One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Home | Political Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Posts for: Zombiefarmer23
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 29 next>>
Jun 11, 2017 09:01:04   #
slatten49 wrote:
Horrific, indeed...and, unacceptable. But, our history includes similar horrific acts.

Lynching in the United States, From Wikipedia

Lynching was/is the practice of murder by extrajudicial action. Lynchings in the United States rose in number after the American Civil War in the late 1800s, following the emancipation of slaves; they declined after 1930 but were recorded into the 1960s. Lynchings most frequently targeted African American men and women in the South. They were most frequent from 1890 to the 1920s, with a peak in 1892. Starting with large mob actions attended by hundreds or thousands of watchers, lynchings in the 20th century began to be conducted secretly by small groups of people. Lynchings were also common in the Old West, where Native Americans, Mexican Americans, and Chinese were the primary victims.

After the Reconstruction era, most of the South was dominated politically by Democrats. Lynchings enforced white supremacy and intimidated blacks by racial terrorism. The rate of lynchings in the South has been strongly associated with economic strains, although the causal nature of this link is unclear. Low cotton prices, inflation, and economic stress are associated with higher frequencies of lynching.

The granting of U.S. Constitutional rights to freedmen after the American Civil War was resisted by many white Southerners. Some blamed the freedmen for their own wartime hardships, and post-war economic losses, and loss of social and political privilege. During Reconstruction, freedmen and whites working for civil rights were attacked and sometimes lynched. Black voting was suppressed by violence. White Democrats regained control of state legislatures in 1876, and a national compromise resulted in the removal of federal troops from the South in 1877. In later decades, violence continued around elections until blacks were disenfranchised by the states across the South from 1890 to 1908.

White Democrats enacted segregation and Jim Crow laws to enforce blacks' second-class status. During this period of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, lynchings reached a peak in the South. Florida led the nation in lynchings per capita from 1900-1930. Georgia led the nation in lynchings from 1900-1931 with 302 incidents, according to The Tuskegee Institute. Lynchings peaked in many areas when it was time for landowners to settle accounts with sharecroppers.

There is no count of recorded lynchings which claims to be precise, and numbers vary depending on the source, years considered, and definition used in defining an incident. The Tuskegee Institute has recorded 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites being lynched between 1882 and 1968, with the annual peak occurring in the 1890s, at a time of economic stress in the South and political suppression of blacks.[8] A five-year study published in 2015 by the Equal Justice Initiative found that nearly 3,959 black men, women, and children were lynched in the twelve Southern states between 1877 and 1950. Over this period Georgia's 586 lynchings led all states.

African Americans mounted resistance to lynchings in numerous ways. Intellectuals and journalists encouraged public education, actively protesting and lobbying against lynch mob violence and government complicity. Anti-lynching plays and literary works were produced. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and related groups, organized support from white and black Americans, publicizing injustices, investigating incidents, and working for passage of federal legislation. African-American women's clubs raised funds and conducted petition drives, letter campaigns, meetings and demonstrations to highlight the issues and combat lynching. In the Great Migration, particularly from 1910 to 1940, 1.5 million African Americans left the South, primarily for destinations in northern and mid-western cities, both to gain better jobs and education and to escape the high rate of violence. From 1910 to 1930 particularly, more blacks migrated from counties with high numbers of lynchings.

From 1882 to 1968, "nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress, and three passed the House. Seven presidents between 1890 and 1952 petitioned Congress to pass a federal law." None succeeded in gaining passage, blocked by the Solid South - the delegation of white Southerners in the Senate. During the 1950s and 1960s Civil Rights Movement, black activists were attacked and murdered throughout the South. The 1964 murders of Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner galvanized public support for passage of civil rights legislation that year and the next.
Horrific, indeed...and, unacceptable. But, our hi... (show quote)

The solid south? The same commiecrats we have today. Instead of lynching the black man they now abort their babies by the hundreds of thousands, per M. Sanger's plan. And together with poor, ignorant anyone elses, they take their money and lives by selling them drugs. The blame lies not with the vast majority of American conservatives but with pinko democrats.
Jun 9, 2017 08:29:58   #
lpnmajor wrote:
Were you an adult during the cold war? Russia is not our friend and never has been and they attacked OUR way of life. You and your kind are rabid about protecting your way of life, from abortion, welfare recipients, LGBT folks and whole list of other affronts - but you are willing to give an enemy of the State a pass - to protect your messiah Trump.

You look like idiots.

Prove it, moron!!
Jun 7, 2017 15:25:23   #
Pennylynn wrote:
Invite only is OPP's version of a "safe room." I am unsure if they provide plush stuff toys and coloring books, but they have provided a space for some to "feel" safe in making any comment without worry of someone disagreeing.

