Man, Republicans in a nutshell. To think, they actually used to stand for something...

submitted by IamRedBeard from i.redd.it

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]IamRedBeard[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Well, in my opinion, you are the closest thing to Nazi's that we have today. I have never said anything different.

You cage children. You Preach Jesus, but dont practice his teachings. You say you are moral but conservatives actions against their neighbors are fundamentally immoral. You arrogantly think you have superiority over people of other skin colors. You fight and shill for the Wealthy, only for the .00002% chance that you may one day be wealthy. Conservatives have no real moral compass, because you believe every sin you cast and whatever evil you do is forgiven just for the asking by the very savior whose teachings you ignore.

Arrogant, emotionally retarded, usually racist, thinks they are morally superior, two faced shills for the wealthy and enemy of the working man.

You know, Nazi's...

But at least when I first came into the world in the mid 70's to the 80's you had some people in the party that I at least respected.

[–]Chipit 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You cage children.

That was Obama's policy.

The rest is just an unstable emotional rant with no citations or evidence. I mean, come on, Nazis?

I support an armed populace, personal freedom, democracy, and small government. All of which are not supported under Nazism. And yet I'm supposedly a Nazi because I'm a right winger.

Mussolini was a socialist radical all his life, including being the editor of Avanti!, the official daily of the Socialist Party. Those of today's American Left who either don't know— - and that's many in my personal experience - —or trivialize the fact that Nazi is an abbreviation of Nationalsozialismus, the same way Sozi was a German abbreviation for the followers and the ideology of internationally focused Sozialismus, need to read up on the era, what led to it and its aftermath.

Nazis were always left-wing. Hitler was widely admired on the left before he attacked the USSR.

The funny part is that when the Nazis created their own race laws, they based them on the Democrat race laws from the American south. But the Nazis decided that the Democrats had gone too far, and toned them down.

So Democrats were actually TOO RACIST for the Nazis.

[–]IamRedBeard[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The Democratic party changed in the 60's and became the modern Republican party.

Anybody who debates politics even casually, knows this.

Yea, its been popular for corrupt right wing politicians to run a left wing campaign and flip when they get in, like Hitler did.

Left wingers are Tree Huggers, Earth loving fools Tolerant of people of different cultures, Ideals, and sexual orientation and color. (Not necessarily tolerant of your evil rhetoric or bullshit)

Yes, the laws were in effect under the Obama administration, but NEVER used to the extent that they are now in holocaust style overpopulated politically motivated camps.

You can go cram your whataboutism and trying to turn the tables with false narrative. It does not work here, kiddo. Go push rope with other people in your echo chambers that dont know history.

[–]Chipit 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Actually, the election evidence shows that the GOP absorbed the Peripheral South and gained in the South primarily from the importing transplants into the region, not by converting Dixiecrats and Democratic Party KKK leaders like Robert Byrd into Republicans. The racist Democrats in the Solid South primarily stayed Democrats. The GOP got more votes from the non-racists, both among the existing population and from immigrants from other States to turn the South into their voting block, beginning with the least (not most) racist States. The details have been written up in many places, but here's one I found with a quick search if you're looking for more details.

http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-myth-of-the-racist-republicans/

To quote that article in relation to the myth you keep trying to spread:

"Starting in the 1950s, the South attracted millions of Midwesterners, Northeasterners, and other transplants. These "immigrants" identified themselves as Republicans at higher rates than native whites. In the 1980s, up to a quarter of self-declared Republicans in Texas appear to have been such immigrants. Furthermore, research consistently shows that identification with the GOP is stronger among the South's younger rather than older white voters, and that each cohort has also became more Republican with time. Do we really believe immigrants were more racist than native Southerners, and that younger Southerners identified more with white solidarity than did their elders, and that all cohorts did so more by the 1980s and '90s than they had earlier?

In sum, the GOP's Southern electorate was not rural, nativist, less educated, afraid of change, or concentrated in the most stagnant parts of the Deep South. It was disproportionately suburban, middle-class, educated, younger, non-native-Southern, and concentrated in the growth-points that were, so to speak, the least "Southern" parts of the South."

