Blaise Ingoglia bill would 'cancel' Democratic Party

[ificandream]

Source: Florida Poltics.com/Mike Wright

Sen. Blaise Ingoglia is sponsoring the “Ultimate Cancel Act,” which would eliminate all political parties that once used slavery as part of its platform.

While “Democratic Party” isn’t mentioned in the bill, Ingoglia said that’s his target.

“For years now, leftist activists have been trying to ‘cancel’ people and companies for things they have said or done in the past. This includes the removal of statues and memorials, and the renaming of buildings,” he said. “Using this standard, it would be hypocritical not to cancel the Democratic Party itself for the same reason.”

The measure (SB 1248) would switch Democratic voters to no-party voters or give them the option of choosing another party.

Read more: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/591585-blaise-ingoglia-bill-would-cancel-democratic-party/

---

Of all the stupid, jackass things ... . It's noticeable he doesn't include supporting an insurrection. Wonder why?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

1. Putting the duh in Floriduh

[3auld6phart]

55. Floriduh

The limp dick State.. that’s nwhat it looks on aAtlas..dang.I thought no State could be any where as backwards as Arkansas.

[Mr. Evil]

2. Oh, For Fucks Sake.

Reason #4,362,749 for why we can't have nice things.

[RKP5637]

3. The best I can say is FFS! n/t

[FredGarvin]

4. I cut the board 2 times and it's still too short

Cancelling the cancel.

Dumerica at it's best

[FredGarvin]

5. Gotta admit it, the dude probably pocketed a few grand

from his "donors" by regurgitating this from the script they fed him.

Smart move. Bills gotta be paid and BMW's are not cheap to maintain

[DFW]

6. As long as they also eliminate parties who had a sitting president resign in disgrace............

I'm sure the Republicans will go for that one, right?

[rubbersole]

23. Eliminate parties that start wars based on yellow cake uranium lies.

[PatSeg]

7. Oh for Pete's sake

Doesn't he have something better to do? How does this little stunt serve his constituents? I can't believe these idiots get paid to pull this kind of crap.

[mcar]

8. That's my state senator!

[Warpy]

9. Ah, yes, the wet dream of the Kochs and Mercers

and the rest of the reeking billionaire class. Make democracy illegal, leaving the billionaires as an oligarchy supported by their brain dead toadies.

We can be just like Russia, only without the housing, education, and mass transit.

[orangecrush]

52. +1

[moonshinegnomie]

10. this moron also wants to name a highway rush limbaugh way

[The Wizard]

11. Makes the case for Repubic sterilization.

[brush]

12. Good luck with that, a-hole.

[Xoan]

13. The Stupidity will continue ...

until Americans stop electing Republicans. Full Stop.

[peppertree]

14. Looks like Mussolini - or a casting reject from a bad mafia movie

Same sort of thuggishness, too.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

15. What happens to those Florida dem voters after the divorce?

Extremism going to new lows. We need new vocabulary.

[Beastly Boy]

16. I would propose an amendment to his bill:

Cancel Blaise Ingoglia.

[TeamProg]

17. Florida has gone nuts. nt

[bpj62]

18. Is this Constitutional?

Please note that this bill will pass both housesin the Florida Legislature and DeSantis will sign it into law. Anything to own the libs and create confusion with voting.

[treestar]

54. nope

just another attempt to expand on their fallacy about the Democrats of the past somehow being still relevant today.

Maybe they think they will convince black voters to vote Republican, because Lincoln was one in 1860. Of course, if it still were 1860, he wouldn't have a twitter machine or whatever he is using to get his "message" across.

[peppertree]

56. And I'd bet you an Antebellum mansion that Booth's descendants, are almost all Republicans

To be nostalgic for slavery and Jim Crow in today's South, is (almost always) to be a Republican - just as they were all Dixiecrats until LBJ, Mike Mansfield, and John McCormack shooed them away.

[Seinan Sensei]

19. Ingoglia's bill also might cancel the Southern Baptist Convention

Slavery was once part of their platform, too.

[Wednesdays]

20. Even IF this were to come to fruition,

the Democratic Party would merely disband and then re-form under a new name, with all of the same followers.
So, what would they have accomplished?

