Ryan: Obama 'sowing social unrest'

  • Thread starter Thread starter Caldera
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The republicans never sow social unrest. Its those darn liberals that caused unrest by letting blacks have rights:eek:
Republicans are evil by purpose and Democrats are evil by circumstance…
 
qui_est_ce said:
We have another fine example of going OT, because nobody seems to be able to refute Paul Ryan’s assertion that Obama is sowing social unrest. 😦
Click to expand...
I proclaim the Ocean is purple, now prove me wrong, round and round we go. Show me unrest that Obama causes in tangible terms please…
 
estesbob said:
I missed where the 12 year old story mentioned that Paul Ryan was an “Objectivist”
Click to expand...
The previous poster gave you five examples. Please do some research…I can’t hold your hand either…
 
My nephew-in-law worked for ACORN. On voting days, he would go to the polls and make sure people knew their rights. The way he said it made it seem that people are routinely denied their rights at polling places. I have never had my rights denied, nor do I know anyone whose rights are denied.

What he saw as community service, I saw as causing unrest.

This is what community organizers do. Rile people up on the pretext their rights are being denied.
 
gubernova said:
The republicans never sow social unrest. Its those darn liberals that caused unrest by letting blacks have rights:eek:
Republicans are evil by purpose and Democrats are evil by circumstance…
Click to expand...
Funny, it was Republicans who stood behind the ultimate civil right for blacks: THEIR FREEDOM from slavery (Republicans did that, not Democrats).

Funny, while JFK was merely timid (at best) about civil rights, when he finally gave in and submitted the bill, the Republicans in congress had a stronger showing of support (in terms of precentages of seats) than the Democrats did. The GOP voted 138-34, while the Democrats voted 152-96. Facts are funny things–they can’t distort the truth.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.

archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/13/194350.shtml
 
qui_est_ce said:
My nephew-in-law worked for ACORN. On voting days, he would go to the polls and make sure people knew their rights. The way he said it made it seem that people are routinely denied their rights at polling places. I have never had my rights denied, nor do I know anyone whose rights are denied.

What he saw as community service, I saw as causing unrest.

This is what community organizers do. Rile people up on the pretext their rights are being denied.
Click to expand...
Good for your nephew, educating those that don’t have your wisdom…
Community organizers rile people up, no they stand up for the rights of people…
 
gubernova said:
Good for your nephew, educating those that don’t have your wisdom…
Community organizers rile people up, no they stand up for the rights of people…
Click to expand...
Because fanning the flames of ignorance always leads to a good end…
 
irishpatrick said:
Funny, it was Republicans who stood behind the ultimate civil right for blacks: THEIR FREEDOM from slavery (which the majority of Democrats fought against it).

Funny, while JFK was merely timid (at best) about civil rights, when he finally gave in and submitted the bill, the Republicans in congress had a stronger showing of support (in terms of precentages of seats) than the Democrats did. The GOP voted 138-34, while the Democrats voted 152-96. Facts are funny things–they can’t distort the truth.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.

archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/13/194350.shtml
Click to expand...
Those are not the modern republicans…The ideology of the Republicans has morphed…Anne Coulter arguments can’t be taken seriously…
 
SamH said:
Because fanning the flames of ignorance always leads to a good end…
Click to expand...
That’s exactly what I was trying to say. Thanks. 👍

They become victimized. Just like Obama saying, “If we lose in 2012, government will tell you you’re on your own.”
 
SamH said:
Because fanning the flames of ignorance always leads to a good end…
Click to expand...
The ignorant are those who oppose you…Has the forum been hijacked by conservative idealogues? People who want change are ignorant?🤷
 
gubernova said:
Those are not the modern republicans…The ideology of the Republicans has morphed…Anne Coulter arguments can’t be taken seriously…
Click to expand...
Red Herring. Are Coulter’s facts wrong? You can find the roll call on just about any legislation posed in the last 100 years.

If you missed it, many of the “modern” Democrat icons (like Bryd or Fullbright) were segregationists.
 
qui_est_ce said:
That’s exactly what I was trying to say. Thanks. 👍

They become victimized. Just like Obama saying, “If we lose in 2012, government will tell you you’re on your own.”
Click to expand...
Who is “they”? The least of your brothers?👍👍👍
 
gubernova said:
Those are not the modern republicans…The ideology of the Republicans has morphed…Anne Coulter arguments can’t be taken seriously…
Click to expand...
And the modern Dems are tilting quickly into socialism. My Dem ancestors are rolling in their graves.
 
scipio337 said:
Red Herring. Are Coulter’s facts wrong? You can find the roll call on just about any legislation posed in the last 100 years.

If you missed it, many of the “modern” Democrat icons (like Bryd or Fullbright) were segregationists.
Click to expand...
Many, what is many, two is not many. If you wanna go that way then the KKK considered themselves christians…:mad:
 
scipio337 said:
Red Herring. Are Coulter’s facts wrong? You can find the roll call on just about any legislation posed in the last 100 years.
Click to expand...
I didn’t see Ann Coulter in that article, nor was she the author.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top