mainstream media (major newspapers and major television news outlets) are demonstrably left wing in both news writing, story selection, and editorial writing.

            40. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Owned by multinationals, is not “left wing”.
              You can attempt to reframe the debate to fit your narrative, but that doesn’t make it true.

            41. renegadesix says:

              Being rich or in charge of a multinational doesn’t make you conservative. Does the name George Soros mean anything?

            42. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Not really why should it?

            43. renegadesix says:

              He’s one of you. Rich and funds most of your causes. Being rich doesn’t make you a conservative.

              So, this idiotic notion that corporate media isn’t liberal because the people who own it are rich can now be put back under the rock where you found it oozing.

              The proof is in what they do, what they report, and what they don’t report — not who owns them.

            44. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Left wing news orgs like democracy now and free speech TV aren’t owned by the corporations.

              What news orgs does Soros own?

            45. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              The truths not in a 2000 year old book riddled with inconsistencies and gross historical errors.

            46. renegadesix says:

              Non sequitur.

            47. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Fact.

            48. renegadesix says:

              Not according to your other post. Here, let me remind you:

              “o back to school, no such thing as objective truth,”

              Do make up your mind…or get one of your leftist profs to make it up for you since you seem incapable of doing it for yourself.

            49. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              So now you are confused about the difference between facts and objective truth?

            50. renegadesix says:

              You said “truths” not “fact”. Try again.

            51. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              I forgot an apostrophe, ” the truth is not in”

            52. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              You are confused. Gravity exists, that is a fact. If you drop an object it falls, and large masses attract more than small ones. Theories of gravity are “truths” and therefore subjective, there have been at least 2 (Newtonian theory and Einsteinian). Newtonian physics can be shown to be inaccurate and therfore it’s factual to say it’s no longer true.

              The bible (the text I refer to) is a collection of teaching stories from the iron age. It was meant to address facts like humans are here, and some people get sick and die when they eat shellfish.
              It does so by proclaiming that we were created, and that there was a divine prohibition against eating shellfish. The facts remain the same (people are here and some have shellfish allergies)
              But the explanations, or “truth” of the bible is demonstrably inaccurate.

              The current accepted explanations for how humans came into existence is evolution. That makes it a truth as well (it’s a theory, or several actually). That doenst mean it not subjective since each person interpates it differently. I suspect that as time passes this subjective truth will be discarded in favor of a new, more accurate/nuanced one. At which point it will also be factual to say evolution is no longer true.

    2. Ernest Crunkleton says:

      You are exactly right, many democratic socialists prefer freedom to serving their entire lives as wage slaves for a few elitists. Where did you get the idea that capitalism isn’t an extreme form of athoritarianism? Wealth is power.

      1. renegadesix says:

        I’d rather be a “wage slave” than a slave to the government. You can walk away from an authoritarian job. You can’t walk away from an authoritarian government.

        1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

          You talking about being a soldier? In that case I agree, it’s better to be a slave in our semi fluid caste system than a paid killer for the military industrial complex.

          1. renegadesix says:

            Go drink more draino. It might clear your mind up if you take just a little bit more.

            1. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Insults are the last refuge of the weak mind.

            2. renegadesix says:

              Says the guy tossing around the “B” word.

            3. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              That’s the term for those that wish to limit the rights of others. If you perceive it as an insult, I suggest you reevaluate your values.

            4. renegadesix says:

              That’s what you liberals are all about, no property rights, no gun rights, no self-defense rights, you people are all about not just limiting but destroying rights.

            5. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Projection.

            6. renegadesix says:

              I’m all about property rights, gun rights, etc. You are not. I’m not a leftist. I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

            7. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Good thing your ignorant beliefs are irrelevant to me.

            8. renegadesix says:

              Right, gun rights and property rights are irrelevant to you. Hence, you’re the one that is all about taking away rights. You just admitted that you’re a bigot under your definition of the word.

            9. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Your opnion of what the definition of projection is is meaningless to me.

            10. renegadesix says:

              Clearly the dictionary definition is as well as you use it in inappropriate circumstances.

            11. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Freud disagrees.

            12. renegadesix says:

              Freud is dead.

            13. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Red herring, his theorys of understanding how people deal with cognitive dissonance are still quite valid to modern psychologists.

            14. renegadesix says:

              A cigar is just a cigar…unless you’re a leftist and then it can be a red herring if the person who is smoking it says it is.

            15. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Or if distracts from the point without addressing it.

            16. renegadesix says:

              There’s that projection again.

            17. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              No I addressed the fact that Freud’s death has nothing to do with the validity of his theorys.

            18. renegadesix says:

              You didn’t say “his theories” you said he would disagree.

            19. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Learn to read.

            20. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Reread the thread.

            21. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Projetion is one of Freud’s theorys. To quote Mike Myers “Are you mental”

            22. Steven Nein says:

              Are your gun rights being taken away? If so, that is news to me and the rest of America! Property rights? Do you not have any property rights? Come on man, you cannot be for real! You are bringing up one red herring after red herring! The smell of these dead fish should be overwhelming you by now!

