View Full Version : Voting Intimidation By Black Panthers In Philadelphia
legelegel
11-04-2008, 11:10 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCeD1RcJjAg
Lewis the Pike
11-04-2008, 11:11 AM
any credible news sources citing these stories?
fifrat
11-04-2008, 11:20 AM
by credible, you mean left, censored news?
I don't know, I don't watch those.
Watch the video Lewis, you will see one of said BP's still there.
andyokstate
11-04-2008, 11:23 AM
"sorry i ruined your black panther party"
Lewis the Pike
11-04-2008, 11:34 AM
by crdible I mean Not MSNBC, Wall Street Journal, LA Times or Fox News, nice try I realize there are radicals on both sides. :rollseyes:
possibly CNN or AP.
bleedorange
11-04-2008, 11:38 AM
by crdible I mean Not MSNBC, Wall Street Journal, LA Times or Fox News, nice try I realize there are radicals on both sides. :rollseyes:
possibly CNN or AP.
Uh, CNN is no more or less credible than Fox News.
Erick
11-04-2008, 11:49 AM
any credible news sources citing these stories?
The guys is right there talking to the camera. Do we need Jon Stewart to to a bit on it before you believe that it happened?
AnniePokely
11-04-2008, 11:58 AM
Oh come on Lewis... pull your head out.
bleedorange
11-04-2008, 11:59 AM
The guys is right there talking to the camera. Do we need Jon Stewart to to a bit on it before you believe that it happened?
He's a cool cat. :vomit-smiley-001:
Ostreak
11-04-2008, 12:04 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU
GoPokes83
11-04-2008, 12:27 PM
Is that Milli Vanilli? "Our Biden love is true! Ooo Ooo Ooo....Obama toooooo."
Black Panthers used to be much tougher looking.
fifrat
11-04-2008, 12:28 PM
But they're still as idiotic!
Lewis the Pike
11-04-2008, 12:36 PM
If Lefties like Dan Rather can forge news; So can righties like Rupert Murdoch and Faux News
bleedorange
11-04-2008, 12:38 PM
....Faux News
You realize that every good comedian has to keep his stuff fresh right?
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 12:42 PM
You realize that every good comedian has to keep his stuff fresh right?
It would be funny if it weren't true...
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 12:51 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCeD1RcJjAg
Just to be clear... These guys need to be removed. They are no different than a klansman standing in front of a polling place in Alabama. Hopefully it gets resolved without incident.
legelegel
11-04-2008, 12:54 PM
Democratic leadership were the typical bullies on the playground, while the Republican leadership were class leaders.
fifrat
11-04-2008, 12:56 PM
Just to be clear... These guys need to be removed. They are no different than a klansman standing in front of a polling place in Alabama. Hopefully it gets resolved without incident.
AMEN, Brother! I wouldn't even mind if they were removed with incident!
legelegel
11-04-2008, 12:56 PM
Just to be clear... These guys need to be removed. They are no different than a klansman standing in front of a polling place in Alabama. Hopefully it gets resolved without incident.
That's funny. I bet those klansman were Democrats too. Not much has changed has it.
WyomingOSUAlum
11-04-2008, 01:05 PM
It would be funny if it weren't true...
I'd be interested in some specific examples, please.
bleedorange
11-04-2008, 01:07 PM
It would be funny if it weren't true...
That's a hoot!
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 01:07 PM
That's funny. I bet those klansman were Democrats too. Not much has changed has it.
In the past sure... But I am sure today that probably not too many of the klan are getting the vote out for Obama.
GoPokes83
11-04-2008, 01:19 PM
I've always wondered this: African Americans in the South are predominantly Democrats. Why? The old Democratic party (In the South anyway) was the party of Jim Crow, Anti-miscegenation laws, poll-taxes, racial abuse and the White Power a-holes who treated them like livestock until less than 40 years ago. While the Republican party was the party of Abe Lincoln and the 14th amendment. I don't get it. Free me from slavery and you've got my vote! So why stay with the Dixiecrats?
It can't be because of modern civil rights laws because in the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.*
So how did the Republican party lose the southern black vote?
*See http://www.congresslink.org/civil/essay.html and http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1982/3/82.03.04.x.html.
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 01:25 PM
I'd be interested in some specific examples, please.
