U.S. District Judge states Georgia discriminates against the Deaf

Nice try guys ....

If you want to politicize this topic here is what I am going to say....I could say this was political - and I am sure there are some political aspects involved when certain federal laws were passed by the republicans and are not followed. No Child Left behind and the massive Public School corruption is an example of what goes on in Atlanta. The hundreds of ADA violations is yet another ...

Absolutely no excuse for it. The best the Democrats can do is try to make this topic as confusing as possible so they can shift blame on the Republicans for their own corruption. So, if you guys want to take this topic in that direction - sure, we can do that (at your peril of course - remember, the Democrats in the South supported segregation and comprised the majority of the KKK).

You need to understand about Democratic Party was much divided in past - liberal, moderate, conservative without segregation and conservative with segregation. Most democrats in the southern states are most conservative ever and they hated Republican Party due history of civil war that destroyed the southern states.

Don't point at Democratic Party platform since it is up to individual.
 
No - I am not blaming DOJ. In fact, I believe the DOJ's surprise inspection was long over due because of all the neglect by State government employees in regards to the deaf and disabled citizens of Georgia.

When government officials claim that they did not have a budget to cover the cost of bringing a building to code, yet own 5 houses, live in a golf course community, children attend private school, drive around in 75-100k cars ....

get it now?

Yup, it sounds like state of Georgia or city of Atlanta are most corrupted.
 
This fiasco started with you and your question intending to politicize this thread.

and FYI - those who supported segregation in the South were members of the Democrat party - not conservatives and rightists as you claim. The party that ended segregation was the Republican party. MLK .... was a republican.

Let's take your "theory" about the KKK card carrying members of the Democrat party who suddenly, and mysteriously, decided to become Republicans, and apply it to the longest serving Senator, and longest serving member of the U.S. Congress to see if it fits.

Nope ... Robert Byrd never switched parties. He was a Dixiecrat when he was a KKK member, and he was a Democrat when he died.

Like I said earlier .... nice try guys. And to answer your question with clarity in post #9 - no, they are mostly democrats - even today.

FACT: MLK isn't republican nor democrat, he is non-partisan so quit make misled information.

Majority of Democratic Party and Republican Party supported Civil Rights of 1965 - look at vote record and majority of them were against are in the southern states.

The racist is already transferred from Democratic Party to Republican Party when most white southern democrats switched to Republican Party started in 1970's and still present. I have seen many hate groups like KKK support Republican Party in the southern states now.
 
FACT: MLK isn't republican nor democrat, he is non-partisan so quit make misled information.

Majority of Democratic Party and Republican Party supported Civil Rights of 1965 - look at vote record and majority of them were against are in the southern states.

The racist is already transferred from Democratic Party to Republican Party when most white southern democrats switched to Republican Party started in 1970's and still present. I have seen many hate groups like KKK support Republican Party in the southern states now.

MLK was a lifelong registered Republican - yes, that is a fact.

His neice, Alveda King, is also a conservative Republican. She has, in fact, dispelled the rumors you are advocating that MLK was non partisan.
 
This fiasco started with you and your question intending to politicize this thread.

I'm talking about this fiasco -

AFTER ...... how did that happen if not for Government employees pocketing money meant to bring buildings up to code?

Now, the State is claiming not enough resources ... puhlease :roll:

They just want to cling to their rolls royce and beach condos (paid for by your tax dollars)

when did it start to happen?
 
MLK was a lifelong registered Republican - yes, that is a fact.
oh? so you're saying MLK PUBLICLY stated that he was a Republican?

His neice, Alveda King, is also a conservative Republican. She has, in fact, dispelled the rumors you are advocating that MLK was non partisan.

for that statement...

PolitiFact Texas | Houston group says Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican
The 2008 AP story about the Florida and South Carolina billboards included a statement from King's son, Martin Luther King III: "It is disingenuous to imply that my father was a Republican. He never endorsed any presidential candidate, and there is certainly no evidence that he ever even voted for a Republican. It is even more outrageous to suggest that he would support the Republican Party of today, which has spent so much time and effort trying to suppress African American votes in Florida and many other states."