            23. renegadesix says:

              My gun rights have indeed been taken away. What part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand? I should be able to carry concealed without a permit. I should be able to own a machine gun. But I can’t because “shall not be infringed” has been significantly eroded. It is getting better, but not by much.

              I loved the qualifier “any” in your question about property rights. Just like with guns, the fact that you’ve left us a few of the property rights we once had doesn’t mean that the rights you took away weren’t taken away.

            24. Steven Nein says:

              You did not answer my questions. What rights have you lost? If I had my family and kids in a restaurant and you walked in with your machine gun, or even a loaded pistol strapped to your waist, I would confront you and see how level headed you might be. I would do my best to have you pull your gun on me or even point it at me and then tell you that your rights stop right in front of my face and that you had better take your guns and get them the hell out of this business. Many businesses do not agree with all of what you call you rights! I do not know your personality or how you might react when confronted, so I guess that you want every confrontation to be a crap shoot or vigilante law! You people have so many damned freedoms and rights that you cannot even use the ones you have!

            25. renegadesix says:

              You wouldn’t do squat and you know it, internet tough guy.

            26. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              My psychology instructor disagrees.

            27. renegadesix says:

              Get a refund.

            28. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Derp.

            29. renegadesix says:

              Exactly. Let me know when you start doing your own thinking.

            30. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              When your entire argument consists of calling me a liberal, it’s easy to be dismissive.

            31. renegadesix says:

              …it’s easy to be dismissive…of the parts where I crushed your preconceived notions with truth, facts, and logic. Those three things are more deadly to liberals than Kryptonite is to Superman.

            32. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Funny I missed all that, I did see a number of logical fallacies, propaganda, and misinformation though.

            33. renegadesix says:

              Now THAT is projection. See? You can be taught.

            34. Ernest Crunkleton says:

              Derp.

        2. Steven Nein says:

          Please tell us exactly what freedoms you have lost lately? Please name the freedoms that you think you should have that you do not have. And, please tell us just how this “authoritarian government” is stopping you for living a normal life and restricting your every move!

          1. renegadesix says:

            Serve who I want in MY business.
            Carry a gun without a permit.
            Own a machine gun.
            Hire whom I want.
            Fire whom I want.
            Pay no more in taxes than what is required for the government to exercise its PRECISE constitutional authority (i.e., no redistribution of income schemes).
            Drive a car without a seat belt.
            Not buy health insurance if I don’t want it.
            Not be taxed/penalized because I don’t want to buy health insurance.
            Not have to buy the government’s mandated level of health coverage if I decide to buy health insurance.
            Shall I continue?

            1. Steven Nein says:

              I think your comment here speaks for itself! You can take your gun and shove it up somewhere the sun doesn’t shine! If you run into my family and kill some of my family members, everything you have worked for will be mine! I’ll bet you would like to just drink and smoke yourself to death as well, and you have all the freedom in the world to do so!

            2. renegadesix says:

              And you just proved that you are anti-freedom. Congratulations, I guess?

              BTW, I’ve been carrying guns pretty much the entirety of my adult life. I’ve run into many families. And not once has my gun jumped out of its holster and shot someone. When you are left with nothing but shill spewings like your last post, you have lost.

              Your family members are far more likely to be killed by someone driving a car than carrying a gun.

            3. Steven Nein says:

              Have you ever been confronted for carrying your gun into a business or is it always concealed? Are you afraid that some liberal will jump out and kick you rear end or are you just paranoid? With the amount of radical conservative groups that have formed since President Obama became President, if I were you, I would be very afraid of them, so maybe this is why you carry a gun everywhere. I do not know your mental stability, but I do know that many people should not be allowed to have a gun. I guess you assume that you and all of your other gun toting buddies in this world are sane, mentally stable and great decisive decision maker and would always make the right decision if some one disagreed with them or they did not like something some one else was doing or telling them to do? To you, the gun makes you a stronger bigger man, and is the ultimate decision maker. Like I stated earlier, I would confront you and push you very hard to see just how you might react if you were open carrying your gun in a business! I hope it stays in your holster, but one never knows what might trip your mind!

            4. renegadesix says:

              Do you own car insurance for your car? Are you “paranoid” you’ll be in a wreck? Are people who keep fire extinguishers handy “paranoid” that they’ll be confronted with a fire? Its called “being prepared.” I know that is an alien concept to you leftists and you just don’t understand it, but it really isn’t paranoia.

              When I carry it is not to be prepared to deal with a liberal. You’re all a bunch of wusses everywhere but the internet.

              To answer your question, I have done both — open carry and concealed carry. When possible I carry concealed now because I have studied the issue and find that it is the more tactically sound thing to do.

