When were conservative women wearing vaginas, publically screaming profanity and treason (blow up the white house) chanting for the deaths of whites and looting and destroying - funny i dont remember that...
I'm sure you don't.
When were conservative women wearing vaginas, publically screaming profanity and treason (blow up the white house) chanting for the deaths of whites and looting and destroying - funny i dont remember that...
Darwin tried that, he was a total racist.
I'm sure you don't.
Since 1965? Uhh hello there was even more obvious anti-black racism back then. Some schools weren't integrated until 1970.
You don't buy much, even when there's clear data to support it. Your opinion does not negate facts.
As late as 1967, racially mixed marriages were still illegal in 16 states.Anti-miscegenation laws or miscegenation laws were laws that enforced racial segregation at the level of marriage and intimate relationships by criminalizing interracial marriage and sometimes also sex between members of different races.
Such laws were first introduced in North America from the late seventeenth century onwards by several of the Thirteen Colonies, and subsequently by many US states and US territories and remained in force in many US states until 1967.
After the Second World War, an increasing number of states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws.
In 1967, in Loving v. Virginia, the remaining anti-miscegenation laws were held to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States.
Similar laws were also enforced in Nazi Germany as part of the Nuremberg laws, and in South Africa as part of the system of Apartheid.
In the United States, interracial marriage, cohabitation and sex have been termed "miscegenation" since the term was coined in 1863.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws
Don't forget the mini marshmallows!
Liberal emergency packet:
You need to work on your WIT my dear fellow. You must not have been blessed with it, at birth.
Blacks can be racist against other black people.
As late as 1967, racially mixed marriages were still illegal in 16 states.
With this as a backdrop, "White Lives Matter" is a thinly-veiled attempt to revert back to those days.
Of course these advocates will argue that they are not racially motivated, but we all well aware that in 2017, politically correct "code words" have been substituted to provide cover for their real intensions!
U.S States, by the date of repeal of anti-miscegenation laws:
No laws passed - gray
Before 1887 - green
1948 to 1967 - yellow
June 12, 1967 - red
If YOU remember it, find a good Psychologist in your area.
:freak: what definition of "racist" are you using?
rac·ism ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit noun the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. |
Well, that's just one man's opinion. As they say, "We all have one." Frankly, your opinion and $5.00 will purchase a half way decent cup of coffee.
What kind of coffee do you drink to be paying 5 dollars :freak:
Better have whiskey in it :chuckle:
I do however remember many examples of conservatives hanging or burning the president in effigy.
Conservatives firing guns at the white house.
Conservatives committing treason when using arms to capture public property.
As i said, liberals are showing all they learned from conservatives over the last 8 years.
I have never had a cup of coffee. Whiskey neither.
rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
Here's a link to the images and a report on both the effigy and a few other racist bits associated with the right aimed at then president Obama.Let's see some proof?? I refuse to take your word for it.
so if i call ghetto gangbangers "ni66ers" i'm not racist as long as i mention that i like dr carson?
sweet! :thumb:
Here's a link to the images and a report on both the effigy and a few other racist bits associated with the right aimed at then president Obama.
And this from The Hill, 11/12/16
[FONT=&]According to conservatives on social media, “Republicans have jobs and responsibilities” and therefore couldn’t engage in civil disobedience to voice their discontent with the 2008 and 2012 elections. With this perception of the Obama elections and subsequent claims of “ Republican acceptance,” Trump supporters are now demanding the same “fairness” for Donald J. Trump’s presidency, “We sat through do nothing politics for 8 years, the least they can do is go shut up and sit in the corner for 8 themselves,” on Trump supporter explained.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]However, these perceptions do not reflect what actually followed the election of our country’s first black president, much less the difference between why people are protesting Donald J. Trump’s presidency as compared to Barack Obama’s presidency.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Obama’s election in 2008 was preceded and followed by violent attacks and property destruction targeted against minorities.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Kaylon Johnson, an African American campaign worker for Obama, wasphysically assaulted for wearing an Obama T-shirt in Louisiana following the 2008 election. The three white male attackers shouted “[inappropriate expletive deleted] Obama!” and “****** president!” as they broke Johnson’s nose and fractured his eye-socket, requiring surgery.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]More frequently, Obama’s presidency was marked by effigies of our first black president hanging from nooses across the country, for example in Kentucky, Washington State, and Maine, or being burned around the world. What Trump supporters fail to remember is that following Obama’s election, property was destroyed across the country, for example in Pennsylvania, Texas, and North Carolina, and a predominately black church was torched in Massachusetts.[/FONT]
The seizing bit is as easy.
A group of gunmen seized control of an empty federal building in remote Burns, Oregon, on Saturday, announced they planned to occupy the facility for “years” and called for “patriots” to join them — and bring more guns. The men now occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge building include at least two sons of Cliven Bundy, the rancher whose legal battle with the government over grazing rights culminated in an armed standoff with federal authorities near Bunkerville, Nevada, in 2014. Huffington Post, Jan. 2016
Don't recall the shooting bit, but I'll look in a minute. :thumb:
You had no answer for it. Photos of the actual thing you wanted and notes about the actual thing you demanded.I got through about half a sentence of your post and decided to skip the rest because
I used a little of both. The Post was mostly about actual photos you could verify anyway. The Hill, a conservative leaning publication, was the second source.I kinda thought you were sending me to some "Left-Wing" links and didn't want to bother.
You think your post was original? :think: That explains a few things.Besides, My original post wasn't to you.
Which would be compelling if you didn't routinely drop in on conversations and address other's comments. But given you do, and given how often you've spoken to or of me since you lay the foundation, the only wall visible is the one you seem determined to hide behind. :thumb:No offence intended, maybe a WALL, though?
You had no answer for it. Photos of the actual thing you wanted and notes about the actual thing you demanded.
I used a little of both. The Post was mostly about actual photos you could verify anyway. The Hill, a conservative leaning publication, was the second source.
You think your post was original? :think: That explains a few things.
Which would be compelling if you didn't routinely drop in on conversations and address other's comments. But given you do, and given how often you've spoken to or of me since you lay the foundation, the only wall visible is the one you seem determined to hide behind. :thumb: