What is the Democrat party?

It’s this:

Dave Moore: The Democrat Party is…

…and has always been, the party of slavery. It’s just that now, they don’t care what color their slaves are. They want all of us to be the slaves of a few.

Mike Austin: The Democrat Party is…

…the party of slavery, Civil War, secession, the KKK, Jim Crow, the Three-fifths Compromise, Dred Scott, The Missouri Compromise, The Kansas-Nebraska Act, church burnings, Welfare, the Income Tax, the Federal Reserve, the first World War, Prohibition, the Vietnam War and its loss, the “boat people”, the defeat in Afghanistan, the Korean War and its outcome, the saving of Lenin and the USSR, the saving of Stalin and the USSR during World War II, allowing the enslavement of Eastern Europe, the Cuban Missile Failure, the salvation of Castro, the betrayal during the Bay of Pigs, the destruction of Law in America, the spread of sexual degeneracy world wide, the creation of race hatred, the destruction of the American republican government and Constitution, abortion, the spread of HIV, Waco, Ruby Ridge, gun control, the strengthening of China, throwing God out of American classrooms and public places, rewarding treason and punishing the law-abiding, Critical Race Theory, the 1619 Project, Drag Queen Story Hour…

My apologies to Satan if I omitted some of his handiwork.

(H/T Gerard Van der Leun and his commenters on American Digest.)

, , , , , ,

Posted by:

The Universal Spectator

An irritable, but lovable, constitutional conservative who loathes and detests collectivists and statists of all persuasions and parties…

One response to “What is the Democrat party?”

  1. Honey Avatar
    Honey

    Actually in an article about the Constitution in the Epoch Times there was a new insight offered on the three fifths compromise.

    It is not demeaning to slaves. That was not its purpose. While it is true that slaves were considered property and that was wrong – but you cannot take events out of the context of their time – the definition of that property was reduced from a whole person to three fifths of a person because owners of property had to pay fees or taxes depending on the value of the property they owned. And it was decided that since a slave is not allowed to operate freely, he would thus be unable to reach his full economic potential, so he could not be valued the same as a free man who would necessarily potentially have to be worth more because he would be free to earn more.

    This compromise was chosen then to reduce the tax burden of the owner of said property and it thus acknowledges that a free man is always worth more than a slave.

    This eventually gave way to the end of slavery because of the obvious recognition that slavery keeps humans down. This disparages the slaveowner for his willingness to do that to other human beings.

    I found that interesting.

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

About us

For lack of a better term, we are misfits, irritable, but lovable, constitutional conservatives who loathe and detest collectivists and statists of all persuasions and parties…

Recent Posts

Newsletter