              However, were I to carry openly and run into you, you wouldn’t push me long. I have this thing called a “cell phone” for people like you. You can use it to call the police. In my state what you claim you have the balls to do is called “harassment”. Its a Class C misdemeanor — usually only punishable by a fine — but it would get you out of my face. Then I would get a restraining order against you.

              Wusses like you are at best an annoyance. The law is more than adequate to deal with the likes of you.

            5. Steven Nein says:

              What I got out of this rant is that you are one big ass scared pussy and the gun makes you a big tough asshole. Maybe Walmart does not have a policy to keep you big scaredy cats out, but many other stores do, and I know which ones do, so your sorry scared ass would be thrown out or thrown into jail after I confronted you. Most of the people shooting other people are not the liberals dumbass, it is radical righties, like the guy that shot Gabby Gifford. You have a very distorted view of reality and an apparent fear of your fellow man. Your training has affected your ability to think in a reasonable manner and I feel sorry for you. I would bet that if you ever had to draw a gun to shot someone, it would not be a bad liberal, it would be one of your own bad conservatives that support the bars and stars! Get real man you are the minority and I would never trust your vigilante attitude to make the right decision when confronted in a confrontational situation. Look at the so called trained police officers that shoot 12 years olds in 12 seconds after arriving at the scene. I suppose that you support this kind of bullshit as well. Give me a break little man!

            6. renegadesix says:

              Loving the big tough keyboard warrior schtick. Never change, komrade.

    3. Steven Nein says:

      Yes, those poor rich multimillionaire elites, have all of the freedom they want because of all of the shackling by their government plantation! The ones who do not have freedom are those being paid minimum wages and working two jobs to try and just live in todays world! I guess you call that “freedom”! I do not!

      1. renegadesix says:

        No one is working two minimum wage jobs to survive unless they are a doped out scumbag. If you are working two minimum wage jobs to survive, you have not taken advantage of the few opportunities you leftists have allowed us to keep.

  12. suburbancuurmudgeon says:

    Good luck. You have voter suppression as your greatest obstacle. Make voting mandatory and problem solved.

  13. Edwin North says:

    yup, conservitards induce fear in to white redneck bigots and garner votes.

  14. Maggie Jones says:

    The republicans have touted religion (when clearly they do not follow the teachings of Christ) to garner support of easily fooled (poor and uneducated) voters. Where is the movement to expose this? Where is the movement to insist on “Separation of Church and State?”

    1. robb32 says:

      you are only protected from the CONGRESS establishing a STATE religion..not from being EXPOSED to religion…and the afore mentioned separation act was originally a letter penned by Jefferson to Protect the citizens of Danbury CT from being required to join the local Baptist church to live in that community. It wa never intended to try and take away people’s RIGHT to worship freely,. nor to “erase” religion..Incidentally Secular atheist Humanism(life apart from God) is recognized AS a religion

    2. Donise says:

      You can’t expose their deciet because God is real! Lots of real Christians fall for stuff.Take solace, Maggie Jones, God Sees All. He desests liars.

    3. RonzoL61 says:

      Maggie Jones, since the words “Separation of church and state” don’t appear anywhere on the Constitution, nobody other than low infomation Progressive Socialist voters believe in it..

      1. Steven Nein says:

        Your statement here is a pile of you know what, BS!

  15. Marina Doshkevich says:

    Sorry, but there are people who, although poor actually believe in hard work, not entitlements. Not to mention that they probably don’t much like seeing all the things that poor black people qualify for that they do not. Its wealthy academia that tends to be liberal, and youth. Anyone that has lived in the world and has even a tiny bit of common sense will realize that wealth redistribution is simply unfair. I don’t have much money, but that doesn’t mean I think I have the right to reach into someone else’s pocket simply because they happen to have it.

    1. Richard says:

      I live in the rural south. Government payments are the largest source of income in some counties. These “self reliant” people are in denial.

    2. CleverBev says:

      Marina, if one’s income defines one as “poor,” and makes one eligible for ASSISTANCE, not entitlements,” then explain how poor blacks “qualify” for benefits which whites of equal income do not. Are you saying that all academics are wealthy? Trust me, they are not. They cobble two and three jobs together to earn a living in the same way that people with less education have to do. I absolutely agree that wealth redistribution is simply unfair, which is why we as a nation need to stop SKEWING OUR POLICIES SO THAT THEY BENEFIT THE WEALTHY. Poor criminals have to be next to you to pick your pocket. Wealthy criminals pick your pocket from a distance in fancy suites, so you don’t realize it’s being picked. Yet, the conservatives continue to skew policies toward the wealthy, feed people an American “Dream” of mobility which they will never have, and encourage them to point a finger toward the “other,” who, by some imaginary magic, is taking things from them.

      1. Steven Nein says:

        Thank you for this very good comment. This is something many of the poor voters do not seem to understand!