Friends and associates of Martin Luther King Jr. also objected. The AP article says that the Rev. Joseph Lowery, who co-founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with King, "said there is no reason why anyone would think King was a Republican." Lowery told the AP that King almost certainly voted for Kennedy and that the only time he openly talked about politics was when he criticized Goldwater in 1964.

The story quotes Lowery as saying: "That was not the Martin I know, and I don't think they can substantiate that by any shape, form or fashion. It's purely propaganda and poppycock. ... Even if he was, he would have nothing to do with what the Republican Party stands for today."

Finally, we checked with political experts in the states where King spent most of his adulthood. Charles Bullock, a political science professor at the University of Georgia, said King "didn't die a Republican." But Bullock speculated that King could have been Republican in his youth when Southern Democrats were intensely segregationist. William Stewart, a political scientist at the University of Alabama, said that if King was a Republican, he kept it a secret. King focused on civil rights, Stewart said, and "partisan politics wasn't relevant."

Upshot: Raging Elephants points to a King family member whose declaration lends support for its claim that King was a Republican: his niece Alveda. We didn't divine how she reached that conclusion. Another King relative, his son, disagrees, as do respected academic experts and former King associates and friends. The record shows that as a civil rights leader, King avoided partisan identification.

We rate the statement False.

I think we should stick with fact.... not hearsay. Did MLK state HIMSELF that he's a Republican or not?
 
This fiasco started with you and your question intending to politicize this thread.

and FYI - those who supported segregation in the South were members of the Democrat party - not conservatives and rightists as you claim. The party that ended segregation was the Republican party. MLK .... was a republican.

Let's take your "theory" about the KKK card carrying members of the Democrat party who suddenly, and mysteriously, decided to become Republicans, and apply it to the longest serving Senator, and longest serving member of the U.S. Congress to see if it fits.

Nope ... Robert Byrd never switched parties. He was a Dixiecrat when he was a KKK member, and he was a Democrat when he died.

Like I said earlier .... nice try guys. And to answer your question with clarity in post #9 - no, they are mostly democrats - even today.

oh? let's see.....

http://www.alldeaf.com/war-political-news/100759-history-civil-rights-acts.html#post2056260
History: Democrats & Republicans On Civil Rights & Equality | Oliver Willis

There is an awful lot of misinformation and untruth out there about the legacy of the two major political parties and the civil rights movement. Conservatives often like to use slight of hand, insisting that because the early Republican party was stronger in support of civil rights, this means that conservatives have the moral high ground. This is totally untrue.

Republicans – Moderate and Liberal Republicans supported civil rights. The Republicans who supported civil rights in America were not conservatives of the same ilk as George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. They were liberals and moderates, people like former Rhode Island senator Lincoln Chaffee and former governor Nelson Rockefeller.

Conservative Democrats opposed civil rights. The Democrats opposed to the civil rights movement weren’t Democrats with the center-left ideology of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. They were, in fact, conservatives – especially from the south – with far more in common with Limbaugh, Beck, etc. than any modern mainstream Democrat. When people say that someone like notorious segregationist Bull Connor was a Democrat, they are technically right on the party label, but when it comes to ideology Connor and the rest of those opposed to racial integration were conservatives.

Conservatives opposed civil rights. At the time of the civil rights movement, outside of the parties, conservatives were opposed to the civil rights movement. Barry Goldwater, a conservative whose brand of politics would soon take over the Republicans in the guise of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, opposed civil rights law. He claimed that he viewed it as a states rights issue, and actually favored equal rights, but the practical effect of his stance would be to allow segregation – in the south “states rights” meant “Jim Crow.” The conservative intellectual movement – William F. Buckley’s National Review, for instance, opposed what they viewed as law-breaking protests by Dr. Martin Luther King.

