Evil Captor, YOU are the moron here. The phase is “in cahoots” with racists, NOT “in cohorts” with racists.
Dumbfuck.
Well. let’s see. “Cahoots,” a word popularized in movies of the Hopalon g Cassidy or Buck Jones genre, is a corruption of the word. . .wait for it. . .[BB]COHORTS**!
It would be well to do a little research and make sure you* are correct before correcting someone else or calling them names. 
Maybe because the phrase general welfare did not and does not allow for federal handouts to the needy. The establishment of justice, insurance of domestic tranquility, provisions for defence, and securing of liberties for ourselves and for posterity are all addressed specifically within the constitution as the enumerated rights of the federal government. The promotion of the general welfare meant state to state, the prohibition of intra-state taxes, the allowance of free travel from state to state, and those enumerated laws of that ilk. Nowhere in the Constitution, nor in any of the ratified ammendments, is there any clause (and remember, what you quoted was the Preamble to the Constitution, which in and of itself is like a ‘mission statement’ for a unit in the DoD. It guides, but does NOT make it law) which allows for the redistribution of wealth under federal authority. Hell, in the spirit of both the Federalist and Anti-Federalist causes, the mere thought of taking from the rich to give to the poor would have made our Founding Fathers vomit. The Federalists wanted a strong central government to beat the European powers down, as the USA was little more than a confederation of 13 soverign states (don’t forget, most documents up to around 1825 or so said “These United States,” when referring to the bit of land between Louisiana, Canada, and Florida, and “The United States” only in refrence to the Federal government in particular), not to take money from the rich and hand it out to the needy (and in this case, the irresponsable.) The Anti-Federalists would have shot you if you came to take taxes which they knew would go into a general pot to be passed out.
The reason that we react like it’s socialist dogma is because IT IS SOCIALIST DOGMA. The beginning of the American welfare state can be traced back to Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. The majority of those ineffective programs were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, because it did allow for the federal government to hand out monies. Again, look at the enumerated duties. Welfare, in the modern sense, ain’t there.
Incidentally, I don’t agree with Evil Captor’s assessment of Republicans as being “in cohorts” with racists. I disagree with many conservative ideas, but equating conservatives or Republicans (nearly, if not always, the same thing) with racists is simply not fair. Racists exist in all parts of the political spectrum.
I disagree with him, but I’m not calling him a moron or a dumbfuck. That kind of thing is for less civil dopers.
Thank you for injecting some decorum here Geezer. Sometimes our legend as the ‘coolest, hippest people on the planet’ doesn’t quite gel with the realities of our on-board behaviour.
Hey, like, what’s a hipster for? 
Reading Evil Captor’s first post that stirred things up so much, I see that he didn’t say “Republicans are racists.” He said SOME Republicans are racists.
Count me as one of the people who finds men who don’t take responsibility for their children even more offensive than ‘welfare moms’. At least the women are taking care of the kids (feeding, etc.). Any guy who thinks being a ‘pimp’ and having tons of kids is a sign of manhood isn’t much of a man, in my opinion.
:::waiting gracefully for milroyj’s heartfelt apologies:::
Happy for you. You have a bunch of liberal web sites that claim republicans are racist. I will deal with them in a later post. What’s “a lot” of republicans are racist supposed to mean? There are millions of republicans and I’m sure some are racist. So what. There are many racist democrats as well.
The democratic party is the one supporting affirmative action. Supporting racial quotas for admissions for schools and jobs. This is treating people differently based on race. That is racism. If you want to find a racist party the democrats are where you should look.
Here is Evil’s first contribution to this thread.
I already quoted it in my first post to the thread and bolded the offending statement. I will do so again:
The “some” term that you point out later in the thread doesn’t limit the statement the way you claim.
You are saying that some Republicans use the “code phrase”. But you lump together Republicans and other racists. The clear implication is that all republican’s (according to you) are racist.
When I point out this idiocy and rightly call you a dipshit for it you respond with:
More republican bashing. If you didn’t think all pubbies were racist why not just say so? It’s because it wasn’t until later after others started pointing out your stupidity that you realize your mistake.
Nothing here. It starts out in 1964 and 68, then jumps to Reagan. This cite somehow assumes we should all equate the term “states rights” with racism. It calls Reagan a racist because he believes in “states rights” and is against affirmative action.
They also mention Bush Sr. in 1988 with some ad campaign that was supposably racist but don’t mention any specifics.
The page begins:
If the republican party is the party of racism then why are they having cordial and productive meetings with the head of the NAACP to discuss racial harmony? The 1960’s racism that the article talks about was mirrored by the democrats. Indeed, Strom Thurmond it even admits was a democratic senator when he was a segregationalist. When he switched parties to become a republican he lost his racist ways.
From december, 2002, this article talks about Trent Lott.
Again, even the most biased liberal sources like these weblog links that Evil has come up with admit that the Democrats were openly and clearly racist 40 years ago. Somehow, however, it is allways worse that the republicans were secretly racists (according to the accusers) 30 years ago.
Forced busing was a bad idea.
Welfare abuse was a serious problem that the republicans tried to fix for decades. It was actually Bill Clinton who finally saw some success with stopping the abuse.