    3. Steven Nein says:

      “Wealth redistribution is simply unfair”! When we tax people that make their income from interest and dividend earnings for their investments at about one half the rate, do you considerate that “Wealth redistribution”? When the richer Americans qualify for interest deductions on their investment properties, do you considerer that “Wealth redistribution”? When businesses get “Capital Purchase” deductions for pickups and larger autos(that they use as their family and personal auto) but get tax deductions to offset and reduce their income, do you consider that “Wealth redistribution”? It is our political policies that are the problem, not about “reaching into someone else’s pocket” as you profess. Wake up and get educated on the causes of income inequality in America today!

  16. mark wyatt says:

    Come on , lets be honest . Its the Christians that are compelled to auto-vote GOP b/c of Roe vs. Wade . Poor or not .They have ruined America with their rallied dis-informed voting . Without the evangelic voter dupe no GOP candidate would ever get elected again . Period .

  17. chest55 says:

    Some white people are just Crazy and don,t know no better and some are just Racial.

  18. Edwin C Young says:

    Just change a few words here and there and you have the Fox News Network business model:

    “The thinking is that most white (…conservatives…) harbor some form of prejudice towards blacks (and browns, feminists, LBGTs, intellectuals, Liberals, etc, etc, etc…). This reality is nowhere more prevalent than in the (…conservative…) white uneducated population (…everywhere…). (…Conservative…) whites have a need to feel superior to something or somebody, and blacks and now Hispanics (…ad infinite item…) are the ticket.”

  19. Richard says:

    As a white male Mississippian….This article is a good summary of a sad progression. One slight correction…The Southern Strategy started under Nixon. It was perfected by Atwater. It’s no accident that Reagan announced in Philadelphia, MS. Atwater begat Rove as a young campaign worker..

    1. Gman says:

      Rove tried his best to defeat Reagan. Also, Dems have taken at least a good portion of the South 5 out of the last 10 elections, so if the strategy was to attract Southern racists, it looks like the Dems have attracted the racists half the time since 1976.

      1. Kenneth James Abbott says:

        Apparently the South turned racist in 1968, then turned not racist in 76, then turned racist again in 80, then turned not-racist in 92, then turned racist again in 2000…..

  20. shay3780 says:

    excellent article

  21. Dorian Mode says:

    You only have to look at the Right to work states to know what the author is saying is true. All of the manufacturing jobs in the south went overseas, and with no unions people were left destitute. How the hell did they ever get that law to pass is beyond me. Believe me when the manufacturing left the town that I live in. There were people who were left high and dry, no pensions, no job training, and most of all no jobs.

    1. robb32 says:

      hmm, ever been to “northern” Detroit?

    2. frankly2 says:

      Dorian, what could have been done differently to keep the jobs? It was inevitable. In China the hard working industrious and intelligent work force makes less than $10000 a year. Because of the cheap labor our pants, shirts, ties, shoes, underwear, glasses, cars, appliances, furniture, computers, phones, tv’s, and just about everything else is cheaper than it has ever been relative to our income. If we had kept the jobs, your car would have cost twice as much, your refrigerator would be four times as much, your clothing three to five times as much and your tv $10,000. Remember when an tv manufactured in the US was $900? I do. It was 1967. What do you suppose $900 in 1967 would be today in equivalent dollars?

      1. Ubiquitousnewt says:

        Protectionist import policy. All this garbage from China wouldn’t be so dirt-cheap if we tacked a 200% tariff on it. Really simple, European countries with high standards of living are the masters of it. …but it inhibits companies and their race-to-the-bottom profits, so…our politicians threw us under the bus. Again.

        Yeah, “stuff” is cheaper, but since *we don’t make it*, our wages have also remained flat.
        Pro-tip, by the way – a good flatscreen is still $1000 in 2015.

        1. RonzoL61 says:

          So, China would just accept the tarrif and not increase the prices to compensate for it?

        2. frankly2 says:

          And if we tacked a 200% tariff on it then the bottom 50% in our country couldn’t afford it. You are kidding yourself if you think this stuff isn’t in Europe. Europe is in worse shape than we are by the way.

          Our politicians didn’t throw us under the bus. The cheap labor was there and the internet allowed us to manage it from here. It was inevitable that this was going to happen.

          1. Steven Nein says:

            Did you know that Germany had no trade deficit with China or any other country? We do not need a 200% tariff, but an equal tariff with other countries! These so called(misnamed) “free trade agreements” are not free for the American consumers! We cannot continue to have a $500 Billion dollar per year drain on our economy from these very bad trade deals! These trade deficits have amounted to some $11 trillion dollars since 1980, of our total debt of some 18 Trillion!

            1. frankly2 says:

              You can’t compare Germany to the US. The trade deals have absolutely nothing to do with our trade deficit.

            2. Steven Nein says:

              Are you kidding me? Where did you go to school? Did you flunk economics 101? Where in the world do you think the $500 BILLION DOLLAR per year trade deficit comes from? Why do they call this a TRADE DEFICIT yoyo?

