waitforufo

Yes I admit it. I Oh the southern strategy myth. Let's look at the the outcome of the 1968 election. 1968 Election Results Candidate Party Electoral Votes Popular Votes ✓ Richard M. Nixon Republican 301 31,710,470 Hubert H. Humphrey Democratic 191 30,898,055 George C. Wallace American Independent 46 9,906,473 looks like the racists voted for the former Democratic Governor of Alabama. Not Nixon. Just in case you didn't see the origin of the white supremacy movement in the US. Let me show you again.

To piss off Democrats. But you still miss their votes don't you.

If a company polluted a river 150 years ago and that company is still in existence, is that company responsible to clean it up? If that pollution killed people, is the company responsible for compensating the decedents of those who died even today? If you want to know why there is race hatred in the United States, look no further than the Democratic party. Now I know that upsets you, but that is an historical fact.

Show me where I wrote the above bolded text. That campaign slogan is part of the history of the Democratic Party. It belongs to the Democratic Party. It's where they come from. I wouldn't belong to a political party that was responsible for the holocaust, and I wouldn't belong to a political party that was responsible for that campaign slogan and the brutality that such a sentiment generated in this country for the following 100 years resulting in oppression, murder, and lynching. Why would anyone join a political party with such a history?

All political parties are defined by their history. That is how you know what they stand for. Why would anyone join a political party without such an understanding. i'm just wondering. If a Nazi told said to you that you cant associate modern Nazi's with the holocaust because it happened more than 60 years ago, would you agree? Somehow you don't think the Democratic party owns this 1868 presidential campaign slogan. I have read on Science Forums many times liberals, progressives, and Democrats co-opting all Republicans prior to JFK. Knowing the history of the Democratic party one can hardly blame them. But now you're claiming Nixon for your team. You folks make me laugh.

No, it wan't him it was " crowded and chaotic situations" that made people feel bad. Al's says he is a warm person who hugs people and only a few sensitive type females felt bad. Any apology that does not include a genuine admission of guilt is not a real apology. In fact such a non apology is simply a further insult. Also Al Franken does remember forcing his tongue down Leeann Tweeden throat either. http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/16/politics/franken-apology/index.html So no, Al Franken hasn't taken responsibility for any thing.

Has he taken full responsibility for it? Here is his apology. http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/al-franken-issues-apology-after-groping-accusations-surface-w512619 Does that really sound like an acknowledgement of guilt or taking responsibility? He's suggesting that his groping was simply a misunderstanding caused by "crowded and chaotic situations." It's also a "I'm sorry that you were offended" and not a "I'm sorry that I groped you" apology. He then goes on to say that during "crowded and chaotic" situations he needs to be more careful and sensitive." Sounds like a denial of intent to me.

Those some who feel that way can vote for politicians in a few years to set a different course for the EPA. Yes the current party can claim credit for the past actions of their party. They are also responsible for the failing of their pasts party.

Not agreeing with the Democratic party agenda for the EPA is not the same as destroying the EPA. Also, it is not irrelevant who created the EPA. The creator of the EPA deserves enormous credit for our current clean water and air.

I didn't ask you to mention Nixon. I asked you who created the EPA. Had you said Richard Nixon, I would have went away. With regard to the middle ground, you find that by acknowledging the accomplishments of your political opponents. Richard Nixon became president in 1968. That was not 60 years ago. 60 years past is not ancient history. Either is 150 years for that matter. The things a political party did 150, 60, or 40 years ago have lasting impact. They own their history and are responsible for it. Quit pretending otherwise.

i"m happy to give Kennedy credit for proposing tax cuts and understanding how taxes are a drag on economic growth. Republicans agree with him and will be happy to give him credit for tax cuts today.

Come on, is it really that hard to acknowledge the person and his party who gave us cleaner air and water and the health and environmental benefits that we all enjoy as a result of the creation of the EPA? I think that matters very much. Also I think it would show intellectual and political honesty on your part.

Come on, it's not that hard to figure out, all you have to do is Google "Who created the EPA?" This is a topic about the truth isn't it? It matters because you are slandering Republicans with your post that begins with the above. So again, who created the EPA?

Who created the EPA?

Another one. http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/politics/al-franken-groping-allegation/index.html What is with the photo-groping? Does Al think women will look back fondly of being groped by him?

No, I was responding to John Cuthber. I even quoted him.

Interesting but I appreciate all your caveats prior to your links. My guess is however, that if Trump was found in violation of the Emoluments clause he would simply have to reimburse the the foreign government involved in the transactions. As you said, time will tell.

