Imgflip Logo Icon

Juneteenth

Juneteenth | Mark your Calendar ! Celebrate the day the Republicans freed all the Democrat's Slaves! | image tagged in memes | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
3,942 views 85 upvotes Made by Sobrmn 3 years ago in politics
141 Comments
[deleted]
12 ups, 3y,
1 reply
LoL you made like 1000 liberal heads explode in less than an hour - "wellf**kindone" !!
5 ups, 3y,
1 reply
I am well aware of history, just like most liberals. I know that the Democrats used to be in favour of slavery, but I also know that had you been around in the civil war, you would have been Democrats.
3 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Press X to Doubt Lady Dimitrescu Resident Evil | The Democrats were not in favor of slavery The slave owning States in the South were | image tagged in press x to doubt lady dimitrescu resident evil | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
5 ups, 3y,
1 reply
The slave owning democrat KKK folks you mean.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Hold on, lemme check.
Um, nope.

If your illiteracy skillz require that you need that much more assistance in reading, perhaps an app can help you some?
Just kidding, not even that can.
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
No I was correcting you to the actuality. If you bother to read a history book on the U.S. you will find my correction to be proper.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
No, child.

The Confederacy. Civil War. Look it up.
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
Right. Confederacy was mostly democrats who lost the war, then started up the kkk durp.
2 ups, 3y
"EmporerCzar_Elect_JR

Right. Confederacy was mostly democrats who lost the war, then started up the kkk durp."

Please tell me you're trolling.
This is so sad. I feel kind of guilty. Almost.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Oh, I screenshot and posted it because you're gonna delete it later.

toodles!
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
No and no, go ahead and read history by CNN and believe it. You're an idiot if you think the KKK wasn't started by Democrats.
2 ups, 3y
CNN is a book? Gosh, you kidz r fonee!

Oh, wait, it's you again! The "Confederacy was mostly democrats who lost the war" guy!
Look, I don't want to be cruel to someone with special needs, but goodness, look something up before blabbering such high level of mental incapacitation like it wuz kool!
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Right, so you read the part in history that talks about the party realignment of 1968?

Oh no, you wouldn't because that's not something Republicans would teach you. Didn't you ever find it odd that most southern states are Republican and most north states are Democrat?
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
Lol that's because retired old people that vote predominantly Republican. That's an old people thing not a white racist thing lol.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Funny thing about that, we have a bunch of young folks here evidently who vote republican too.
1 up, 3y,
2 replies
And not compared to older (35 and up) categories. Ppl go more republican as they get older.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y
Today, yes. But I don't think it's a condition that happens because of age.
1 up, 3y
Idk - I heard a joke at 16. If you're 18 and a republican, you have no heart. If you're 35 and a democrat, you have no brain.

I am a registered democrat. And am still more to the left of middle than not, but as I have gotten older and wiser - I see a lot of better ideas on how to run government from a financial standpoint from the right, than I do the left. I see better social measures occuring in the left.

Things like gay rights to marry and I'm a Christian... Who supports their rights. And doesn't think they are abominations...

Neither side has it all right or all wrong - their main fault is in not doing what is best for us - and doing what is best for their special interests, whose main goal is to keep the peasants debating each other and not them.
0 ups, 3y,
2 replies
GA went democrat. Through whatever wonky means.
[deleted]
3 ups, 3y
Change happens, fortunately.

I guess enough people saw that the last guy didn't do a very good job. That's how voting works.
0 ups, 3y
Agreed.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
My comment was also about the red herring that the KKK is a "Democrat thing" when it no longer is. It's a republican thing.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
They literally backed Biden this last election around.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y
And they backed Trump in his first election. Your point? I mean, that isn't to say all of the other white supremacist groups that make up the right-wing.
1 up, 3y
No - it's technically not republican or democrat thing anymore. They are an anarchist group, which would have there me no government. KKK is strictly just a white racist thing....
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
So which is it - it was racist republicans in the civil war - which is why it's so republican in the south ? Or was it there was a party realignment in 1968? If your statement about civil war is true - it would be those states changed and became democrat based in 1968 with the party change you speak of.