            3. frankly2 says:

              So why don’t you tell us how the trade agreements created the trade deficit? You might sound a little smarter if you would just apply basic supply and demand theory to figure out the reason for the trade deficit.
              First, the trade agreements did not create the conditions that made manufacturing companies move to Mexico or China or anywhere else. The conditions that made that happen were cheap labor there and expensive labor here. It was inevitable.
              Second, clothing, autos, appliances, drugs, and just about everything else we buy is a lot cheaper because it was made with cheap labor. The people of the US have benefitted enormously from it. More than they have suffered a loss from the decline in manufacturing here. The US still has the largest and wealthiest middle class that has ever existed in history.
              Third, All you have to do to defeat the problem is to get people to buy American. They will have to pay two to three times as much but if they do it then the jobs will come back here.
              Fourth, the US is poised to become the world’s largest oil, gas and coal exporter but our leaders in the democratic party want to stop that. If you really care about the $500 billion trade deficit then you should be urging them to allow the development and sale of our oil and coal.

            4. Steven Nein says:

              Typical right wing republican, rape the earth and screw the people all for the benefit of a few at the top! Our middle class is “the largest and wealthiest that has ever existed in history” ! Wow, which countries did you choose to not compare here? Your thinking is convoluted here! You are talking out both sides of your mouth. First you talk about how much Americans have benefitted from cheaper foreign products and then you talk about all we need to do is get the American people to buy American products (that we do not produce) and pay two or three times more for them! If we pay our workers such low wages, they cannot afford to pay two or three times as much for the products. This is the right wing agenda, of supply side economics, cheaper cheaper and cheaper at all costs which has closed our manufacturing companies! How you do not understand this and try to have it both ways shows your lack of understanding of reality! If you do not want America to prosper, keep lying to your self and ignore the facts and reality, which the republican party has been great at for some 35 years and it is about to catch of with them! Mark my words.

            5. frankly2 says:

              Can you see the hypocrisy in your own post?

            6. frankly2 says:

              So where is your explanation? I thought you might not reply.

            7. frankly2 says:

              Do you know enough about it to say that if we didn’t have those agreements the trade deficit would be less? Or maybe even worse? I think the trade deficit would be worse. The problem is Americans have a lot of money to buy foreign made products.

            8. Steven Nein says:

              I know that these trade deals have decimated some 50,000 American manufacturing businesses and cost the US close to 3 million jobs because our politicians and our corporate rulers could make so much more money with the cheap labor overseas, but in doing so destroyed cities like Detroit etc! Detroit’s problems are not their elected leaders, their problems come from political policies that sent these jobs overseas! Even Allan Greenspan told congress that American could not continue to have this kind of trade deficit, but have you seen congress even talk about correcting this? They have now gone even farther with the passage of the TPP trade Agreement! Many democrats and some republicans fought against this and against President Obama on this deal. Yes, this country has the money to buy foreign products, but do not want to pay American workers a living wage! This has been and continues to be a huge drag on America’s debt and job creation!

            9. frankly2 says:

              No one argues that the trade deals have cost the US jobs that wouldn’t have been lost anyway.

            10. Steven Nein says:

              Let me see now, if we would not have lost those 50,000 manufacturing businesses, we would still have lost those jobs? It’s okay to send our money to foreign countries who pay their workers some 50cents per hour with no benefits and dictators as leaders and terrible working conditions and this is okay with you? The great greedy capitalistic model that we worship has about destroyed America. People need jobs in our cities and a lot of our problems would be reduced. These conversations always lead to the two economic models, the supply side versus the Keynesian economic model. We have been under the supply side model since President Reagan and we seeing and experiencing the results of this model. This nation needs to pull its horns in and take care of its own people and quite this forever war mentality and the debt building costs to America as well as the debt building trade deficits we continue to allow. These are political policy decisions and have been leading this nation the wrong direction for some 35 years now. This needs to be changed. The idea that this nation can continue to cut taxes for the rich and continue huge tax loopholes for corporations and remain a great nation is total folly! The idea that we do not need to pay our workers a living wage is nonsense. Allowing companies like Walmart to have as their business model, workers being subsidized by the government because of such low wages while making some $16 Billion dollars profit last year. CEO’s and hedge fund managers making $10’s of millions of dollars per year and paying some of the lowest income tax rates. These are again political policies made by our elected officials. As the old saying goes, the American people are sleeping while Rome burns!

        3. frankly2 says:

          Pro-tip, if it wasn’t imported it would be $10,000. And by the way you can buy a very good flat screen for about $250.

      2. Steven Nein says:

        Apparenty, you did not read or get the gist of my statement on America’s trade deficit of $500 Billion per year, which would pay some 10 million workers some $50,000 per year, yet we can buy all of this crap from China and make China our Banker and pay them some $30 billion dollars per month to take American jobs! Where in the hell do you righties come from on this and why can you not understand reality here?

