Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Democrat Party Legacy of Racism & Segregation: Part One

By Tom Correa

Dear Friends,

Allow me to put this article into perspective for you. As most of you know, I mostly write about American History, especially 1800s American history. Do you want to know why many blacks fled the South and headed West after the Civil War? Do you want to know who they were fleeing from and why? This has everything to do with the Buffalo Soldiers, Black Cowboys, and 1800s America.

Republicans have fought for freedom from their start! Democrats cannot say the same. In fact, Democrats have tried everything humanly possible to keep the black-American down and segregated in our society. And today, Democrats want to ignore the Democrat Party's legacy of racism and segregation and spin things around to make the public think that Republicans are historically racists and are for segregation. It is a lie!

It is a lie the Democrats are trying hard to spin!

Proof that Democrats are trying to rewrite history came during that fantasy special they called the Democrat National Convention in 2012. One by one, each speaker marched up to the podium and told the crowd how mean and heartless Republicans are. Some were not surprising, such as Liberal student Sandra Fluke (pronounced "Fluck" at Georgetown University) who was angry that American taxpayers are against buying condoms. Yes, she feels the American taxpayer should subsidize her $1,000 a year expenditure on condoms. Oh the humanity!

But the speaker who proves the point best, that yes Democrats are liars trying to rewrite history, was Representative John Lewis. John Lewis used his convention speech to argue that a Republican victory in November will send African-Americans back to the early 1950s and '60s, when Africans-Americans were forcibly denied access to restaurants, public restrooms, transportation and the ballot box. Imagine that for a moment! He knowing said that! Knowing very well that it was in fact Democrats who fought against stopping segregation and equality.

Do you want to know what helped drive Black freed slaves West for better lives, and why they fled to escape the terror put upon them by in the South? It was the Democrat Party.

The Democrat Party's History of Racism and Segregation and Jim Crow Laws and the Democrat's use of terror against both Republicans and Black freed slaves during the 1800s!  Democrats, not Republicans, gained the political power to start segregation in the South that lasted almost 100 years. And yes, for a black-American, John Lewis should not have forgotten that fact of history.

“I’ve seen this before, I lived this before,” he claimed with a straight face, after extensively describing his activism in Southern states in the 1950 and 1960s. "We were met by an angry mob that beat us and left us lying in a pool of blood."

On the floor, the roughly 20,000 Democrat delegates went wild giving Lewis a raucous applause. Their applause was incredible! Loud and thunderous cheered the Democrat delegates! 

Of course, the whole time, either through ignorance or apathy, the Democrats there did not realize that the old man up before them was lying to them. John Lewis’ speech was intended to rally African-Americans to vote for Obama, despite the stalled economy which has increased their unemployment rate. And yes, without skipping a beat like an old con artist, John Lewis had the nerve to say that Republican legislators are trying to suppress voting by African-Americans.

“Too many people struggled and died … [and] we have come to far together to ever turn back,” Lewis said. “We must not be silent. … We must march to the polls like never ever before.”

The event was scheduled to be held in the nearby 74,000 capacity at the Bank of America football stadium, but was relocated to the 20,000 capacity basketball arena because of weather concerns. And yes, the almost 20,000 delegates there went wild. Since Lewis proved that he did not want to deal in facts or the truth, why should his followers. Why bother dealing with facts when you are running a smear campaign based on lies, lies, and more lies!

There is no truth, and there is no evidence, to indicate that Republicans plan to put black-Americans "back in chains" or re-segregate African-Americans as Lewis said. But worse, historically, that old con man knew real well that the Republican Party was in fact established in the 1850s to helped destroy slavery, which it did under the first elected Republican president, Abraham Lincoln.

To help win some support from African-Americans, Republican nominee Mitt Romney has argued he can spur the economy and boost the employment and wealth of all Americans. But honestly, Democrats don't want to hear that because they are too busy painting him and other Republicans as "slave owners".