I got booted because I said to lpnminor, "prove it,moron", after it blathered on about agw being true. Imagine that. Seems there IS a commiecrat in charge.
Jun 1, 2017 18:51:50   #
Maggie Sullivan wrote:
White House spokeswoman Hope Hicks issued this statement (joke? parody? pratfall?): “President Trump has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000. He has built great relationships throughout his life and treats everyone with respect. He is brilliant with a great sense of humor . . . and an amazing ability to make people feel special and aspire to be more than even they thought possible.”

The novel Ninety Eighty-Four would never have made it to print using this Hope Hicks beyond imagining example of "double think" or "newspeak." As an alternative fact, her statement is now the definition.

For your perusal, some his "infectious positive energy" where he "treats everyone with respect."

From Trump Supporters:
White House spokeswoman Hope Hicks issued this sta... (show quote)

Commie moron.
Jun 1, 2017 17:08:10   #
fullspinzoo wrote:
This Judge is one of the best political commenters on TV today. She's always on point, but in her last open, she hit it out of the park.

Video unavailable.
May 28, 2017 18:01:54   #
EmilyStrode wrote:
No. I use reasonable arguments, sources, and stay on topic, my topic BTW so the term Troll is not applicable.

I pity you.
May 28, 2017 17:46:04   #
EmilyStrode wrote:
Too funny and too typical. Pressed to be intelligent, you demure to insult. Both sides have such trolls. Here is the definition of Troll (see how cozy you are): "a person who rarely, if ever, gives a substantive reply to the topic but always looks to disrupt or corrupt the ongoing conversation with inflammatory statements, insults, or useless deflections." This is a mirror for you.

And for you.
May 28, 2017 17:31:52   #
EmilyStrode wrote:
Then explain.

No. You trolls would not understand if the explanation were shoved past your sphincter.
May 28, 2017 16:43:23   #
EmilyStrode wrote:
It is just a fact. Sorry if reality offends you.

Your inability to understand economic reality offends me.
May 28, 2017 16:37:29   #
EmilyStrode wrote:
Are you that unfamiliar with low income people? Almost all fast-food employees, working at minimum wage, cannot afford basic survival and depend on the government for help.

Once again, moron!
May 28, 2017 14:34:34   #
archie bunker wrote:
I just did.
How ya been Mr. Farmer? Are the folks below you at work minding their business, and not giving you any shit?

Not a peep from anyone. Well, not the permanent residents. Some of their progeny are pains.
May 28, 2017 14:30:58   #
confused one wrote:
They say that unemployment is around 5%. They say too, that there are between 45 to 50 million on food stamps. Something doesn't add up.
Could it be that there never was a recovery and that the true unemployment is closer to 20%? All that QE failed to spur anything except the stock market.
All I was saying is that this isn't the right time to impose draconian measures in an attempt to get our fiscal house in order. As much as conservatives would like to see the President's budget passed I'm saying that the timing is not right. I think that doing so now would backfire and lead to much bigger problems.
They say that unemployment is around 5%. They say ... (show quote)

It's called biting the bullet.
May 28, 2017 12:57:55   #
Weewillynobeerspilly wrote:
It's Norte...same garbage, same quotes by others.....ive been calling him Norte all morning.

Same crap, same person.

I have already put the puke on ignore.
May 28, 2017 09:28:22   #
EmilyStrode wrote:
Russia faced the same thing a long time ago. Shockingly, when the citizens were starved and ignored by their government, they objected and protested. Why do so many see the right to peaceful assembly in protest, guaranteed in the Constitution, what our forefathers did, as communism?

You're just a regular little JAQ'er aren't you??
May 27, 2017 23:39:12   #
EmilyStrode wrote:
Is this true? Yes, of course it is. Improper welfare payments, including fraud, are estimated to be 10.1% of all federal welfare payments made and totaled $71.5 billion in fiscal year 2016. This is outrageous. Something has to be done. Trump has done it. His budget punishes 100% of those of those on these programs, by reducing life-sustaining money and cutting programs that will leave our fellow Americans hungry and desperate, most of those children, the elderly, and disabled. Nearly 90% have a legitimate need. So this question arises: is this "creeping socialism" or common decency to provide such programs. Put another way, are Americans entitled to eat? If we change "entitled" to "right" in polls, most agree. Is it socialism or a good democratic government--and the democratic government is for, by, and of the people, not something else--to feed and provide necessary health care for its citizens?

All previous governments were not "of the people." In the Us of A, the people are the government. Caring for this "government" is caring for the nation. Nothing is more important. The government is you and me and not the three branches we learn in history. Considering Draconian cuts to the "government" is an affront to our Republic and an attack on our basic ideals and principles.
Is this true? Yes, of course it is. Improper welfa... (show quote)

Moron commie.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 29 next>>
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use - Forum
Copyright 2012-2018 IDF International Technologies, Inc.