        1. frankly2 says:

          Righties? So it is the left only that has problems with the trade deficit? I think you will find it is also a pretty big percentage of the “righties” who think like you.
          The righties who disagree with you do so because we are fundamentally realists and know that throughout history protectionist policy has almost always backfired and hurt the American worker. Your theories would hurt more than they would help.

      3. Greg Price says:

        Yes, but we would have more jobs at better wages so it ends up a wash.

        We managed just fine before sweatshop labor. Our economy was the envy of the world.

    3. Bymynishus says:

      In the rural towns I’ve seen where industrial industries have died out, these “red state” people have embraced the cultivation of marijuana. It’s kind of interesting to meet them and see them stick to their guns on everything else, but this issue now that it’s keeping their families fed. I think it’s one more frayed thread to start the unraveling of the GOP’s hold.

  22. Champ86 says:

    A simpler answer, FOX, it hands it’s audience a point of view, one they can use conversationally, without doing the deep thinking and research that goes into forming an opinion. Rodger Ailes knows, people don’t like difficulty of thought but, they do like the comfort of having an opinion

    1. Gman says:

      Says the guy who has their home page on their internet browser set to the DailyKos, with MediaMatters littering his “favorites”. SMH

    2. FightForYourRight-HispanicCons says:

      How about this for “difficulty of thought.” What would you use to blame conservatives before Fox News? I kind of feel sorry for people like you that are so easily swayed by
      propaganda… Logic evades your mind, but yet impudence makes you points
      your fingers at others. Pitiful.

      1. Gman says:

        Exactly … just look at Champ’s previous Disqus comments. He’s a big MediaMatters fan. Oh, the delicious irony … a MediaMatters sycophant accusing others of having a source do their thinking for them. LOL!

  23. BrotherRog says:

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” – John Steinbeck

  24. Kris Weibel says:

    Excellent. So many articles on voting against our own best interests….this nails it.

  25. John N. Ely says:

    This all would have been true a couple of decades ago. While it remains true that institutional racism and xenophobia remain factors (though now at least as much directed toward Muslims, the gay community and presumptively undocumented Hispanics as toward African-Americans), the attraction of poor white America to the GOP, and particularly to its farthest-right fringe, is much simpler: they love guns, they love Jesus and the Republicans promise them both.

  26. boB says:

    Wow … reading the article I thought this had to be some expert in politics or history that just doesn’t write very well. I get to the end and the author’s bio claims that his actual profession is writing?!?!?

    No one who is a professional writer should produce something this full of grammatical errors and omitted words. I’ve seen junior high school theme papers that were better put together.

  27. lrs63 says:

    Grossly oversimplified and windy.

  28. You need to read Krugman’s “Bubba Isn’t Who You Think”. He notes, “poor whites are not the issue. In fact, if you look at voting behavior, low-income whites in the South are not very different from low-income whites in the rest of the country.”

  29. William P. Homans says:

    Johnny is a freelance writer because no one would hire him as an “official” spokesman. I have rarely seen anyone who presumes to write substantive analysis pay as little attention to grammar and syntax as he. Even if he is correct in his positions, analysis and surmises (and he is), most educated people would throw up their hands at someone who takes as little care to proofread as this man.

    Even the headline is miswritten. The word “to” should appear between “People” and “Vote.” In particular, he needs some basic remedial education in the use of punctuation. I fear that he just wrote this in one burst and then posted it without even having re-read it.

    I choose not to work in the mainstream media, even though I have two writers’ degrees. I tried it. In purely economic terms, I made more money as a truck driver, and now, as a professional international touring musician, than I ever could as a run-of-the mill general-assignments reporter. Besides that, trucking, labor, and the cultural work I do now have more integrity and more societal value than working in the bought-and-sold corporate media.

    But I will never permit any writing I do, on Discus or Facebook or any other venue, to cause other intellectually developed individuals to dismiss my work as sloppy or amateurish. If Johnny is listening, I invite him to contact me, and I would be pleased to give his writing the polish it needs.

    He is a person of good will. I wish to empower such people. That’s my job as a musician, and also as a trained educator.

    William P. Homans, BA, MA (History and Journalism)
    www-dot-watermelonslim-dot-com

  30. William P. Homans says:

    All that said, all y’all NEED to READ what he has to say! I utterly commend this fellow Tarheel (I was raised in Asheville, NC) for THINKING, as a SOUTHERNER of good will (as I am also).

  31. robb32 says:

    actually, it’s converse..the poorest of minority people have been jobbed by the Dems for years, with promises of “entitlements”( and by the way..who exactly entitles them?). As a Libertarian, it is clearly evident both parties have used the masses, both poor uneducated, and self appointed rich “elitists” to gain wealth and power. Corruption and ignorance isn’t limited to a party nor a demographic. The Constitution has always promised you the “right to PURSUE happiness”, and not to demand it from others or to take it at the point of a gun, be you a criminal or a politician. You have the right to seek an education , however when the education you are getting is more designed to save collegiate tenure than allowing you an affordable education, and slants or “recreates” history, you border on Stalinist fascism/Communism. However, the most recent flag debate is yet another smoke and mirror attempt to hide the TTP and TISa trade pacts being shoved down the American throat, as was Nafta and Gatt. Nothing new here, but a loss of American sovereignty, American middle class freedom, and the demise of American jobs…in an effort to give Ruling powers to the Executive branch. But even Sparta had it’s traitors that brought down a great power. YTou keep thinking the rebel flag is your enemy while satan and this brood of vipers in the Congress and White House work to sell you out, here and abroad..