Democrats moved left on civil rights, in favor. Over time the Democrats moved to the left on civil rights, meaning they moved with other liberals in favor of them. Southern, conservative Democrats opposed civil rights and the laws were passed by liberal/moderate Republicans and liberal/moderate Democrats. The Civil Rights Act was signed into law by Lyndon Johnson, a Democrat.

Conservative Democrats left the party in opposition to civil rights and became Republicans. After the Civil Rights law was signed into law, conservative Democrats left the party. Strom Thurmond, who ran as a segregationist in 1948, became a Republican, as did Jesse Helms (who went on to filibuster against making Martin Luther King Jr. day a federal holiday).

Republicans used racial resentment for elections, while Democrats became more racially inclusive. As the Republican party became more ideologically conservative in the post-Goldwater era, they increasingly used racially divisive politics for electoral gain. The GOP employed what is now known as “the southern stategy” (acknowledged by GOP party chairmen Ken Mehlman and Michael Steele in the last decade) to demonize blacks and other minorities while also riling up the white, male conservative base that forms the party now. Examples include the Willie Horton ad used by Bush Sr. allies vs Michael Dukakis, the “hands” ad used by Jesse Helms, and the nonstop racebaiting versus President Obama from conservative outlets like Fox News and talk radio.

At the same time, the Democratic party became more and more racially inclusive. After civil rights passed, and the GOP became more conservative and increased racial demagoguery, black and other minority voters became Democrats. Every black member of the House of Representatives is a Democrat, and every black senator since 1979 has been a Democrat. The first black president, is of course, Barack Obama – a Democrat.

The parties have changed but the ideology hasn’t. The attempt to co-opt liberal support of civil rights has been a consistent campaign of the right, despite their predecessor’s opposition to the concept. The attempt to say that liberal Republicans of the past are the same as conservative Republicans of today, is just a terrible lie. Conservatives often try to say people like Martin Luther King Jr. would be conservatives. This is entirely untrue. In the last years of his life, Dr. King ran what he called “The Poor People’s Campaign,” and his beliefs would largely be to the left of where the modern Democratic party is, let alone the Republicans.

The Democrats moved away from the conservative position against racial inclusion, while the right moved the other way and has only recently somewhat acknowledged the moral folly of its past. Conservatives opposed civil rights, while liberals favored them. Both ideologies have inhabited majorities in both parties, but the ideological support or opposition to civil rights and equality has largely remained the same.
:eek3:

either you are lying or you're confused about historical facts....
 
Written by Oliver Willis....enough said. :lol: But congrats on destroying another thread.

might want to remind OP about it especially starting from Post #16.... or even from the beginning where I have repeatedly asked for facts for allegations as made in OP's subsequent posts.
 
might want to remind OP about it especially starting from Post #16.... or even from the beginning where I have repeatedly asked for facts for allegations as made in OP's subsequent posts.

Clearly it started in post #9 by the usual culprit. Moving on....please continue.
 
Clearly it started in post #9 by the usual culprit. Moving on....please continue.

But it didn't digress to some old history like MLK, segregation, and KKK. It started to go way off the tangent at Post #16.

Post #6 was a fair question to ask because I'd like to know the whole details of this story since Steinhauer is notorious for not discerning the difference between facts and myths.

example -
I think it is typical when government is run by the "good 'ol boy" system. A lot of "here, take this $$$" wink - wink under the table, back room deals "what can they do about it (heh heh) they can't do anything - they are disabled" <<<<< generally what good ol boys think when it comes to receiving federal funds meant to be distributed to those with disabilities - they end up pocketing it or spending it on High School Football Fields or some other such fancy stuff - don't they always drive such nice cars, live in golf course communities?

^ Just my opinion of course. Time to rattle their cage.

Too many people I personally know have been absolutely burned, lives destroyed, because of government greed ... er, mismanagement right here in Georgia.

And ..... since a U.S. District Judge just said it is actually happening, I can say that with more than an ounce of conviction.

can we now please continue without you causing further disruption? :ty:
 
But it didn't digress to some old history like MLK, segregation, and KKK. It started to go way off the tangent at Post #16.