Or as the NY Times put it: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html?mcubz=0

"In the postwar era, they note, the South transformed itself from a backward region to an engine of the national economy, giving rise to a sizable new wealthy suburban class. This class, not surprisingly, began to vote for the party that best represented its economic interests: the G.O.P. Working-class whites, however - and here's the surprise - even those in areas with large black populations, stayed loyal to the Democrats. (This was true until the 90s, when the nation as a whole turned rightward in Congressional voting.)

[–]IamRedBeard[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Strangely, over a century, America's two major political parties gradually reversed identities, like the magnetic poles of Planet Earth switching direction.

When the Republican Party was formed in 1856, it was fiercely liberal, opposing the expansion of slavery, calling for more spending on public education, seeking more open immigration and the like. Compassionate Abraham Lincoln suited the new party's progressive agenda.

In that era, Democrats were conservatives, partly dominated by the slave-holding South. Those old-style Democrats generally opposed any government action to create jobs or help underdogs.

Through the latter half of the 19th century, the pattern of Republicans as liberals, Democrats as conservatives, generally held true. In 1888, the GOP elected President Benjamin Harrison (1833-1901) on a liberal platform seeking more social services.

Then in 1896, a reversal began when Democrats nominated populist firebrand William Jennings Bryan (1860-1925), "the Great Commoner."

"He was the first liberal to win the Democratic Party presidential nomination," political scholar Rich Rubino wrote. "This represented a radical departure from the conservative roots of the Democratic Party."

Meanwhile, the GOP began shifting to conservative. Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) - a vice president who took the top office after William McKinley was assassinated in 1901 - was a Republican liberal who supported a "Square Deal" for working families. He broke up monopolistic trusts of rich corporations. He championed pure food and drugs. He created national parks and forests for the enjoyment of everyone. He won the 1906 Nobel Peace Prize for helping end war between Russia and Japan.

After leaving office, Roosevelt felt that his successor, William Howard Taft (1857-1930), was leading America too far to the right. So T.R. challenged Taft for the GOP nomination in 1912, and lost. In rebellion, Roosevelt gathered his liberal delegates and formed the Progressive Party, with a bold platform bordering on socialism.

The new-formed party called for universal medical care under a National Health Service. It sought government pensions for retirees, plus compensation for the jobless and disabled. It demanded an eight-hour workday and a minimum wage for women. It sought a constitutional amendment to allow a federal income tax. It supported voting by women, more freedom for workers to organize and strike, inheritance tax on rich estates, worker's compensation for on-the-job injuries, and many other left-wing goals.

The Progressive platform attacked big-money influence in politics, vowing "to destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics."

Roosevelt was a fiery orator and writer, saying: "I believe that there should be a very much heavier progressive tax on very large incomes, a tax which should increase in a very marked fashion for the gigantic incomes."

While Roosevelt was campaigning in Milwaukee in 1912, a crazed assassin, John Schrank - who claimed that the ghost of William McKinley asked him to avenge McKinley's death by killing Roosevelt - shot the Progressive candidate in the chest. The bullet was partly deflected by Roosevelt's 50-page speech and his steel eyeglasses case, but wounded him nonetheless. Bleeding, he continued to orate unfazed.

Later, when reporters asked if the wounding would deter his campaign, Roosevelt replied that he was "fit as a bull moose." Thereafter, his party was dubbed the Bull Moose Party.

Progressives won about one-fourth of the 1912 popular vote, and Democrat Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924) attained the presidency. In 1916, Roosevelt declined the Progressive nomination, and the liberal party he created soon disintegrated.

In a sense, Teddy Roosevelt was the last major Republican liberal. Ensuing decades saw the GOP grow steadily more conservative, and Democrats acquire the liberal mantle. When the Great Depression struck, the "New Deal" of Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945), Theodore's nephew-in-law, achieved landmark progressive reforms.

In the 1960s, the "Great Society" of Democrat Lyndon Johnson (1908- 1973) vastly expanded the public safety net and gave legal equality to African-Americans - driving racist Dixie out of the Democratic Party, into the GOP.