Well there are lots... Here are a couple... We can talk about how FNS has used 'reliable sources' like Jerome Corsi or Andy Martin to promote some of the false hoods about Obama that have spread. Even devoting a whole hour long program to Martin the man who originated some of the Muslim rumors and not being born in the US rumors, and who is an anti-semite. They also more recently took a highly edited tape to state that Obama said that he wanted to bankrupt the coal industry, when if you listened to in whole the comment was wildly out of context... Or there is the whole spreading the wealth comment from a legal discussion 7 years ago which again had nothing to do with economic socialism or really economic policies at all when the entire context of the discussion was read. There are others I am sure, and all candidates are guilty of abusing the context of a quote, but Fox News isn't a candidate.
legelegel
11-04-2008, 01:29 PM
I've always wondered this: African Americans in the South are predominantly Democrats. Why? The old Democratic party (In the South anyway) was the party of Jim Crow, Anti-miscegenation laws, poll-taxes, racial abuse and the White Power a-holes who treated them like livestock until less than 40 years ago. While the Republican party was the party of Abe Lincoln and the 14th amendment. I don't get it. Free me from slavery and you've got my vote! So why stay with the Dixiecrats?
It can't be because of modern civil rights laws because in the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.*
So how did the Republican party lose the southern black vote?
*See http://www.congresslink.org/civil/essay.html and http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1982/3/82.03.04.x.html.
One party wanted to give blacks the freedoms they long deserved. The other party sold them on the fact that they deserved more than equal rights.
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 01:35 PM
I've always wondered this: African Americans in the South are predominantly Democrats. Why? The old Democratic party (In the South anyway) was the party of Jim Crow, Anti-miscegenation laws, poll-taxes, racial abuse and the White Power a-holes who treated them like livestock until less than 40 years ago. While the Republican party was the party of Abe Lincoln and the 14th amendment. I don't get it. Free me from slavery and you've got my vote! So why stay with the Dixiecrats?
It can't be because of modern civil rights laws because in the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.*
So how did the Republican party lose the southern black vote?
*See http://www.congresslink.org/civil/essay.html and http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1982/3/82.03.04.x.html.
It is pretty sad actually, how do you go to a party of Lincoln to a party of Jesse Helms? Maybe that is the key is that most of those old school segregationalists like Helms either changed party's or changed their beliefs like Byrd. Who knows... I am sure that the 1963 Civil Rights Act also had some to do w/ that as it was proposed and signed by a Democratic president.
WyomingOSUAlum
11-04-2008, 01:37 PM
Chris,
I'm familiar with one of those stories you are referring to. However, I think they reported what Corsi was saying, just as they report what Obama or McCain says about something.
Take the Corsi book, for example. It was a #1 best seller about a presidential candidate. That's certainly newsworthy, right? The only way the coverage isn't slanted is if they don't give the other side a chance to rebut. As I recall, they did exactly that!
What's so unfair and/or unbalanced about that?
WyomingOSUAlum
11-04-2008, 01:40 PM
P.S.,
I can't comment on what I didn't see, or at least choose not to do so. But I've seen time after time where a story is reported and the other side gets their chance to affirm or deny whatever the topic is about. I've never seen anything one-sided on Fox News, ever.
WyomingOSUAlum
11-04-2008, 01:48 PM
So I did a search on Fox's website for the coal story.
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/03/a-dirty-fight/
I'm still looking, but that seems very fair to me....
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 01:51 PM
Just to be clear... These guys need to be removed. They are no different than a klansman standing in front of a polling place in Alabama. Hopefully it gets resolved without incident.
FYI... It looks like these guys have been removed by the police.
legelegel
11-04-2008, 01:52 PM
It is pretty sad actually, how do you go to a party of Lincoln to a party of Jesse Helms? Maybe that is the key is that most of those old school segregationalists like Helms either changed party's or changed their beliefs like Byrd. Who knows... I am sure that the 1963 Civil Rights Act also had some to do w/ that as it was proposed and signed by a Democratic president.
Actually it started with an even better man, whose middle name was a single letter, who racially integrated our armed forces in 1948 and who we all know was also a Democrat.
WyomingOSUAlum
11-04-2008, 01:53 PM
Here's what aired on Greta last night. It shows Senator Obama explaining his position very clearly. The guy wants cleaner technology and seems like he wants to penalize industry which doesn't meet standards. If this is slanted or biased coverage, I'm missing it....
http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/11/04/coal-miners-vs-sen-obama/
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 01:56 PM
Actually it started with an even better man, whose middle name was a single letter, who racially integrated our armed forces in 1948 and who we all know was also a Democrat.