Post #6 was a fair question to ask because I'd like to know the whole details of this story since Steinhauer is notorious for not discerning the difference between facts and myths.

example -


can we now please continue without you causing further disruption? :ty:

:shock:not after you completely destoyed the thread....the "good old boys" system is not rep. or dem..it is both(something you already know)...but you wanted to make it rep.
 
:shock:not after you completely destoyed the thread....the "good old boys" system is not rep. or dem..it is both(something you already know)...but you wanted to make it rep.

I'm not asking about "good ole' boys" system. I'm asking about government officials involved in this fiasco.

my oh my... lot of assumptions and accusations going on now... looks like certain ADers are already starting to circle the wagons...
 
I'm not asking about "good ole' boys" system. I'm asking about government officials involved in this fiasco.

my oh my... lot of assumptions and accusations going on now... looks like certain ADers are already starting to circle the wagons...

Then you wasted a post because you should know that the whole governemnt is involved in "slaping on the wrist" any enterprise that discriminates. There ain't certain government officials of a certain party.

Yes, I know of these "huge" fines but they are a "slap on the wrist" because the discrimination continues. Just ask the FCC about closed caption.

Why circle the wagons for one Indian?
 
Then you wasted a post because you should know that the whole governemnt is involved in "slaping on the wrist" any enterprise that discriminates. There ain't certain government officials of a certain party.
so... it's a bunch of faceless men? like.... bogeymen?

Yes, I know of these "huge" fines but they are a "slap on the wrist" because the discrimination continues. Just ask the FCC about closed caption.
exactly why I'm asking questions in this thread and all I get is accusation, allegation, and assumption. where are facts that I asked for?

facts.... where are they?

Why circle the wagons for one Indian?
that's the question I had about your hostility in this thread. are you trying to prevent truth from coming out?
 
If the "facts" you speak of come from post #9, I'll be happy to answer for you.

No, not Reps., because we have a Dem. president and he is "the buck stops here".

"Pocketing it or spending it" is a IMO, no answer required.

government feed and mismanagement!!! I don't know which rock you have been hiding under but that had been going on all my life and my grandfather's too.


What truth(s) are not being allow to come out?
 
If the "facts" you speak of come from post #9, I'll be happy to answer for you.
yes please do. that's what i've been waiting for.

No, not Reps., because we have a Dem. president and he is "the buck stops here".
but... Georgia - either at state or local level or both has been found misusing federal funding, not Obama.

"Pocketing it or spending it" is a IMO, no answer required.
ok. so sit down and be quiet. you do not have to answer my questions.

government feed and mismanagement!!! I don't know which rock you have been hiding under but that had been going on all my life and my grandfather's too.


What truth(s) are not being allow to come out?
the questions I'm asking. I'm not getting any facts for my questions because you are attempting to block my effort to get the whole details of this fiasco.

what does it matter if my questions are important or not to you? it does not concern you. again - you do not have to answer my questions and I did not ask you a question.
 
MLK was a lifelong registered Republican - yes, that is a fact.

His neice, Alveda King, is also a conservative Republican. She has, in fact, dispelled the rumors you are advocating that MLK was non partisan.

I don't accept the claim from Alveda King, even I'm not advocating but just tell you a fact.

oh? so you're saying MLK PUBLICLY stated that he was a Republican?

for that statement...

PolitiFact Texas | Houston group says Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican

I think we should stick with fact.... not hearsay. Did MLK state HIMSELF that he's a Republican or not?

Steinhauer, if you dispute that so please present authentic source with document that did MLK publicly say he is republican? Any source from his families, especially Alveda King are not accepted.

My history professor told us that MLK is non-partisan, even official college encyclopedia and Wikipedia doesn't state MLK as republican because he doesn't publicly announce about whichever parties that he supports.
 
:shock:not after you completely destoyed the thread....the "good old boys" system is not rep. or dem..it is both(something you already know)...but you wanted to make it rep.

Not really, you did destroy some threads, especially mine one and I'm disappointed with your unacceptable behavior, especially trolling.
 
Back
Top