If the party swing change is true - then the civil information can't be true.

You're cognitively dissonant to reality. Keep drink that China Kool Aid, wearing the CNN purple jumpsuit and Warren Buffett shoes -- gather in a group and drink the Kool aid.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
3 replies
"You're cognitively dissonant to reality. Keep drink that China Kool Aid, wearing the CNN purple jumpsuit and Warren Buffett shoes -- gather in a group and drink the Kool aid."

Oh mylanta. The projection is real here folks.

In the Civil War, the KKK was started by Democrats, today's Republicans. The same people who vouch for small government are the same people who vouched for small government because they didn't want the bigger government dictating what they do with their land/property (slaves). Ironically, even though today's Republicans are complaining (once again) about big government, they don't shy away from making "big government" sweeping policies. Like abortion, for example. Or, LGBTQ rights. Or Drug decriminalization. Or progressive policies. Or social policies. But once again... they continuously pipe the buzzphras "Big gubmint."

Anyway, the "New Deal" brought in the 1940s held many then left-wing policies. Democrats (todays Republicans heavily opposed it. And also the same with the Civil Rights act. However, once Nixon was elected, claiming the "Law and Order" party of the Republicans, the left-wing right-wing parties haven't realigned since. Democrats belonged to the left wing policies, and Republicans owned the right wing policies.

Everyone jumped ship of their parties and realigned.

Here is a summary of the events. This is a blog, not a historical text, but you will find that when compared with a history in politics book, the echoes many of the points made here.
https://heterodoxacademy.org/blog/on-1968-a-realigning-period/
1 up, 3y
No - in terms of taxes.... The south only got 35 percent of it's war cost funding from taxes in the south. They didn't like taxes.

The north - by comparison received 65 percent of it's funding by taxes to folks in the north. The north - had higher taxes running which funded their war better than the south who did not use taxes as much.

The southern antebellum states had laps of luxury in terms of wealth - and didn't want to let go of that money. Higher taxes and paying slaves didn't seem nice for their lifestyle.

Do the homework, follow the money as they say and you will see it came down more to money and taxes than it did slavery. Slavery was just the last straw.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
I know what that bill and declaration of war states. It does talk about keeping slaves - because that was the last straw item for them to secede.

The real reason wasn't just slavery - it was the kind of taxes the federal government had been making, then also making the notion that slaves would be freed.

Knowing their only chance of winning a war against the north would be the slaves acting as soldiers - they fought for slavery.

If the last straw had been an excise tax increase in tobacco - the war would have been fought over tobacco from the south. When you look at the history prior to the events - you can see the full scope of the events before the war and get a full picture of why it happened.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y
Louisiana:

As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of an­nexation not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country. The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery.

Alabama:

Upon the principles then announced by Mr. Lincoln and his leading friends, we are bound to expect his administration to be conducted. Hence it is, that in high places, among the Republi­can party, the election of Mr. Lincoln is hailed, not simply as it change of Administration, but as the inauguration of new princi­ples, and a new theory of Government, and even as the downfall of slavery. Therefore it is that the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than a solemn declaration, on the part of a great majority of the Northern people, of hostility to the South, her property and her institutions—nothing less than an open declaration of war—for the triumph of this new theory of Government destroys the property of the South, lays waste her fields, and inaugurates all the horrors of a San Domingo servile insurrection, consigning her citizens to assassinations, and. her wives and daughters to pollution and violation, to gratify the lust of half-civilized Africans.

Texas:

…in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states….
0 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Yesterday's democrats are not today's democrats. That is BS History rewrites. The Civil War wasn't fought over slave rights - there were southern states already talking about abolishing slavery.

The southern states - opposed federal government making laws, in particular to taxes. They didn't like the taxes. The Confederacy only got 35% of it's funding during the war via taxes, compared to a funding of the north of 65% of it spending via taxes.