Well please post it. I might surprise you.

So Republicans equal Nazi's in your mind? Your above statement is completely unhinged. Perhaps you are too young or have forgotten just how bad stagflation was under Jimmy Carter. Stagflation was and economic phenomenon that economists thought was impossible. Combined inflation and unemployment. Reagan gambled that the nation could take the pain of correcting this situation. He was correct and the nation rewarded him with a second term. Here is the electoral map. The largest electoral win in US history. No part of the permit permitted driving a vehicle into crowds. That is not the issue. He had the legal right to be where he was and be unmolested. If the facts show that he believed his life was threatened by a mob, his actions were self defense. I hope that a jury does not find that to be the case, but I won't be surprised if they do. I'm not turning a blind I to murder. I have called it just that. i'm just a realist with regard to our criminal justice system and I understand the legal meaning of reasonable doubt. Also there are consequences of mob violence. Those participating in it are culpable in the results. If you have a problem with white supremacists having 1st amendment rights. Take that up with the ACLU. They always go to bat for Nazi's and white supremacist when it comes to the first amendment. By the way it doesn't matter if I like that or not. Its the law that we all have to deal with.

The Emoluments clause has been a popular topic on Science Forums since Trump won the election, so I'm sure we are all familiar with it by now. So you are claiming that Trump has violated this clause. Do you have specific evidence? Also this split from the Al Franken topic started out based on a claim that Donald Trump is a dictator. If you have evidence that Trump has violated the Emoluments clause, do you contend that this makes Trump a Dictator? Perhaps we can agree that claiming that Trump is a dictator is false? Has this collusion been proven? Is there even enough evidence to make a legitimate claim? Nepotism is not illegal. No fraud charges are pending. Neither are sexual assault charges. Trump was elected with full public knowledge of sexual assault allegations. Behavior in office is not a crime. All of your post is opinion and speculation. Also nothing showing that Trump is a Dictator or even acting like one. Yeah, I know you don't like him and wish he wasn't president of the US. I felt the same way about Obama. I would have felt the same way about Hillary Clinton. I didn't have a hysterical meltdown over Obama and wouldn't have over Hillary. I would have merely been disappointed.

Perhaps you should study the legal meaning of reasonable doubt. The driver was in town to participate in a march and rally which received a legal permit by the city. There is plenty of video of the counter protesters initiating clashes with legally permitted march and rally participants. Now I'm sure they have the car as evidence. Now if that car has dents and scratches in the hood, trunk lid, and rear quarter panels that's all evidence. His defense simply has to create a reasonable doubt in the mind of one juror that the defendant was fleeing for his life and the Nazi bastard will get off. Having been on a criminal jury, I think he has a good chance of getting off. No, I was just in a bit of a hurry when I made that post. Now that I have more time let me get back to your post. You were dismissing my previous comments about past prosperity with your studies on childhood nostalgia. So I pointed out that my memories of the past were not from my childhood. Your studies therefore do not apply. And I presented my counter facts. Economic growth during the second Reagan term per year was, 7.3%, 4.2%, 3.5%, and 3.5%. Under Obama economic growth was -0.3%, -2.8%, 2.5%, 1.6%, 2.2%, 1.7%, 2.6%, 2.9% ,1.5%. Never once in 8 years did economic growth break 3% under Obama. Sure Obama was burdened with the great recession, but Reagan was burdened with the stagflation of Jimmy Carter. You gave me a challenge, and I rose to the challenge. I showed that people with at 12th grade education can still work there way into the middle class. Also, I think we need more jobs where people can do this. I think all of us should be interested in assuring that those with a 12th grade education can make it into the middle class. I would be surprised to find out that the Democratic party would find such a goal bad or foolish. What is your point? Yes one is too many, but what are your going to do? Round them up and put them in camps. After that will Republicans be next? Oh wow, you got me there. There are a tiny minority of bad people that don't want opportunities for everyone. Your hysteria is however blown way out of proportion. I believe I covered this one.

What's truly unfortunate going forward is that the white supremacist murderer will likely get off. His defense will be a simple one. All he has to do is convince one juror that he was fleeing for his life from a murderous mob trying to break into his car to kill him. He will claim it was a simple case of self defense.

Look at economic growth then. https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543 Clinton didn't do to bad, but not as good as Reagan and Bush. Also, the quality of jobs today sucks. Jobs under Reagan/Bush were great.

Is it this one? Because if it is could you please elaborate?

I said job were plentiful and easy to find. I think that points to unemployment no?