Of course none of that matters when you are in the process of re-writing history. And that is exactly what John Lewis and other Democrats are doing these days. Democrats want people to forget that after they perfected racism, they created the KKK and invented Segregation in the South.

No matter what kind of lies Democrats want to pass, American History does not lie. And yes, our history tells a story of a Democrat Party legacy of racism and segregation only matched by South Africa's apartheid government. After all, Democrats used a system of apartheid in our South long before South Africa ever did!
Democratic Party Campaign Advertisement 1860s

In 1860, because the pro-slavery Democrats wanted to keep their slave "property" -- they instead handed the newly formed anti-slavery Republican Party the presidential election that year. Democrats love of slavery made Republican Abraham Lincoln the 16th President of the United States.

It was pro-slavery Democrats who were at the root cause of the American Civil War. It was over slavery pure and simple. And yes, even thought there are some who will say it was about "states rights" - the fact remains that the "states rights" they were talking about was the Southern states right to keep and sell slaves. Something Republicans were against and Democrats were for!
During the Civil War, Abe Lincoln wanted to reunify the states at any cost. It was hard-line Republicans who forced President Lincoln and proclaim the Emancipation Proclamation which freed black-Americans. The Union victory in the Civil War may have given some 4 million slaves their freedom, but African Americans faced a new onslaught of obstacles and injustices during the Reconstruction Era from 1865 to 1877. By late 1865, when the 13th Amendment officially outlawed the institution of slavery, the question of freed blacks' status in the postwar South was still very much unresolved.

Under the lenient Reconstruction Era policies of Republican President Andrew Johnson, Southern Democrats reestablished civil authority in the former Confederate states in 1865 and 1866. During that time Democrats immediately enacted a series of restrictive laws known as "Black Codes," which were laws designed to restrict the activity freed blacks and ensure their availability as a labor force now that slavery had been abolished. For instance, many states required blacks to sign yearly labor contracts; if they refused, they risked being arrested as vagrants and fined or forced into unpaid labor.

Republicans became outraged over the "black codes," and blamed President Andrew Johnson's policies. By late 1866, control over Reconstruction had shifted to the Republican Party who controlled Congress. And yes, Republicans coined the term "Civil Rights."

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 -- Democrats Were Against Giving Rights To Black Americans

It was something long overdue for black-Americans. The Republicans enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which became a federal law mainly intended to protect the civil rights of African-Americans, in the wake of the American Civil War.

It was formally titled "An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their vindication, the Act declared that people born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power are entitled to be citizens, without regard to race, color, or previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude."
A similar provision was written a few months later in the proposed Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Regarding citizenship by birth in the U.S.: "...all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States."

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 also said that any citizen has the same right as a white citizen to make and enforce contracts, sue and be sued, give evidence in court, and inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property. Persons who denied these rights to former slaves were guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction faced a fine not exceeding $1,000, or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both.

It was intended to provide the freedmen (freed slaves) with the full range of civil rights that were enjoyed by other citizens. This statute was a major part of general federal policy during the Reconstruction era.

Interestingly, parts of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 are still in effect in the 21st century, according to the United States Code: All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and "exactions" of every kind, and to no other.

This section of the United States Code is based on section one of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The Democrat response to the Civil Right Act of 1866 was anger and resentment. And yes, Democrats benefited from the white resentment of Republican administrators and Reconstructionist who helped the newly freed slaves. Their political power steadily grew stronger in the South. Reconstruction after the war, and the consequent hostility to the Republican Party, benefited the Democrat Party. As hostilities grew, Southern Democrats gained political power and created the Ku Klux Klan, the White League, and the Red Shirts to enforce their will.
During the Civil War, Democrats made up the majority of the Confederate Army. After the war, returning Confederate soldiers from Pulaski, Tennessee, created the original Ku Klux Klan during Reconstruction. In actuality, the Ku Klux Klan was one among a number of secret, oath-bound organizations using violence. Others were the Southern Cross in New Orleans (1865) and the Knights of the White Camelia (1867) in Louisiana.