  32. Walter Pewen says:

    The problem is though, the Southern Strategy is now very old and has turned on itself. These states have huge social and physical costs that are piling up now at a faster pace-Ferguson, Katrina, a younger generation with not many prospects (including whites) decades of neglect on public health. They are trying to live 50 years in the past and they will not be able to do so.

  33. Mike Harrell says:

    Those who think racism is only a problem in South, or in rural areas, are deluding themselves. Only this past week one of the Republican Presidential candidates from New York City made a highly irresponsible and bigoted comment about Mexicans. And that’s not an aberration. Racism continues to exist all over this nation, and those who only want to focus on the South are practicing a form of denial that, while it may make them feel better about their own back yards, does little to address the wider problem.

  34. inapsin says:

    This article is to long. A poor uneducated white republican is not going to read this article. Even if they started, you’ll never reach them. You’re trying to reach a reptilian brain with a long article, facts and logic.

    1. Gman says:

      “facts” … not backed up by citation.

      1. inapsin says:

        Gman
        Please, why would I want to give facts with citations to reach a reptilian brain person. All I have to do is tap into their emotions, especially fear, trust, and disgust and I win, Like be scared of blacks, they’re killing white people. Facts show that whites kill whites and blacks kill blacks. Black people are getting something white people are not getting. Facts show more whites benefit from welfare than blacks. Black people alway getting a job, into school or something they’re not qualified for. Facts don’t show that, the only place blacks are winning is in the NBA and NFL. Now if you’re an intellect, stop being lazy and take the time to fact check. You can start with google.

        1. Gman says:

          Your examples are nothing but simplistic non sequiturs. Since you’re so fond of advocating the use of Google, take some of your own medicine and Google the correct spelling of rudimentary, second grade-level words like “too”, and perhaps research how to debate without littering your arguments with cherry picking, ad hominem, and other logical fallacies.

          1. inapsin says:

            You’re silly at best. You can always tell a fake intellect, you’re a reptile. Trying to use grammar as an argument. Address the points. You modern day dumb down conservative. Following idiots like Rush and Hannity. Millionaires hired by a billionaire to fool you. I use to be a conservative. I became a conservative because of William Buckley. You remember him. The golden day when intelligence was important. I left the party because I have to deal with idiots like you. The party has become dumb with no solutions. The tail is wagging the dog. In the end, I don’t care what you think. You idiots have already lost.

            1. Gman says:

              1) I’d have said nothing about your profoundly shítty grammar and sentence structure had you not criticized “uneducated” Republicans for having “reptilian brains”. Héll … I wasn’t even disagreeing with that assertion, just pointing out the delicious irony in your accusation, given your lack of writing acumen.

              2) Sorry, Scooter. I don’t listen to the blowhard Limbaugh, nor the FoxNews idiot that constantly invites ignorant 19 and 20 year-olds on his show to opine on foreign affairs, as if their inexperienced opinion means anything … AND he keeps inviting Karl “The Stooge” Rove on his show (at least these things are what he did about 6 or 7 years ago, which is the last time I watched that channel). Furthermore, you maladroit fool, you mistake me for someone who gives a dämn about the Repubican Party (misspelling intentional) with their “leadership” (<– misnomer?) in John "Boo Hoo" Boehner, John "Twice Loser" McCain, Lindsey "Goober" Graham, *itch McConnell (no, the asterisk is NOT an ersatz M), etc. Just a cursory glance at my previous comments would have revealed that, but intellectually lazy, left-wing-talking-points regurgitators do not possess the capacity to perform even a MODICUM of due diligence before running their filthy trap about others. Their M.O.: Make cräp up in their own heads, and then posit all arguments based on those made-up premises.

              3) Dämn right, I know Buckley. Too bad we don't have someone like him around anymore. He would be flipping in his grave if he saw how National Review was being ran into the ground by pseudo-Conservatives.

              4) You said, "The party has become dumb with no solutions." Alas, we can agree on something. But you imply the destructive Democrat Party is any better, and not worse. So, save your party-affiliation accusations for those like yourself and other MediaMatters-vomiting parrots who think like you. $100 says you pull that level for every dämned (D) on that ballot, every dämned election. Who is idiot, again?

              5) You said, "I don't care what you think…", yet, your obvious anger, butthurt, and uncontrollable rage compelled you to respond to what I thought in the previous comment. LOL!