Then Republican President Ronald Reagan (1911-2004) mobilized the "religious right" of white evangelicals for his party. Later, extreme white conservatives calling themselves "tea party" militants emerged in the GOP.

All this outlines America's political flipflop - how the liberal Republican Party turned conservative, and the conservative Democratic Party turned liberal. It was a fascinating transition.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/article/How-Democrats-and-Republicans-switched-beliefs-9226115.php

[–]Chipit 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That doesn't say a thing about the non switch I was talking about.

extreme white conservatives calling themselves "tea party" militants emerged in the GOP.

Wow, there's some unbiased non-political journalism right there. How dare the little people politically organize!

I'm old enough to remember when journalists were on the side of the people against power. This is the opposite.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Conservatives actions against their neighbors are fundamentally immoral.

That's a huge, sweeping claim to make. I think traditionalism is not fundamentally immoral, nor are the true principles that real conservatives hold. It should be said that the majority of conservatives are Christian, and if they are true followers of Christ, they must follow in his footsteps. The fundamentalist and denominationaliat christianity we observe today is very much at odds with the true teachings of Jesus.

You arrogantly think you have superiority over people of other skin colors.

Who are you suggesting thinks this, all conservatives? I have conservative and liberal values and believe I'm a lesser person than even my enemies because I answer before God. The crowd you are referring to, seems small in comparison and not a legitimate threat. Of course, the media on both the left and right would have you think differently because the military-financial-corporate-media-government-complex understands that perpetuating division through class and race is the very best method in controlling a society. Obama did this with Sunstein's cognitive infiltration PSYOP, Trump's administration is carrying out this VERY SAME PSYOP.

You fight and shill for the Wealthy, only for the .00002% chance that you may one day be wealthy.

I agree that many conservatives and liberal statists alike... that includes must of the democrats as well as the neoconservative, and neoliberal controlled GOP shill for the ruse of modern free market enterprise. They preach free markets and yet control markets via price fixing. They preach honest barriers of entry in words only and yet are the forbearers of the increasing wealth inequality, monopolies, oligopolies and unreasonable barriers of entry that plague the United States of America today.

Would I blame conservatives or liberals in general? No, I would not. I believe it is a particular set of statists and authoritarians in government, politics, business, banking, defense and media that have led us down this path; scheming and plotting for themselves and their buddies own agendas and interests. A plot, in fact, that has existed throughout antiquity to the present day.

Conservatives have no real moral compass, because you believe every sin you cast and whatever evil you do is forgiven just for the asking by the very savior whose teachings you ignore.

Extreme white conservatives calling themselves "tea party" militants emerged in the GOP.

Again, your using a reductio ad absurdums here and a gross, sweeping generalization. I know people with traditional conservative values, God feating people who maintain a positive morality unlike most people. I could say the same for many liberals and existentialist Christians.

You might find the forefather of Christian existentialism to be of interest. For he was starkly against the denominational, evangelist and Catholic church but was a true follower of the teachings of Jesus. Actually, I think you should read his works. And no, your sins are not forgiven just because you ask for forgiveness. You pray to God and the Son of Man in meekness. You pray and ask for forgiveness, understanding that what you did was wrong. You become aware of your sins and position your moral compass on Jesus and his teachings. All your sins WILL BE JUDGED on judgment day by the Son of Man. As for the conservatives you see in the news. They are mostly neotrotskyite communists. The GOP has been hijacked by Zionists and Neoconservatives, who are NOT conservatives and for the most part are not Christian. The problem with the evangelist denominational portion of Christianity is that it has been infiltrated by Zionists and warmongers preaching a false gospel. Trump was a former democrat and is not a Christian. He attends a Presbyterian Church, but has admitted in an interview that he does not pray and does not ask for the forgiveness for his sins. He said, “you know, I never really asked God for forgiveness.” It is to be understood that asking for forgiveness is NOT an exemption to continue to sin. Real Christians understand this.

He is what you would call a church goer and nothing more. Not a true Christian.

But at least when I first came into the world in the mid 70's to the 80's you had some people in the party that I at least respected.

Yeah, real conservatives, not the fake ones we see today.