Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on February 06, 2010, 01:31:21 PM

Title: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: 240 is Back on February 06, 2010, 01:31:21 PM
Tom Tancredo doing EVERYTHING he can to be the anti-mccain repub that he actually was in 2008.  Gotta be careful touching on hotbutton topics like this, however.  It will certainly get the toothless hillbilly vote on his side, but mainstream america might not dig it.  Any more of these quotes and I think Miss Palin might fake the flu to avoid knowingly speaking after people have made statements like these.


Tea Party opening speaker suggests law that kept blacks be kept from voting be reinstated

http://rawstory.com/2010/02/tea-party-opening-speaker-suggests-blacks-voting/

The opening night speaker at the Tea Party convention suggested a return to a "literacy test" to protect America from presidents like Obama -- a segregation-era method employed by southern US states to keep blacks from voting.

In his speech Thursday to attendees, former Republican congressman Tom Tancredo invoked the loaded pre-civil rights era buzzword, saying that President Barack Obama was elected because "we do not have a civics, literacy test before people can vote in this country."
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: drkaje on February 06, 2010, 01:40:40 PM
LOL!!!
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: 240 is Back on February 06, 2010, 02:13:50 PM
I would LOVE to see the tea party move into the forefront and become what the repub party SHOULD be.

But letting their 1st event start not with a criticism of obama's spending, the nonstop wars, the healthcare mess... but "Obama only got elected because illiterate black people voted for him" is a TERRIBLE move!!
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 07, 2010, 05:55:24 AM
I've raised the same question here.  I think I had a poll about it a while back.  I wasn't serious but just ticked off after seeing countless videos of the dumbest people ever answering political questions.  I didn't have race in mind when I asked that question.  We've all seen the videos over the past year or so.  Both whites and blacks in large number saying the dumbest shit imaginable...

You mean 240's boy in Ft Meyers? 

Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: 240 is Back on February 07, 2010, 05:59:06 AM
hahaha i saw Julio like 3 months ago at Mcd drive thru... loud and as obnoxious as ever lol
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 07, 2010, 05:59:53 AM
hahaha i saw Julio like 3 months ago at Mcd drive thru... loud and as obnoxious as ever lol


So now he has been there for 6 years? 
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: drkaje on February 07, 2010, 06:11:29 AM
Ironic. Last year it was "white liberal guilt" that got him elected, now it's ignorant black folks. How long until radical muslims are becoming citizens by the millions to vote for him? :)
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 07, 2010, 06:14:28 AM
Ironic. Last year it was "white liberal guilt" that got him elected, now it's ignorant black folks. How long until radical muslims are becoming citizens by the millions to vote for him? :)

It was all of the above.  I know many white guilt ridden whites who knew obama was not qualified but voted for him anyway out of white guilt. 

Liberal whites are the worst pieces of shit on the planet.  They are worse than a plague of locusts.   
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: drkaje on February 07, 2010, 06:21:53 AM
It was all of the above.  I know many white guilt ridden whites who knew obama was not qualified but voted for him anyway out of white guilt. 

Liberal whites are the worst pieces of shit on the planet.  They are worse than a plague of locusts.   

It'll take years before anyone admits this but: Given an identical set of circumstances, he would have still won if white.

On some level right-wingers are very fortunate he's black. His race is a built-in factor no one has to openly deal with at the polls should republicans ever get serious about the white house next term. Without race they'd have to deal with other issues like the war, overspending, AIG, Fannie Mac, and all the other conditions/regulations that ultimately led to this mess.

You guys are also lucky Hillary Clinton is an attention whore. Staying out of the limelight and taking the Ill. seat would have meant no Barack Obama as president. :)

I wish the right would stop making gay excuses and become republicans again.
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 07, 2010, 06:28:25 AM
It'll take years before anyone admits this but: Given an identical set of circumstances, he would have still won if white.

On some level right-wingers are very fortunate he's black. His race is a built-in factor no one has to openly deal with at the polls should republicans ever get serious about the white house next term. Without race they'd have to deal with other issues like the war, overspending, AIG, Fannie Mac, and all the other conditions/regulations that ultimately led to this mess.

You guys are also lucky Hillary Clinton is an attention whore. Staying out of the limelight and taking the Ill. seat would have meant no Barack Obama as president. :)

I wish the right would stop making gay excuses and become republicans again.


No he wouldnt have won because he never would have made it through the primary. 
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: 240 is Back on February 07, 2010, 06:28:44 AM
Obama led with educated college grads by a mile in 2008, didn't he?
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 07, 2010, 06:30:13 AM
Obama led with educated college grads by a mile in 2008, didn't he?

Why is that 240? 
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: drkaje on February 07, 2010, 06:31:29 AM

No he wouldnt have won because he never would have made it through the primary. 

Sorry, Bro.

You're still in denial about how bad things got under republican control.
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 07, 2010, 06:33:26 AM
Sorry, Bro.

You're still in denial about how bad things got under republican control.

Did you read my post or not? 

I said he never would have beaten hillary.  Remember, he won early primaries but got beaten towards the end as more evidence came out about him and his lies, phoney record, etc. 
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: drkaje on February 07, 2010, 06:35:09 AM
Did you read my post or not? 

I said he never would have beaten hillary.  Remember, he won early primaries but got beaten towards the end as more evidence came out about him and his lies, phoney record, etc. 

I don't believe republicans would have let Hillary be anything except VP. Her ego is way too big for that. :)
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: BM OUT on February 08, 2010, 06:36:22 AM
I'm for a literacy test to vote and a poll tax.Why should unemployed idiots who pay no taxes decide elections.
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 08, 2010, 06:38:57 AM
I'm for a literacy test to vote and a poll tax.Why should unemployed idiots who pay no taxes decide elections.


NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! ! !
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: drkaje on February 08, 2010, 11:05:52 AM

NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! ! !

Perhaps votes should also be weighted based upon actual tax burden. Why use "one man, one vote" when the top 1.5% pay almost 40% of actual taxes?
Title: Re: Tea Party speaker throws support to Jim Crow law
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 08, 2010, 11:13:19 AM
Perhaps votes should also be weighted based upon actual tax burden. Why use "one man, one vote" when the top 1.5% pay almost 40% of actual taxes?

I was making a joke out of the phrase of course, but in other thoughts, one wonder whether people who pay no taxes and suck off the system should be able to vote since they are always going to vote for the guy who promises more free crap from the govt.