Known as the KKK, historians generally see the KKK as part of the post Civil War insurgent violence related not only to the high number of veterans in the population, but also to their effort to control the dramatically changed social situation by using extrajudicial means to restore white supremacy by the Democrat Party.

In 1866, Mississippi Governor William L. Sharkey reported that disorder, lack of control and lawlessness were widespread. In some states armed bands of Confederate soldiers roamed at will. The Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party and they used public violence against blacks and Republicans as intimidation. They whipped the white Republicans and burned their houses. They attacked and killed the freed blacks and left their bodies on the roads.

Former Confederate Brigadier General George Gordon developed the "Prescript," or Ku Klux Klan dogma. Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, or a particular group or organization. It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it can not be changed or discarded.

The KKK "Prescript" set forth the white supremacist belief system. For instance, an applicant should be asked if he was in favor of "a white man's government", "the re-enfranchisement and emancipation of the white men of the South, and the restitution of the Southern people to all their rights."

The latter is a reference to the Ironclad Oath, which stripped the vote from white persons who refused to swear that they had not borne arms against the Union. Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest became Grand Wizard, claiming to be the Klan's national leader. Gordon was elected as a Democrat to the Sixtieth, Sixty-first, and Sixty-second Congresses. He was a Democrat member of the United States House of Representatives for the 10th congressional district of Tennessee.

In an 1868 newspaper interview, Democrat Party hero Nathan Bedford Forrest stated that the Klan's primary opposition was to the Republican state governments, rights for freed black slaves, carpetbaggers and scalawags.

Carpetbaggers were Northern Republicans who came South during the Reconstruction Era. Scalawags were Southerners who were pro-Union.

Historian Eric Foner observed: "In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired restoration of white supremacy. Its purposes were political, but political in the broadest sense, for it sought to affect power relations, both public and private, throughout Southern society. It aimed to reverse the interlocking changes sweeping over the South during Reconstruction: to destroy the Republican party's infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life." (per Foner 1989, p. 425–426)

The Klan attacked black members of the Loyal Leagues and intimidated southern Republicans and Freedmen's Bureau workers. When they killed black political leaders, they also took heads of families, along with the leaders of churches and community groups, because these people had many roles in society.

Agents of the Freedmen's Bureau reported weekly assaults and murders of blacks: "Armed guerrilla warfare killed thousands of Negroes; political riots were staged; their causes or occasions were always obscure, their results always certain: ten to one hundred times as many Negroes were killed as whites."

Klan violence benefited the Democrat Party cause as it worked to suppress black voting. More than 2,000 persons were killed, wounded and otherwise injured in Louisiana within a few weeks prior to the Presidential election of November 1868. Although St. Landry Parish had a registered Republican majority of 1,071, after the murders, no Republicans voted in the fall elections. Democrats cast the full vote of the parish for Grant's opponent.

The Democrat controlled KKK killed and wounded more than 200 black Republicans, hunting and chasing them through the woods. Thirteen captives were taken from jail and shot; a half-buried pile of 25 bodies was found in the woods. The KKK made people vote for the Democrat Party and gave them certificates of the fact.

In the April 1868 Georgia gubernatorial election, Columbia County cast 1,222 votes for Republican Rufus Bullock. By the November presidential election, however, Klan intimidation led to suppression of the Republican vote and only one person voted for Ulysses S. Grant.

Democrat Klansmen killed more than 150 African Americans in a county in Florida, and hundreds more in other counties. Freedmen's Bureau records provided a detailed recounting of Klansmen's beatings and murders of freedmen and their white allies.

By 1868, two years after the Klan's creation, its activity was beginning to decrease. Members were hiding behind Klan masks and robes as a way to avoid prosecution for freelance violence. Union Army veterans in mountainous Blount County, Alabama, organized "the anti-Ku Klux". They put an end to violence by threatening Klansmen with reprisals unless they stopped whipping Unionists and burning black churches and schools. Armed blacks formed their own defense in Bennettsville, South Carolina and patrolled the streets to protect their homes.

