Phil Robertson returns to A&E Duck Dynasty

Status
Not open for further replies.
OMG! Phil reminds me of Brian David Mitchell.

xrlZ0Ei.jpg


Both of them are sick old men.
 
No, I gave an clearly accurate information about who voted for Civil Rights Act of 1964 and that's not my opinion. I included vote statistic that showed bipartisan with strongly geographic divide (north vs. south), so it looks like you have difficult to accept these statement and the history can be painful and brutal. The definition of bipartisan means bill supported by mostly democrats and republicans combined, but if you say it is not bipartisan so it means non-southern democrats would not vote, along with southerners so it doesn't make sense. Go check the vote statistic.

I'm not going waste my time if you choose to deny this fact and there are many people know about who voted for Civil Rights Act. I didn't offend you at first place so why would you see me as backwards. :dunno:

Note: You chose to brought it up with #87 and if you didn't at first place, so we don't see any argument.


Foxrac, all I am going to say here is that the democrats that are currently being lauded for having voted to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, voted against it in 1957 (stop reading leftist propaganda please). It was also the Democratic party that tried to block it from passing into law. Saying anything else is an attempt to revise history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1957 <<<<Southern whites in the article were the Democratic Party - the dixiecrats, the KKK - Robert Byrd was a grand wizard of the KKK
Also, the Republicans already passed a similar version of the Civil Rights Act when they won the Civil War.
 
Foxrac, all I am going to say here is that the democrats that are currently being lauded for having voted to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, voted against it in 1957. It was also the Democratic party that tried to block it from passing into law. Saying anything else is an attempt to revise history.

Also, the Republicans already passed a similar version of the Civil Rights Act when they won the Civil War.

incorrect. it was mostly liberals (most of them in Republican Party at that time) who passed it. and it was the conservative Democrats who were against it. the time has changed and the conservatives switched sides.
 
Our Founding Fathers were liberals who didn't mind shooting people.
Anyway, carry on. ;)
 
incorrect. it was mostly liberals (most of them in Republican Party at that time) who passed it. and it was the conservative Democrats who were against it. the time has changed and the conservatives switched sides.

Another lie from the left (and they lie often - one of the reasons I included Robert Byrd - but I could have included so many other dixiecrats that didn't switch parties)

and ...if they were so liberally feelie goodie goodie two shoes as is being purported now - why did they vote against the same law in 1957?
 
Another lie from the left (and they lie often - one of the reasons I included Robert Byrd - but I could have included so many other dixiecrats that didn't switch parties)

and ...if they were so liberally feelie goodie goodie two shoes as is being purported now - why did they vote against the same law in 1957?

fortunately... the facts proved you wrong.
 
Foxrac, all I am going to say here is that the democrats that are currently being lauded for having voted to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, voted against it in 1957 (stop reading leftist propaganda please). It was also the Democratic party that tried to block it from passing into law. Saying anything else is an attempt to revise history.
Civil Rights Act of 1957 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia <<<<Southern whites in the article were the Democratic Party - the dixiecrats, the KKK - Robert Byrd was a grand wizard of the KKK
Also, the Republicans already passed a similar version of the Civil Rights Act when they won the Civil War.

Excuse me, none of my sources are leftist propaganda, seriously and people with excellent reading comprehension could perfectly understand those history. You need to understand about geographical difference - northern vs. southern. Northern democrats (liberal) are not same as southern democrats (conservative). Northern republicans were much moderate, but southern republicans in 1960s - not much, just bad as southern democrats. It is not hard to understand about geographical difference and are you trying to rewrite those history because you don't want to see progressive's accomplishment to end the discrimination, especially northern democrats and republicans.

I'm suggesting you to read about Strom Thurmond, he switched from southern democrat to southern republican, so being democrat or republican don't share any difference in southern states. George Wallace, our ex-governor in Alabama has a lot of history as well.

Civil Rights Act of 1957 was passed by bipartisan, especially non-southern politicians. If it wasn't bipartisan, it will be very little or no democrats support, so it doesn't make sense.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed by bipartisan as well, it is part of history and you have to accept this fact. Rewrite the history will not going make you win or change.

Hello Reba, please could you give a statement about civil rights, in your word?
 
fortunately... the facts proved you wrong.

incorrect.

Eisenhower attempted to pass the Civil Rights Act - a Republican.

The Democrats voted it down - including JFK - a Democratic Senator
 
Another lie from the left (and they lie often - one of the reasons I included Robert Byrd - but I could have included so many other dixiecrats that didn't switch parties)

and ...if they were so liberally feelie goodie goodie two shoes as is being purported now - why did they vote against the same law in 1957?

Southern democrats, republicans are not left wing, nor was liberal.

Left wing, liberals (mostly northern democrats) and moderates (mostly northern republicans) support anti-discrimination, especially civil rights.

Same concept for LGBT anti-discrimination, mostly support by northern and west coast democrats and republicans, however democrats in southern states are becoming more progressive now.
 
once again Steinhauer... the facts have proved you wrong...
 