Truman was a very under-rated President.
legelegel
11-04-2008, 02:05 PM
Truman was a very under-rated President.
Eisenhower was one of many who disliked him, primarily for his handling of Korea. His snubbing of Truman on Ike's inauguration day has soured me on our thirty-fourth President.
OSUchris
11-04-2008, 02:12 PM
Here's what aired on Greta last night. It shows Senator Obama explaining his position very clearly. The guy wants cleaner technology and seems like he wants to penalize industry which doesn't meet standards. If this is slanted or biased coverage, I'm missing it....
http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/11/04/coal-miners-vs-sen-obama/
I will agree that at least on television FNS usually has someone from the each side representing their view (some more competent than others), but my gripe w/ FNS is their choice of stories to cover. An example (taken to the extreme) would be for a news organization to cover the SkinHead's annual convention and give news credence to their views. FNS isn't that bad by far, but they give attention to stories sometimes that aren't all that they are cracked up to be. They seem to have a bit too much of the tabloid journalism editorial standards at their roots.
GoPokes83
11-04-2008, 02:27 PM
Wasn't Truman a Klansman too? Was he the only US president to be in the Klan? I can't imagine another one. I don't think he was a lynchin' klanny, but he wore the bedsheets. ( He was a great President who was widely disliked during his terms. Makes you wonder what history will think of GWB)
The republicans did just as much for the civil rights movement as the dems, they just didn't get the credit. But you're probably right about the '63 civil rights act. I doubt the southern press had much praise for the republican's efforts so the southern democrats got the political spoils from something they opposed. what a world!
edit* and what happened to my capitalization skillz ???
legelegel
11-04-2008, 02:41 PM
Wasn't Truman a Klansman too? Was he the only US president to be in the Klan? I can't imagine another one. I don't think he was a lynchin' klanny, but he wore the bedsheets.
Here's what may be the correct story.
In 1924, Harry Truman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Truman) was a judge in Jackson County, Missouri, which includes Kansas City. Truman was up for reelection, and his friends Edgar Hinde and Spencer Salisbury (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spencer_Salisbury) advised him to join the Klan. The Klan was politically powerful in Jackson County, and two of Truman's opponents in the Democratic primary had Klan support. Truman refused at first but paid the Klan's $10 membership fee, and a meeting with a Klan officer was arranged.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman-refusal) According to Salisbury's version of the story, Truman was inducted, but afterward "was never active; he was just a member who wouldn't do anything." Salisbury, however, became Truman's bitter enemy in later years, so this version is suspect.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman-salisbury) According to Hinde and Truman's accounts, the Klan officer demanded that Truman pledge not to hire any Catholics if he was reelected. Truman refused, and his membership fee was returned; most of the men he had commanded in World War I had been local Irish Catholics.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman) Truman had at least one other strong reason to object to the anti-Catholic requirement, which was that the Catholic Pendergast (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Pendergast) family, which operated a political machine in Jackson County, were his patrons; Pendergast family lore has it that Truman was originally accepted for patronage without even meeting him, on the basis of his family background plus the requirement that he was not a member of any anti-Catholic organization such as the Klan.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman-pendergast) The Pendergast faction of the Democratic Party was known as the "Goats," as opposed to the rival Shannon machine's "Rabbits." The battle lines were drawn when Truman put only Goats on the county payroll,[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman-payroll) and the Klan began encouraging voters to support Protestant, "100% American" candidates, which was anathema to the Catholic Pendergasts. The Klan allied itself against Truman and with the Rabbits, and Shannon instructed his people to vote Republican in the election, which Truman lost.[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman-threats) Truman later claimed that the Klan "threatened to kill me, and I went out to one of their meetings and dared them to try," speculating that if Truman's armed friends had shown up earlier, violence might have resulted. However, biographer Alonzo Hamby believes that this story, which is not supported by any recorded facts, was a confabulation based on a meeting with a hostile and menacing group of Democrats that contained many Klansmen, showing Truman's "Walter Mitty-like tendency ... to rewrite his personal history."[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman-hamby) Sympathetic observers see Truman's flirtation with the Klan as a momentary aberration and point out that his close friend and business partner Eddie Jacobson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Jacobson) was Jewish, and that in later years, Truman's presidency marked the first significant improvement in the federal government's record on civil rights since the post-Reconstruction nadir (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadir_of_American_race_relations) marked by the Wilson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson) administration.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_national_politics# endnote_truman-civilrights) It is also possible to interpret it as a young racist politician's opportunistic attempt to get ahead. The incident was clearly entwined with the intricacies of machine politics, and may also be seen as an indication of Truman's long evolution toward a more modern outlook on race relations.
legelegel
11-04-2008, 02:44 PM
Truman was one of fourteen United States Presidents who were Freemasons.