Northern sentiment gathered to crack down on the Klan, even though - believe it or not - some Democrats at the national level questioned whether the Klan really existed or believed that it was "just a creation of nervous Southern Republican governors."

The south had long been a Democrat stronghold, favoring a state's right to legal slavery and post-Civil War segregation. In addition, the ranks of the fledgling Ku Klux Klan were composed almost entirely of white Democrats angry over poor treatment by northerners and bent on reversing the policies of Reconstruction.

The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 fought against Democrat Terrorism in the South. 

The second Republican attempt to ensure rights for black-Americans was the Civil Rights Act of 1871. It was also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871.

In January 1871, Pennsylvania Republican Senator John Scott convened a Congressional committee which took testimony from 52 witnesses about Klan terrorist atrocities. It was political terrorism sponsored by the Democrat Party of the time. The committee accumulated 12 volumes of horrifying testimony which established that the Ku Klux Klan was acting as the military arm of the Democrat Party in the South.

In February, former Union General and Congressman Benjamin Franklin Butler of Massachusetts wrote and introduced the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (Ku Klux Klan Act). This added to the enmity that southern white Democrats bore toward him. While the bill was being considered, further violence in the South swung support for its passage. The Governor of South Carolina appealed for federal troops to assist his efforts in keeping control of the state.

A riot and massacre in a Meridian, Mississippi, courthouse were reported, from which a black state representative escaped only by taking to the woods. The 1871 Civil Rights Act allowed President Ulysses S. Grant to use troops and suspend Habeas Corpus if need be.

In April of 1871, President Ulysses S. Grant signed Butler's legislation. The Ku Klux Klan Act was used by the Federal government together with the 1870 Force Act, another act that President Grant signed, to enforce the civil rights provisions for individuals under the Fourteenth Amendment of Constitution.

The Force Act of 1870 was formally known as, "An Act to enforce the Right of Citizens of the United States to vote in the several States of this Union, and for other Purposes."  It was a Republican effort enacted on May of 1870, to restrict the first wave of the groups that made up the Klan.

In this act, the government banned the use of terror, force or bribery to prevent people from voting because of their race. Other laws banned the KKK entirely. Hundreds of KKK members were arrested and tried as common criminals and terrorists. The first Klan was all but eradicated within a year of federal prosecution.

Interestingly, in 1964 the United States Justice Department charged eighteen individuals under the 1870 US Force Act, with conspiring to deprive Michael Schwerner, James Chaney, and Andrew Goodman of their civil rights by murder because Mississippi officials refused to prosecute their killers for murder, a state crime.

The Democrat Party used the Klan as part of its military wing. The Democrat Party used the KKK as terrorists.

While its people used the Klan as a mask for political crimes, state and local governments seldom acted against them and instead worked with the Klan. African Americans were kept off juries, and in lynching cases all-white juries almost never indicted Ku Klux Klan members because of Democrats in political office.  Fact is Democrats turned a blind eye to lynching as a way of keeping dominance over black men.

When Republican Governor of North Carolina William Woods Holden called out the militia against the Klan in 1870, it added to his unpopularity. Combined with violence and fraud at the polls, the Republicans lost their majority in the state legislature which led to white Democratic legislators' impeaching Holden and removing him from office.

In some areas, other local white para-military organizations such as the White League, Red Shirts, saber clubs, and rifle clubs continued to intimidate and murder black voters - taking over where the KKK left off. 

In 1874, organized white para-military groups were formed in the South. The White League in Louisiana and the Red Shirts in Mississippi, North and South Carolina campaigned openly to get Republicans out of office, intimidated and killed black voters, tried to disrupt organizing and suppressed black voting.

There was nothing secret about the White League or the Red Shirts. They openly used violence and were out in force during the campaigns and elections of 1874 and 1876, contributing to the Democrats regaining power in 1876, against a background of electoral violence.