JFK voted it down? You are grossly incorrect.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/85-1957/s75

JFK voted YES for Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Actually, Kennedy voted against Eisenhower's 1957 Civil Rights Act

In the decade before he won the White House, Kennedy said almost nothing about civil rights. In 1957, as a senator he voted against the 1957 civil rights bill

JFK's Civil Rights Legacy: 50 Years of Myth and Fact | Earl Ofari Hutchinson

don't let me stop you from revising history bro :cool2:
 
Actually, Kennedy voted against Eisenhower's 1957 Civil Rights Act
according to https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/85-1957/s75 - did JFK vote against it or not?

and... Eisenhower's 1957 Civil Rights Acts was probably ineffective and weak.... thus passing his own Civil Rights act later on.


oh I'm sorry that he said nothing about Civil Rights... probably because he was busy fighting with the commies especially with nukes pointing at USA from Cuba.

and according to your source.... the facts have proved me right... it has stated that the Southern Democrats (the conservatives who later switched side to Republican Party) had blocked him over Civil Rights bill.
 
Oh, I found out why.

One of the matters demanding Kennedy's attention in the Senate was President Eisenhower's bill for the Civil Rights Act of 1957.[36] Kennedy cast a procedural vote on this, which was considered by some as an appeasement of Southern Democratic opponents of the bill.[36] Kennedy did vote for Title III of the act, which would have given the Attorney General powers to enjoin, but Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson agreed to let the provision die as a compromise measure.[37] Kennedy also voted for Title IV, termed the "Jury Trial Amendment". Many civil rights advocates at the time criticized that vote as one which would weaken the act.[38] A final compromise bill, which Kennedy supported, was passed in September 1957.[39]

John F. Kennedy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

JFK voted for final version of Civil Rights Act of 1957, so govtrack.us is correct.

Stein, no wonder about why you didn't put this information.
 
I never watch Duck Dynasty. I don't know who Phil Robertson is. I only read the articles.

What I see is that Phil Robertson has every constitutional right to express his beliefs, but constitutional rights protect every American citizen from government interference or prosecution. "Duck Dynasty" is a show owned by A&E. A&E are a private entity, they can drop him from their show for any reason they want.

I watched a video. It appears CNN took a context out of Phil Robertson's quote. CNN cut that part, "there is an old saying in the south." He even said to get your parents' consent first. He's advising this to a young man about 20 and not someone his age. He married his 16 year old wife in his time, and they're still married now.

I'm biased. The society in America has been changed abruptly since the beginning of the Digital Era. In the early 90s, I was 16 years old and went out with my 21 years old date many times. No one complained about it at the time. No, that wasn't a Southern thing. My parents let me date him after he asked them for permission. I know a few friends who got married at 17 and 18 years old, and they're still married today. They all have education, jobs, and children. My adopted aunt was married at 16, and has teen children with her husband. Their children speak more than two languages. She is a professional chef. My niece was married at 19, and graduated with honors from a prestigious university. She is in PA program becoming a PA. My dad is almost 20 years older than my mom. Oh, yeah, they still do get plenty of bullied and criticized for getting married too young. The way we get treated badly is unfair because of too many reports on teen pregnancy, child pornography, sexual child abuse constantly in this society. We don't have any of those issues.

That's my two cents.
 
I never watch Duck Dynasty. I don't know who Phil Robertson is. I only read the articles.

What I see is that Phil Robertson has every constitutional right to express his beliefs, but constitutional rights protect every American citizen from government interference or prosecution. "Duck Dynasty" is a show owned by A&E. A&E are a private entity, they can drop him from their show for any reason they want.

I watched a video. It appears CNN took a context out of Phil Robertson's quote. CNN cut that part, "there is an old saying in the south." He even said to get your parents' consent first. He's advising this to a young man about 20 and not someone his age. He married his 16 year old wife in his time, and they're still married now.

I'm biased. The society in America has been changed abruptly since the beginning of the Digital Era. In the early 90s, I was 16 years old and went out with my 21 years old date many times. No one complained about it at the time. No, that wasn't a Southern thing. My parents let me date him after he asked them for permission. I know a few friends who got married at 17 and 18 years old, and they're still married today. They all have education, jobs, and children. My adopted aunt was married at 16, and has teen children with her husband. Their children speak more than two languages. She is a professional chef. My niece was married at 19, and graduated with honors from a prestigious university. She is in PA program becoming a PA. My dad is almost 20 years older than my mom. Oh, yeah, they still do get plenty of bullied and criticized for getting married too young. The way we get treated badly is unfair because of too many reports on teen pregnancy, child pornography, sexual child abuse constantly in this society. We don't have any of those issues.

That's my two cents.

Except A&E cannot dismiss Phil for expressing his rights to freedom of religious expression. That is a Federal Violation. Even in right to work States, that is still a Federal Violation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top