Comments on: Democratic Party enslaves Republican Party frees those enslaved

By: Doug

Doug — Mon, 08 Aug 2016 14:57:03 +0000

Considering the theme of this post, the article I linked-to below is, I think, germane to the discussion. There is so much of our (U.S.) history that is hidden. The victor writes the history, it is said, and that is so true. Almost everything we’re being told is either a lie, or has been spun to hide the real truth.

http://snoopinganthropologist.com/the-secret-racist-history-of-the-democratic-party/

By: klaus

klaus — Sat, 06 Aug 2016 19:10:56 +0000

The democratic party reminds me of Judas Iscariot of Holy Bible. In John 12:5 Judas complained and wanted to know why the perfume was not sold and money placed in the money bag and given to the poor. The thing is Judas didn’t give a dam for the poor and wanted the money for himself because he was a thief. The democrats are the same. They could care less about the poor and only want to be elected for themselves. Just look at the facts. Household net income remains at 50 year lows. More people are on food stamps than ever before. Obama is the only president in history to not have 1 single year of 3% GDP growth. Of course the democrats hate facts and live in the world of myth along with many others.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Fri, 05 Aug 2016 18:11:46 +0000

Good day.

On my earlier comment on “Christian Republican Slavery”, I was referring to the Left’s lies, as well as the whole Hollywood portrayal of Biblically justified slavery.

Being a slave in Christ is more freedom than the world could ever provide.

By: Caitlin Lane

Caitlin Lane — Thu, 04 Aug 2016 04:23:58 +0000

There are a lot of variables for how much Trump can accomplish if elected.

Time: Who really knows how much time we have? Inaction is surrender so let’s not surrender whatever amount of time is left.

Opposition: Expect it from the Democrats but we need to clean house in the Republican party too. Paul Ryan needs to go. His policies for open boarders, more refugees and bad trade agreements reflect those of Clinton’s more than Trumps.

From what I’ve read Dr. Kelli Ward is a solid conservative and a better choice for the senate than McCain.

It’s up to us to know when the RINO’S are up for reelection in our states and vote them out. There’s a lot of house cleaning that will take time.

I feel like those three third party candidates Castle, Johnson and Stein are being selfish. They know they won’t win but yet stay on the ballot which will take votes from Trump. Is that their purpose?

The Democratic Party is not only socialist but it is lawless. I get kind of scared thinking about what will happen if they win another four years.

By: Don Koenig

Don Koenig — Sun, 31 Jul 2016 02:57:27 +0000

In reply to ~David. That is what the Tea Party was about. Do the ideals of the Tea Party still exist in government? It does among some Senators and a lot of U.S. Representatives. They certainly are not the majority. It also existed in the military but that is rapidly fading because flag officers are more worried about promotions and pensions than the Constitution or the nation.

By: Don Koenig

Don Koenig — Sun, 31 Jul 2016 02:47:26 +0000

In reply to DM.

There seems to be some debate on what if any party MLK Jr identified with. Almost all blacks in the south were Republicans before 1964 and I suppose MLK Jr. also identified with black Republicans. After all his Father was a Republican.

There is more than one source that says MLK Jr was Republican including his niece. I don’t think anyone really knows how MLK Jr. actually voted since Georgia did not required registration by party. Here are some links.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/08/martin_luther_king_was_republican.html
http://humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/
http://www.newsmax.com/US/martin-luther-king-republican/2013/09/01/id/523296/

I think in the end King became disillusioned with both parties and voted how ever he pleased. There is no doupt that his civil rights marches were opposed by southern Democrats. Both parties were working on the civil right act but the Democrats controlled congress at that time. And it was the southern Democratic Senate that unsuccessfully filibustered the Civil Rights act.

By: ~David

~David — Sun, 31 Jul 2016 00:57:32 +0000

I do not in this comment have much to offer in the evaluation of slavery of past history, regardless of the parties involved. I look at it as a hideous undertaking of humanities past.

I am sad to see that the race baiters of today insist on keeping this terrible tragedy of past history alive and pertinent, much of it for political and population manipulation I think….that I won’t go into here.

My thought and question here revolve around the Democratic, Republican, and other parties.

Obama and other liberal supporters have clearly accomplished what they set out to do, to bring our nation down to its knees.

My question, is there any entity or sector in the United States Government that is not hell bent on the complete destruction of our independent nation ?

Is there any entity or sector in the United States Government that wants to fight and resurrect our nations status to a powerful and Constitutional Republic again ?

Or, despite our clear path downwards, are those in United States Government only concerned with One World Governance and surrendering our independent sovereignty…for the sake of their misguided and destructive agenda ?

It seems clear to me that if Hillary were to be elected, she would simply be Obama II.

Trump, despite his rhetoric of “Make America Great Again”, seems to be too little, too late…if he were even able to accomplish half of what he proposes.

By: DM

DM — Sat, 30 Jul 2016 23:49:55 +0000

Don, when you say that Martin Luther King was a Republican, do you mean Daddy King? Because MLK Jr has definitely never been a Republican. Wasn’t Jr working with L. Johnson on the Act of 1964?

By: Don Koenig

Don Koenig — Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:30:38 +0000

In reply to Joseph.

Joseph,

i am not sure what you are saying. There was no Republican history of slavery. Christianity only represents spiritual freedom in Christ. Slaves were told to serve their master in the New Testament. Most people in any dispensation of time are not true Christians anyway. It was no different in colonial times.

There were slaves in biblical days and even before. The Bible does not condemn slavery it was part of the human condition. When a person could not pay their debts they were sold to become slaves to pay off their debt.

God gave directions in the Bible to set slaves free when their debt was paid. Even so, some slaves chose to remain slaves because they loved their master or could not make a living on their own. Being a slave was not something dishonorable to those that voluntarily choose to be slaves.

Some slaves had quite a bit of power and they were will taken care of. Some actually were second in command to the land owner and some even inherited the owner’s estate if the owner so willed. The whole nation of Israel were slaves to another country several times in their history. This was allowed by God so that Israel would learn to honor and obey the God that kept them free men.

Slavery was very common all over the world in the days that the American Republic was set up. It is just the way it was. Besides, there was a lot of misinformation about other races even being fully human coming from so called science to confuse even Christians.

I think freely becoming a slave of Christ is quite honorable and that is the state of true Christians.

Helmer, stay on the post topic or your comments will not be posted. If you have a question, find the correct post to ask it on or email me. Read my commenting policy

By: Doug

Doug — Sat, 30 Jul 2016 20:18:37 +0000

Considering Grant became president in 1869, and that the 13th amendment was ratified in December of 1865, he would have had to relinquish his slave, if indeed he had one at that time. As far as I am aware, the historical records only show one slave ever owned by Ulysses S. Grant, and that man had been freed in 1859.