[Brilliant]

Reed=Reid

[rbbeachkid]

I think that now the Republican party should stand up to the slavery of socialism. The slaves that are the recipients and the slaves that are the forced providers.

[Non-Sequitur]

You take your officers and put them on horseback. I want every one carrying a nig*er knocker and when they come back they'd better be RED. I'll teach them not to protest in MY city. Ghetto's in the sky...really. - Chicago Mayor Dick Daley Sr. (DEMOCRAT)

I kind of doubt the authenticity of this one. Daley, senior, couldn't string that many words together into a coherent sentence.

[jacknhoo]

That's typical of the Democrats, to claim they are something they are not...it is exactly how they operate. They claim to be concerned about live, only so they can kill people...unborn, just born, disabled and elderly. They claim to be for the poor, black and disadvantaged and elderly only so they can kill them with, abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, assisted suicide and healthcare rationing. They claim to be for civil rights only so they can eliminate civil rights and incorporate totalitarianism and authoritarianism.

People should never be fooled when evil attempts to convince man it is a good...but they are fooled. Darn fools we are, many of us - mankind.

[Engineer_Soldier]

Although freeing the slaves was a noble cause, Abe Lincoln is responsible for EVERY infringement by the federal government we suffer under today. I wouldn’t spend much time bragging about the man who single-handedly enlarged the scope of government more than any president in history. His actions paved the way for the New Deal, War on Poverty, War on Drugs, and every other usurpation of state sovereignty we’re trying to fight to this day. Your use of Abe may be a good political ploy, but on principal, Abe is the author of undoing our nation as intended by our forefathers.

[lolhelp]

Orval Faubus, on one has ever used his middle name.

[aSeattleConservative]

I have to side with the southern democrats when it came to trying to vote down the unconstitutional Civil Rights Act of 1964. Evidently so does Ron Paul (whose social libertarian ideology I disagree with):

“Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

[nutmeg]

.