George Washington
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
James Polk
James Buchanan
Andrew Johnson
James Garfield
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
Howard Taft
Warren Harding
Franklin Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Gerald Ford
Abraham Lincoln was not a Freemason. He did apply for membership in Tyrian Lodge, Springfield, Ill., shortly after his nomination for the presidency in 1860 but withdrew the application because he felt that his applying for membership at that time might be construed as a political ruse to obtain votes. He advised the lodge that he would resubmit his application again when he returned from the presidency.
Lincoln never returned. On the death of the president, Tyrian Lodge adopted, on April 17, 1865, a resolution to say "that the decision of President Lincoln to postpone his application for the honours of Freemasonry, lest his motives be misconstrued, is the highest degree honorable to his memory."
Lyndon Johnson received his first degree on October 30, 1937. After receiving the degree he found that his congressional duties (elected in 1937) took so much time he was unable to pursue the masonic degrees.
Ronald Reagan has often been referred to as a Freemason. President Reagan is not a Freemason although he is an honorary member of the Imperial Council of the Shrine. President Reagan has on numerous occasions been involved in Shrine and masonic functions throughout his career.
The confusion as to his membership arises from a ceremony held in the Oval Office of the White House on February 11th, 1988, when a group of Freemasons presented President Reagan with a certificate of honor from the Grand Lodge of Washington, D.C., then he was made an Honourary Scottish Rite mason. The title of Freemason can only be conferred by a Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons. In Reagan's case this was not done, probably because the ceremonies would have taken a full day to confer and the president's time was limited; therefore,President Reagan should only be referred to as a Shriner or Scottish Rite mason. The Shrine and Scottish Rite are concordant bodies and cannot confer the title Freemason on any person.
George Bush has also on numerous occasions been referred to as a Freemason.The confusion as to President Bush being a member arises from the swearing in ceremonies at his inauguration. President Bush took his oath of office on the George Washington Bible which belongs to St. Johns Lodge in New York City. Because the Bible belonged to a Masonic Lodge many writers assumed he was a Freemason. The Bible was used at the request of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies
This Bible was first used on April 30, 1789, by the Grand Master of the Masons in New York, to administer the oath of office to George Washington, the first president. Other presidents who took their oath of office with this Bible are Warren G. Harding, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Jimmy Carter.
http://mastermason.com/wilmettepark/pres.html
Lewis the Pike
11-04-2008, 02:46 PM
I'd be interested in some specific examples, please.
-exclusion of Ron Paul from the NH debates; even though he was leading Guiliani and Thompson prior to the debates.
-omission of Ron Paul's text victory despite Fox News were the ones sponsoring the vote.
(those were the first two of the top of my head)
Their pundits have every right to be biased; when it bleeds into their reporting; they are no longer news; but punditry disguised.
fifrat
11-04-2008, 02:48 PM
Ron Paul was excluded because he came across as a blathering old fool in the first debate. My wife actually felt sorry for him.
Lewis the Pike
11-04-2008, 03:00 PM
Ron Paul was excluded because he came across as a blathering old fool in the first debate. My wife actually felt sorry for him.
What did he say that was foolish?
The part about the constitution? Respecting the borders? Non-interventionist nation building? Personal accountability? Civil Liberties?
I missed the blathering... please point them out to me?
Thanks!
GoPokes83
11-04-2008, 03:06 PM
Lincoln and Kennedy were both NOT Freemasons, but WERE replaced by Freemasons after their assassinations!
Duh
Duh
Duh
Duhhhhhhhhhhhh!
My Grandpa was a Freemason, and as far as I know he wasn't involved in either crime.
legelegel
11-04-2008, 03:08 PM
What did he say that was foolish?
The part about the constitution? Respecting the borders? Non-interventionist nation building? Personal accountability? Civil Liberties?
I missed the blathering... please point them out to me?