Nothing here. It starts out in 1964 and 68, then jumps to Reagan. This cite somehow assumes we should all equate the term “states rights” with racism. It calls Reagan a racist because he believes in “states rights” and is against affirmative action.
They also mention Bush Sr. in 1988 with some ad campaign that was supposably racist but don’t mention any specifics.
The page begins:
If the republican party is the party of racism then why are they having cordial and productive meetings with the head of the NAACP to discuss racial harmony? The 1960’s racism that the article talks about was mirrored by the democrats. Indeed, Strom Thurmond it even admits was a democratic senator when he was a segregationalist. When he switched parties to become a republican he lost his racist ways.
From december, 2002, this article talks about Trent Lott.
After the article was written Lott was removed from his position. He was widely denounced by the republican party. He apologized dozens of times to anyone who would listen.
Again, even the most biased liberal sources like these weblog links that Evil has come up with admit that the Democrats were openly and clearly racist 50 years ago. Somehow, however, it is allways worse that the republicans were secretly racists (according to the accusers) 40 years ago.
Forced busing was a bad idea.
Welfare abuse was a serious problem that the republicans tried to fix for decades. It was actually Bill Clinton who finally saw some success with stopping the abuse.
Quotas are racist, unfair, and a bad idea.
Being against forced busing, welfare fraud, and racial quotas does not make one a racist.
This is another december 2002 article about Trent Lott.
Again it talks about Nixon in the 1960’s having a policy of racism.
This one is more specific in the charges however:
Still no proof offered, though. Is there a memo or letter where Nixon tells other Republicans to lace speeches with appeals to racists?
Even if this is true, so what? The Democrats in the south were openly racist 50 years ago. Why is it worse that the republicans were supposably secretly racists 40 years ago? Why does this make the repulicans the party of racism?
Another december 2002 article. More Trent Lott basing. Geez, somebody ought to remove him from his postion as…
The article goes on to complain about how conservative the media is. :rolleyes:
Again this article somehow makes the leap that “states rights” equals racism.
Sorry for the double post. Please ignore the first one.
Wabbit said “welfare moms”! He must be a racist! :rolleyes:
You aren’t against affirmative action and school busing too, I hope. Then you might as well be in the KKK according to Evil Captor’s cites.
No one, rich or poor, in this day and age, needs to have six or seven children unless they live on a farm and need them to work the land. However, this is not Communist China and the goverment has no business in mandating how many children a couple can produce. One option is subsidised birth control for women who qualify financially and wish to limit the number of children they have without depending on a man who might refuse to wear a condom. Many, if not most, poor people have no health insurance and medicine is quite expensive.
No one, rich or poor, in this day and age, needs to have six or seven children unless they live on a farm and need them to work the land. However, this is not Communist China and the goverment has no business in mandating how many children a couple can produce. One option is to offer subsidised birth control for women who qualify financially and wish to limit the number of children they have without depending on a man who might refuse to wear a condom. Many, if not most, poor people have no health insurance and medicine is quite expensive.
Birth control is not always 100%, btw… paid for or not.
Noooo, you’ve brought me to Evil’s attention! Now I must face the fiery wrath of the King of Morons and Ill-Conceived Generalities! Damn you Debaser!!! 
I have repeated what I mean, and meant, and you don’t seem to get it. You’re getting off on this huge semantic quibble. I never said all Repubs are racist. Even if what I said can be CONSTRUED to mean all Repubs are racist, it isn’t what I meant, and I have said so several times. You just don’t want to hear me. I’m gonna let that be your problem from here on out.
My problem with the Repub Party is not primarily that it has many racists as members, but that it is clearly and obviously promoting racism. Anybody who has followed electoral politics for the last few years knows that this is true, and they know why it’s true – the Republican Party leadership has deliberately chosen to appeal to racists and to promote laws that appeal to them, as an electoral stratagem.
Denying it will do you no good. It is obviously true. Repub apologists who deny their party’s racism are like someone with a huge boil on their face running around screaming “There IS NO boil on my face! There IS no boil on my face!” when all anybody has to do is take a brief glance to see that there is one.
It’s reasoning with you that will do me no good.
You can chant “the Republican party is racist” all day long until you are blue in the face and it still won’t be true.
You claim that the party leadership has deliberately chosen to appeal to racists. How? When? During Nixon’s administration?
You claim that they promote laws that appeal to racists. What laws? When were they passed?
You are full of shit. You are making this up as you go along. The only cites you could find to back up your rediculous assumptions were liberal web logs and even they admit that the democrats were openly racist 50 years ago. While the stongest claims they make aer that the republicans were supposably secretely racists 40 years ago.
The only claims in any of the dumb cites you drudged up that had anything to do with events of the last several decades were that republicans are against school busing, racial quotas and welfare fraud. As I have already pointed out my obtuse friend, being against these shitty, wasteful and stupid liberal programs does not make one a racist.
The democrats today are in favor of racial quotas for college admission and job hiring. This is treating a certain group of people better because of their race. This is racism. It would seem that the democrats who were racist against blacks back in the 50’s and 60’s have simply changed who they have chosen to discriminate against.
As Chirs Rock once said: Put the dick down.