During the Reconstruction Era, the White League and Red Shirts were the para-military groups described as "the military arm of the Democratic Party."

Through violence and intimidation, its members reduced Republican voting and contributed to the Democrats' taking over control of the south in 1876. After white Democrats regained power, members of the White Leagues and Red Shirts were absorbed into their individual state militias and later in the National Guard. In the former Confederacy and neighboring states, local governments constructed a legal system aimed at re-establishing a society based on white supremacy. Democrat Party controls barred African-Americans from voting.

The Democrats passed legislation known as Jim Crow laws forcefully separating people of color from whites in schools, housing, jobs, and public gathering places.

The first anti-Segregation legislation in the United States was the Republican's Civil Right Act of 1875

What? You say you never heard of the Civil Rights Act of 1875? Well, it was a United States federal law proposed by Republicans in 1870. The act was passed by Congress in February, 1875 and signed by Republican President Ulysses S. Grant in March. And yes, that's quick!

So what's the big deal about the Civil Rights Act of 1875? 

Well, it was supposed to end segregation in the United States! Yes, it is true! And that's the great thing about history, it doesn't lie like liberal politicians do. You see the Republicans controlled Congress in Washington D.C., and pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1875. It was the first time, almost 100 years before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that Republicans tried to end segregation. That's right. Republicans worked for almost 100 years to get segregation stopped in the Democrat held South. And please, take a moment to imagine that for all it's worth.

If it were continued, the Civil Rights Act of 1875 would have guaranteed that every person, regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, was entitled to the same treatment in "public accommodations" - i.e. inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement.

If the Republican Civil Rights Act of 1875 was kept in place, then maybe there would not have been a Brown case, or a need for great men like Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., or the marches, or the dogs and the fight that took place years later in the 1950s and 60s.

The Act made it so that if a violator was found guilty, then the lawbreaker could face a penalty anywhere from $500 to $1,000 and/or 30 days to 1 year in prison. And friends, $500 to $1,000 in the 1870s was equal to $25,000 to $50,000 today.

So yes, if Republicans got there way back then, I believe that there would have been no black and white entrances or restrooms or anything else. I believe we would have been a more color-bind society today for what old anti-slavery Republicans tried to do many many years ago.

The problem they faced was however two fold. First, the law was rarely enforced, especially after the 1876 presidential election when Republicans lost power and the withdrawal of federal troops from the Democrat controlled South took place. And second, by the end of the 1870s, Republicans were absolutely powerless to fight for black-Americans in the Democrat stronghold known as the "Solid South."

I would hope that there is some solace the Republicans can have knowing that later, many years later, the provisions they wrote into their anti-segregation act known as the Civil Rights Act of 1875 would actually be used and enacted into the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fair Housing Act.

Of course the difference between the acts is that today they are backed by the federal government.

Back then, the Supreme Court ruled that the Force Act of 1870 did not give the Federal government power to regulate private actions, but only those by state governments. The result was that as the century went on, African Americans were at the mercy of hostile state governments controlled by Democrats. And yes, Democrats absolutely refused to intervene against private violence and para-military groups.

After Redeemers ended Reconstruction in the 1870s, and following the often extremely-violent disenfranchisement of African Americans led by such "firebreather" white supremacist Democrat politicians as Ben Tillman of South Carolina that took place in the 1880s and 1890s, the South voted Democrat and became known as the "Solid South."

The Civil Rights Cases, in 1883, were a group of five similar cases consolidated into one issue for the United States Supreme Court to review. Believe it or not, the Court held that Congress lacked the Constitutional authority under the enforcement provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment to outlaw racial discrimination by private individuals and organizations, rather than state and local governments.

More particularly, the Court held that the Republican written and passed Civil Rights Act of 1875, which provided that "all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude" was actually unconstitutional. Consequences of the decision were long lasting.