Thanks!
This is for all to review if desired:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hfa7vT02lA
legelegel
11-04-2008, 03:14 PM
Lincoln and Kennedy were both NOT Freemasons, but WERE replaced by Freemasons after their assassinations!
Duh
Duh
Duh
Duhhhhhhhhhhhh!
My Grandpa was a Freemason, and as far as I know he wasn't involved in either crime.
My Grandfather and my Father were 32 degree Freemasons and so am I.
There were a lot of people in the South that hated Lincoln.
May Grandmother was one of the most giving and loving persons I have ever known.
She was a Texan and she hated Lincoln with a passion. She was born in the middle of the 1890s. I wonder what Lincoln did and who instilled that hated in her?
GoPokes83
11-04-2008, 03:18 PM
Ron Paul is a brilliant man with many great ideas that would benefit our country tremendously. Unfortunately he has the speaking ability and public appeal of a popscicle stick. Apparently what the American people want is sizzle, not steak.
GoPokes83
11-04-2008, 03:20 PM
Legalegel = Fair Play For Cuba Committee
I knew it!!!!!
Back... and to the left.
FloridaPoke
11-04-2008, 03:38 PM
Here's my black power hero
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=3628.0
legelegel
11-04-2008, 03:45 PM
If you see a deleted post entry by me above, I apologize.
Legalegel = Fair Play For Cuba Committee
I knew it!!!!!
Back... and to the left.
Kennedy was an elitist. He came from a family whose ill-gotten wealth put him in office. His poor health made him reckless and he was a womanizer like his old man. He was not a man of honor.
He certainly didn't need killin'. No President to date has.
_________________________________________________
There is no "a" in legelegel. legelegel is a PALINDROME, that is it reads the same in reverse, like "navy van". :)
Now a palindrome should not to be confused with a SEMORDNILAP (palindromes spelled backwards) which has a different meaning read in reverse, e.g. evil & live.
jakeman
11-04-2008, 06:35 PM
Here's my black power hero
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=3628.0
I have no f'n idea who that cat is, but he's pretty damn smart.
I like him. A lot.
FloridaPoke
11-04-2008, 07:39 PM
I have no f'n idea who that cat is, but he's pretty damn smart.
I like him. A lot.
Believe it or not, I think he is a successful W Coast musician. Hilarious. I don't know if he did it as a spoof.....or whether he really believes what he says in this video. I tend to believe him.....because
I was one of the guys that brokered the (6 week) truce between the Crips and the Bloods in S. Central LA in the early 90's. In that 'all night' negotiation (top 20 leaders from each gang in one room from midnight to 7am), I was "amazed" at how conservative the politics were of the ghetto bro's who were fighting the fight in the middle of the worst gang (i.e., drug) warfare in US history and in the middle of one of the worst low income blight areas ever.
I should make another specific post about that night..........one to remember in the roughest part of any city in America..........where when I say "the guns and knives were checked at the door".........I mean a pile of weapons you wouldn't believe. :)
bleedorange
11-04-2008, 07:46 PM
FP- you're like Forrest freakin' Gump for cryin out loud, minus the "not a smart man" part. You've got more stories to tell than anyone I know. You weren't there when Kennedy was shot were you?
JimBob
11-04-2008, 07:49 PM
Ron Paul was excluded because he came across as a blathering old fool in the first debate. My wife actually felt sorry for him.
Ron Paul is actually Pat Paulsen's other brother Darrell.:officechair:
FloridaPoke
11-04-2008, 07:53 PM
FP- you're like Forrest freakin' Gump for cryin out loud, minus the "not a smart man" part. You've got more stories to tell than anyone I know. You weren't there when Kennedy was shot were you?
LOL......I was in the first grade in Weatherford America and I remember them telling the whole school and then cancelling class for the rest of the day. What I remember most however was being (very) pissed off that Sat morning cartoons were cancelled for frickin Presidential Assassination TV Coverage.
Yahh, the Crips and Bloods thing is a crazy story.......and something I wasn't even invited to be involved in until 24 hours before the event. And that is another story :)
BigBadBen
11-04-2008, 08:12 PM
That dude is spot on.
But he isnt singing a lovey dovey song about barrack hussein so the media wont sniff it.
GoPokes83
11-05-2008, 05:11 AM
It's a PBS Documentary on FloridaPoke!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRaTekm9Ak8
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.