            2. inapsin says:

              Gman
              Obviously you have better grammar skills than me. I just have a math degree from an Ivy league with a MD, practicing for over 20 years. My screen name should give you a clue. I can comment on your reasoning and logic skill, poor. Where did I imply better or anger. Saying republicans is going to lose doesn’t imply better. I don’t care implies anger. Wow. You don’t know my voting record. Here is a fact, if you’re in the 1% the best thing that ever happened was Obama. I’ve always voted R for my financial interest. I didn’t vote for him, but you cannot argue against the increase in wealth due to that socialist, communist man. Let’s put an end to this silly debate. Come off line, put up your education, credentials, accomplishments, income, finances, businesses and let’s see who has accomplished more. All hail Mr. Gman the internet grammar champ.

            3. Gman says:

              1) Obviously, you weren’t paying attention, or were, but simply missed the point. Your introductory phrase, “… you have better grammar skills than me …” gives the impression that you felt it was an assertion that I was making, which it wasn’t, however, going over your entire library of Disqus account comments, it’s clear that you do not quite write at the high-school level, and that’s being generous. That notwithstanding, I don’t give two squats about your linguistic prowess, or the lack thereof, nor was I comparing mine to yours. Again, I wouldn’t have brought it up had you not criticized others for their lack, all while demonstrating yours.

              2) Hundreds of conversations with those who have earned Doctorates in Philosophy, Jurisprudence, Education, and Economics, among others, have rendered Doctorates meaningless when making the argument that simply because one has acquired a Doctorate, the acquisition thereof de facto translates to a superior intellectual fortitude in said recipient. Such an accomplishment indicates perseverance and dedication, not intellect. Intelligence is inherent, and rarely increases/decreases once adulthood is reached, save some tragic and/or traumatizing event, regardless of academic achievement.

              3) Your screen name indicates nothing more than your potential employment as a pharma salesman, and given your responses, perhaps even someone who might be prescribed such medication.

              4) You said, “… you cannot argue against the increase in wealth due to that socialist, communist man.” Never was such an argument put forth … not by me, at least, nor would I ever think of making an argument against it, as I agree with that statement 100%. You’re making things up again.

              5) You said, “… put up your education, credentials, accomplishments, ad infinitum, ad nauseam …” I’m not about to put my C.V., nor my resume on a random forum for the sole purpose of assuaging the insecurities of a faceless, nameless entity on the internet. I do not want, nor do I need such validation … neither should you.

              6) Now that we have objectivity out of the way, here’s some opinion, classified only as such because you are a faceless, nameless, keyboard warrior on the internet, and therefore, will not be provable, but clearly evident, nonetheless: I think you’re a liar with regard to your “accomplishments”. If you were intelligent, you really wouldn’t give a dämn about my opinion, but something tells me that my assertion bugs you. Bring the hate again 😉

            4. inapsin says:

              Gman
              Grammar king of the internet. I guess you missed the part where I said come off line. Proving who’s a liar is quite easy. Actually, I have an old C.V., publications, and book chapters online. So when ever you want to prove your point let me know. A quick google search can fix that. I know it’s easier for you to babble and hide behind words.

            5. Gman says:

              1) I’ve never made the claim of grammar mastery. You’re the one that keeps bestowing it to me.
              2) You said, “… proving who is the liar … ” leaving the possibility that I, not you, am the liar. Point out a single declaration of fact that you consider to be a lie. (Sorry, my observations and opinions, by definition, cannot possibly be construed as lying.)
              3) Speaking of “missing parts”, you must’ve missed the part where I said you shouldn’t need validation from a nameless, faceless entity on the internet.
              4) If you, indeed, have been published, you must’ve had one HÉLL of an editor.
              5) My review of your C.V. and resume would just further cement my assertion that there is zero direct correlation between possessing a Doctorate and possessing intellectual fortitude. Now, why on earth would you want to do that?

            6. Steven Nein says:

              The only thing I can disagree with you here is the fact that the top 1% have done so much better under President Obama. Why is this? to state this without noting that the republican party which you voted for has blocked and filibustered any attempt by the democratic party to correct this income inequality! You have to recognize this fact when making such a statement! Which party tried to tax the rich more, which party tried to control the out of control banking industry, which party tried to raise the minimum wages for the working class Americans? How you can vote republican and then state that this President helped the rich get richer is total hypocrisy! You, as you profess to be such an educated person should know better and vote according to what you profess!

            7. inapsin says:

              Gman
              By the way, I’m not trying to be rude. You’re a reptilian, so I have to come at you like this.

            8. Gman says:

              Pshht … bring the rude … this is the internet. Who cares? LOL!

    2. HigherGround/Blk Conservative says:

      How about an affluent black conservative? I took the time to read it, and it’s nothing more than unsubstantiated dribble. Sometimes, it seems that liberals abhor facts, well at least facts that are detrimental to their rhetoric.

  35. Char Kelly says: