Righties always have a difficult time detecting sarcasm. Personally, I think it's an issue with often being humorless, but that obviously depends on the individual.Oh, I see. Leftist should avoid sarcasm, irony, etc. because it's too difficult to tell when they are being serious anyway.
Correlation does not equal causation. The South was the issue. You are going to keep running into this problem/logical fallacy. It keeps sinking your argument.Yes, slavery and Jim Crow laws, supported by the Democrats, were a tradition in the South.
No, in 1964 more Democrats supported black rights both from a numbers perspective (fairly irrelevant) and a percentage perspective (completely relevant). I've posted this before, but I will again. Congressional results from voting on the Civil Rights Act of 1964:Yes, it was the Democratic South who opposed Black rights but you have offered no support for your contention that Republicans were against Black rights. In fact more Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act than Democrats.
Here are some of the important points that prove my position:The original House version:
• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Both the numbers and the percentages show that more Democrats than Republican supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It also shows that the delineation issue was REGIONAL, not partisan.Here are some examples:
7 Southern Democratic Representatives supported the act (7%). NO Southern Republican Representatives supported it (0%).
9 Northern Democratic Representatives voted against the act (6%). 24 Northern Republican Representatives were against it (15%).
1 Southern Democratic Senator supported the act (5%). NO Southern Republican Senator supported it (0%)
1 Northern Democratic Senator voted against the act (2%). 5 Northern Republican Senators voted against it (16%)
You have been refuted.
Because that's what "north" and "south" are.Then why did you earlier call them areas or sections?
Who is they? You are overgeneralizing. Just like "useful idiot" conservatives who hilariously believe that Obama is a socialist. You are talking about extremists who only know how to demonize.Yes, since the Cold War ended Leftists claim it was not 'real' Communism, just a perverted form of the real Communism, but which is truly wonderful when done correctly.. However if that was the case why did Liberals (aka Useful Idiots) march for Communists and rail against Conservatives, such as Ronald Reagan, who rightly called the USSR an "Evil Empire". Leftists should have supported him and said yes, the Russians, Cubans, etc. are ruining the good name of Communism with their mass killings, gulags, etc., but they didn't. Instead they attacked the Republican President of the day, and many other conservatives, for pointing out the obvious.
No you haven't. You've been to countries run by totalitarian governments.I've actually been in a Communist country and have seen the horrors with my own eyes, and witnessed the propaganda even though our eyes told the truth.
It ain't mine. It's the actual definition. If a group of people pervert a definition, that doesn't suddenly mean it's accurate.You may not want to call it Communism because it contradicts your idea of what Communism should be but in fact Communists knew what was going on behind the Iron Curtain and ignored it because they had to cling to their dream. When millions of people call themselves Communists I'll go along with their self description, not yours.
Which is a good definition of totalitarianism, not communism.Nazis say that Hitler ruined 'real' Nazism, Mussolini ruined 'real' Fascism, and so on. A pox on all their houses. People who can't even manage their own lives feel still feel they have the intellectual capacity to control the lives of millions of others.
I posted numbers that show just that.Then lets see examples of Republicans holding back the rights of Black people and then compare them with what the 'progressive' Democrats did.
Thank you. You just FURTHER proved me correct. George Wallace was a Southerner.It was the central issue with Democrats, and not only in the South. Did you see how well the Democrat George Wallace did? How can there be a Republican belief and not a Democrat belief?
Depends on the discussion.Party philosophies over an issue like slavery are irrelevant? What about in modern times? Are the philosophies of different political parties still irrelevant as well?