GOPs KKK problem is much bigger than Donald Trump

Well, he's not, you One Droppist.

 

So, you missed civics class, too!!

When there is a problem, our government has very few tools for resolution of that problem outside of passing legislation. Of course, there are executive orders, too.

There are thousands of lines of federal law that reference marriage. Suggesting that the federal government should have ignored the obvious discrimination against same sex couples is really just ridiculous.

In fact, the right wing wanted the federal government involved in marriage - it's just that the right wing wanted to have the federal government further the discrimination!! So, now it didn't go your way, so you want the federal government out of it! A famous Gomer Pyle line comes to mind: "Surprise, surprise, surprise!"


More civics lesson: Having a clear statement in the constitution does not in any way mean that the statement will be (or is being) carried out. We follow our laws. Those laws stand until repealed by the legislature or rejected by a challenge in our courts.

 

The dem answer will be more of the same. How's that working out?

 

Health care distribution is improving.

Due to SS, there is no longer an epidemic of American workers who contributed throughout their lives only to live out their last years eating cat food in unheated tenements.

etc., etc.

It's not rapid progress. It would really help if all those "Christian" Republicans actually listened to what Jesus said.

 

Health care 'distribution' is actually getting worse with one in four counties stuck with only one provider. Obamacare is dying on the vine. Another of those liberal 'good intentions' that turn to poop.

 

I'm just going to point out this part of your post because I assume the rest of it is just as sloppy in its declarations as the above. You say that I have not taken any civics classes (I don't necessarily recommend these courses to anyone myself) and then talk about legislating and executive orders. Executive orders are only meant to direct executive agencies and the problem with that is that most executive agencies (which you probably support even though they are illegal) are unConstitutional (such as the DOE, DEA, or ICE), yet continued to be funded by Congress. The only branch that can pass legislation is the Congress, "All legislative power herein granted shall be vested in a Congress (not Executive) of the United States; which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." (Article 1, Section 1). There is no legislation from the bench or from the White House. The modern day Executive harkens back to a complaint of the Colonists, "He has erected a multitude of New Offices (As Killary plans to do), and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance." [DOI]

 

Not one shred of evidence to support these claims.

Can you produce anything other than your partisan propaganda?

 

The Federal government does not have the power to be involved in healthcare you Federal Supremacist. The chains of the Constitution must bind them!

 

I laughed at the thread title. Why? The GOP doesn't have a KKK problem to begin with. Although if you are a sheep grazing in the mass media's pastures I'm sure it looks very differently to you. It should since that is the point of propaganda. I'll give most of you the benefit of the doubt while I dissect the topic.

Also just to point this out I'm not going to read 11 pages of this thread. I'm going to address the original topic.

Lets first start with Trump. David Duke, a one time KKK member, and a highly visible one at that, did endorse Trump. The controversy stems that it took days for Trump to acknowledge and condemn the endorsement. However this is ridiculous since Trump doesn't have to reply to each and every endorsement and just because you choose to vote for someone doesn't mean it's an endorsement (at least one not worth the attention of anyone off your street). Furthermore Duke has the right to freedom of speech just like everyone else; he is free to vote for whom he wishes. It doesn't reflect on the candidate at at all.

Lets move on to Hillary Clinton. These are the facts the mass media will not tell you. It is a fact that Hillary Clinton regarded past Senator Robert Byrd (D) as her friend and mentor. There are plenty of pictures of the two together. Byrd of course, and I'm not telling you anything new, was a Grand Cyclops in the KKK. He was particularly invested in recruitment. It is also a fact that The KKK of California and specifically it's Grand Dragon has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President. In an interview he affirmed that the KKK did indeed support Clinton and reaffirmed the racial hostility his group preaches.

This coupled with the fact that the Democrats founded the KKK in the first place in 1865. Mind you there has been several versions of the KKK becoming prevent in America in the 19th and 20th centuries. Each found their way from Democrats of the time and politics of the time period. There is no magical flip flop like Democrats usually retort with. It's a group that founded, lived, died, restarted, and repeated three or four times officially.

So what exactly does the GOP have to fear? Nothing at all. There is no connection and the public is growing more and more so aware at the dirty tactics of the Democrats. After over a decade of slandering EVERY GOP OPPONENT as racist, homophobe, bigoted, hateful, etc (insert your favorite buzz word) its a pattern even the most entrenched Democrat voters cannot ignore. The topic of slander and the follow up of propaganda has propelled the Democrats into power many times in our past - however people are waking up to it and won't be puppets to it for much longer.

So I think the OP needs a better topic if he wants to slander the GOP. Furthermore he might use a real source next time.

 

It's not about evidence. The Democrats have a long history with the Klan. Killary herself has apparently gotten many donations from them in this campaign which her campaign denied. They said somethijng to the effect that "we do not take money" and at this point I was like wait a minute, Killary is all about that money. She takes it from civil liberty violators from Saudi, you think Klan member donations will phase her? She also received the endorsement of Communists here I the U.S. Of course if I were a Democrt I'd be like she's clearly a Commie, she's got their endorsement. Yet much of the yeomanry are not the the brightest bulbs in the room.

 

Jesus said we should voluntarily give to the poor.

He did not say a distant government (Rome or Washington) should take money from us by force and then redistribute the money to its favorite constituents.

 

You didn't recognize that in your post to which i replied.

So, i'm glad to see we're in agreement on the above.

But, that didn't solve the rest.

 

The federal government has been involved in health care, including in regulation of hc insurance for a long, long time.

Nobody wants an unregolated hc industry. You are promoting a hell that is only theoretical, thank God.

 

The Federal government has been doing illegal things for a long, long time. Long standing practice does not mean constitutional. Case in point, the Patriot Act.

It's always been regulated. And it sucks. Regulations go part and parcel with crony capitalism. You Leftists with your regulations. Regulate rights, regulate markets, Regulation Nation. The federal government needs to get the hell out of the business of healthcare.

 

I didn't recognize what?

 

Old testament law included loans to the poor being required, with nonpayment forgiven at a specified date - a day of celebration.

Today, people don't follow Jesus' NT teachings, resulting in problems that fall to government to address. The voluntary direction simply failed.

 

So, you agree with what i said.

Great!

 

Yes. And they endorse Trump strongly because of his POLICIES.

 

People can't give to charities because their taxes are too high.

 

Oh Jesus, we're not racists and now blacks aren't black

Republicans would be so DAMNED funny if they weren't actually serious and discussing serious things.

 

No. I wish that were true, but it's just plain not the case.

We've had massive tax cuts for the wealthy since the Reagan era - tax cuts for those who have the money to make a difference for the poor.

That has NOT translated into a solution. I don't mean to denigrate Catholic Charities or others who do fine work, but in NO WAY has private charity been substantial enough or broadly administered enough to be considered a solution.

Also, the various pieces of our social safety net have been put together on brick at a time. And, each step was in response to a need that was serious, was nation wide, and was not being met by donations.