Split of the union would have bankrupt the US as their markets didn't produce the most popular commodity of tobacco. The south being free to split would have raised high taxes to the north. Both sides had talks of freeing slaves because both sides had common decent people. The trigger was pulled to free slaves and mandate another law to the southern states. Enough was enough - war occurred.

The 1960 drop off of Democratic voting was due to the generation of democrats dying off, and a generation of rebellious youth being republican mixed with television and big church pastors. It made a swing of religion - which typically votes republican.

The really rowdy youths - marked themselves continually as KKK - and continued to support Democratic leaders. They praised Biden's calls of segregation and targeting black criminals with legislations. However - their votes were silenced and their groups disapproved of by the new decent republican voters that took over the southern states.

From the 1970s to modem times - the KKK numbers continuously dropped to their modern numbers right around 11K nationwide. Most - in the south.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y
Yesterday's democrats are not today's democrats. That is BS History rewrites.
>>At least we agree on that.

The Civil War wasn't fought over slave rights - there were southern states already talking about abolishing slavery.
>> IT was *literally* in their casus belli (declaration of war.)

The southern states - opposed federal government making laws, in particular to taxes. They didn't like the taxes. The Confederacy only got 35% of it's funding during the war via taxes, compared to a funding of the north of 65% of it spending via taxes.
>> Please go read the casus belli.

Split of the union would have bankrupt the US as their markets didn't produce the most popular commodity of tobacco.
>> Who harvested the tobacco?

The south being free to split would have raised high taxes to the north. Both sides had talks of freeing slaves because both sides had common decent people. The trigger was pulled to free slaves and mandate another law to the southern states. Enough was enough - war occurred.
>> Wow man. The declaration of war was by the south, to keep slaves. Go back and read their casus belli.
1 up, 3y
The Union collected taxes from the Confederacy and dispensed revenue to them during the Civil War?

Have you ever even visited this dimension?
0 ups, 3y,
2 replies
So... Jefferson Davis' party was not Democratic Party but... something else?
2 ups, 3y
No, and, no.
0 ups, 3y
Modda... More like man chowder.
[deleted]
9 ups, 3y,
2 replies
[deleted]
8 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Juneteenth - was what the Texas slaves said when they were asked what date they were set free, they didn't know the exact date, so they said " dunno, sumtime Juneteenth" . So you are basically right, it is a term created by uneducated black slaves.
8 ups, 3y
Lawdy!
6 ups, 3y
Damn that is funny.
5 ups, 3y
6 ups, 3y,
1 reply
I'M SHARING THAT :0)
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
The apostrophe is not incorrect. Try again.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
So the author meant the salves of a single democrat were freed? You sir are the target audience.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
It’s funny how you brought up the “mistake” in the meme when you made 1 in the prior comment and 3 in the latest one, hypocrite.
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
OMG I really had no idea what level of crazy I was dealing with but you are its (you are wondering if I really used the right version or not are you?) leader. Do you really not understand singular vs plural possessive forms? Democrat's slaves are the slaves of a single Democrat. Democrats' slaves refer to the salves of multiple Democrats. Now I am a hypocrite, lame.
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
#1: You wrote salves, not slaves.
#2&3: It should have been “You, sir, are…”.

Try to keep up, dimwit.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
And you forgot some punctuation after OMG.

And you wrote salves yet again. Lol.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Care to be the hypocrite yet again and complain about someone else’s poor English?
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
Thanks for playing!
3 ups, 3y
Do you need some slave[sic] for those burns?
2 ups, 3y,
2 replies
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
1 up, 3y
I am really proud of him. He spotted a typo and learned the difference between singular and plural possessive use of the apostrophe today. I hope the summer break is fun because 3rd grade will be more challenging.
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
No actual rebuttal, just a lame picture.

I wonder why?
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
I can’t stop laughing. Twice you were so sure you had the correct rule. You even told me I didn’t read the rule. I am the dimwit.
2 ups, 3y
I told you once. Unlike you, I realized my mistake.

You shouldn’t be such a salve[sic] to deflecting from your mistakes.
Show More Comments
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
Mark your Calendar ! Celebrate the day the Republicans freed all the Democrat's Slaves!