The decision and the political power of the Democrat Party put an end to the attempts by Republicans to ensure the civil rights of blacks and ushered in the widespread segregation of blacks in housing, employment and public life that confined them to second-class citizenship throughout much of the United States until the passage of civil rights legislation in the 1960s in the wake of the Civil Rights Movement.

So when Democrats talk about starting up segregation again, ask yourself which party has worked to end it over a hundred years ago versus which party has tried to keep segregation alive? You'll find that Democrats fought tooth and nail to keep the black man down and states segregated. That included denying black people the right to vote. And through legal maneuvering and violence, Democrats blocked the Civil Rights of black-Americans after the Civil War, And yes, they thought of every devious way of doing it.

Beginning in the 1890s, Democrat controlled states enacted literacy tests, poll taxes, elaborate registration systems, and eventually whites-only Democratic Party primaries to exclude black voters. Poll taxes required citizens to pay a fee to register to vote. These fees kept many poor African Americans, as well as poor whites, from voting.

These racist laws proved very effective. In Mississippi, fewer than 9,000 of the 147,000 voting-age African Americans were registered after 1890. In Louisiana, where more than 130,000 black voters had been registered in 1896, the number had plummeted to 1,342 by 1904.

From the end of the Civil War, African Americans primarily favored the Republican Party due to its overwhelming political and more tangible efforts in achieving abolition, particularly through President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

In the 1890s under Chief Justice Melville Fuller, the Supreme Court of the United States established the separate-but-equal rule. In 1890 a new Louisiana law required railroads to provide “equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored, races.” Outraged, the black community in New Orleans decided to test the rule.

On June 7, 1892, Homer Plessy agreed to be arrested for refusing to move from a seat reserved for whites. Judge John H. Ferguson upheld the law, and the case of Plessy v. Ferguson slowly moved up to the Supreme Court.

On May 18, 1896, the U.S. Supreme Court, with only one dissenting vote, ruled that segregation in America was constitutional. In that case, the Supreme Court in 1896 upheld the constitutionality of social segregation of the "white and colored races" under the "separate but equal" doctrine.

The case came from Louisiana, which in 1890 adopted a law providing for "equal but separate accommodations for the white and colored races" on its railroads. In 1892, passenger Homer Plessy refused to sit in a Jim Crow car and was arrested. He was brought before Judge John H. Ferguson of the Criminal Court for New Orleans, who upheld the state law. The law was challenged in the Supreme Court on grounds that it conflicted with the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.

By a 7-1 vote, the Court said that a state law that "implies merely a legal distinction" between the two races did not conflict with the Thirteenth Amendment forbidding involuntary servitude, nor did it tend to reestablish such a condition.

The Court avoided discussion of the protection granted by the clause in the Fourteenth Amendment that forbids the states to make laws depriving citizens of their "privileges or immunities," but instead cited such laws in other states as a "reasonable" exercise of their authority under the police power.

The purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Court said, was "to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law.... Laws ... requiring their separation ... do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race." The argument against segregation laws was false because of the "assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. If this be so, it is ... solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it."

Many historians believe that that arrest of Homer Plessy in 1892 was part of an organized effort by The Citizen’s Committee to challenge Louisiana’s Separate Car Act.  While many consider the civil rights movement to have begun in the 1950s with Brown, communities were organizing for equal rights much earlier than the 1950s.

Following the Plessy decision, because of the power of the Democrat Party, restrictive legislation based on race continued and expanded steadily, and its reasoning was not overturned until Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka in 1954. But then again, it is apparent that people like Whoopi Goldberg and Representative John Lewis have conveniently forgotten these historical facts. Facts that, even they can't change.

For PART TWO, please click here:

Democrat Party Legacy of Racism & Segregation: Part Two 


  1. Tom I am sure Andy Johnson was a Democrat. Lincoln chose a Democrat to try to keep the union together.

  2. I just love how the jackass in the picture is throwing a fit and jumping up and down. Because only a jackass would behave like that. Wanna throw a temper tantrum? Don't worry, pal. I've got all day. Still not gonna get your way, though.


Thank you for your comment.