[ificandream]

21. Not good when it comes to national elections.

It's really a stupid idea. Hopefully it won't go anywhere.

[LudwigPastorius]

32. Blatantly unconstitutional...

It’s not going anywhere.

[The Grand Illuminist]

39. It is more civil right than constitutional.

As political affiliation is not a protected class.

[LudwigPastorius]

44. The First Amendment right to assemble doesn't cover it?

[William Seger]

27. Maybe they could call themselves the "Democrat Party" (nt)

[NeoGreen]

22. What about 'Involuntary Servitude'?...

... aka those prisoners with jobs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude

How would anyone differentiate between a political party that included Slavery vs Involuntary Servitude in their platform?

[mopinko]

26. esp prison laborers who happened to actually be innocent.

and set up for petty crimes for their labor.
red state thing….

[DownriverDem]

24. That Dem Party

moved to the repub party in 1964. This is nuts.

[multigraincracker]

25. Going that far back, the could name Florida

The Emancipation Proclamation State in honor of their party.

[SunSeeker]

28. They'd have to cancel the Republican Party because that's where the Dixiecrats went. nt

[LoisB]

31. Yep.

[Polybius]

34. Loophole

The bill says if it was ever in a Party platform, and by the time of Dixicrats (50's and 60's) slavery was long abolished. Slavery was never in their official platform.

[former9thward]

37. Yes it was. 1856 and 1860 Democratic Party platforms

3. That the Democratic party will resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or out of it, the agitation of the slavery question under whatever shape or color the attempt may be made.

4. That the Democratic party will faithfully abide by and uphold, the principles laid down in the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1798, and in the report of Mr. Madison to the Virginia Legislature in 1799; that it adopts those principles as constituting one of the main foundations of its political creed, and is resolved to carry them out in their obvious meaning and import.

And that we may more distinctly meet the issue on which a sectional party, subsisting exclusively on slavery agitation, now relies to test the fidelity of the people, North and South, to the Constitution and the Union—

1. Resolved, That claiming fellowship with, and desiring the co-operation of all who regard the preservation of the Union under the Constitution as the paramount issue—and repudiating all sectional parties and platforms concerning domestic slavery, which seek to embroil the States and incite to treason and armed resistance to law in the Territories; and whose avowed purposes, if consummated, must end in civil war and disunion, the American Democracy recognize and adopt the principles contained in the organic laws establishing the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska as embodying the only sound and safe solution of the "slavery question" upon which the great national idea of the people of this whole country can repose in its determined conservatism of the Union—NON-INTERFERENCE BY CONGRESS WITH SLAVERY IN STATE AND TERRITORY, OR IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1856-democratic-party-platform

By 1860 there was some dissent.

2. Inasmuch as difference of opinion exists in the Democratic party as to the nature and extent of the powers of a Territorial Legislature, and as to the powers and duties of Congress, under the Constitution of the United States, over the institution of slavery within the Territories,

Resolved, That the Democratic party will abide by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States upon these questions of Constitutional law.

6. Resolved, That the enactments of the State Legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1860-democratic-party-platform

[SunSeeker]

40. The 1860 Democratic Party is not the same as the modern Democratic Party and you know that.

The parties completely changed and basically switched with Republicans going from being the progressive party to the conservative party, and the Democrats going from being the conservative party to the progressive party.

And I don't think the poster you are responding to is denying that the Democratic Party of the 1800s had slavery in its platform. Odd that you felt compelled to spew all that support for a right wing talking point.

[former9thward]

41. The poster I was replying to said:

Slavery was never in their official platform.

But you say: And I don't think the poster you are responding to is denying that the Democratic Party of the 1800s had slavery in its platform.

Odd that you would deny what is in the post....

[SunSeeker]

42. The "their" in that post was referring to the Republican platform.

If you read my post that it was replying to, it was discussing the GOP platform, not the Democratic platform.

And as you can see in my reply to that poster below, I disagreed that the GOP platform never mentioned slavery and I explained why.

[SunSeeker]

38. The GOP platform incorporated the original US Constitution, which had slavery in it.

Last edited Tue Feb 28, 2023, 07:36 PM - Edit history (2)

The GOP doesn't appear to have a platform now, so their membership is their platform, and their membership is populated by former Dixiecrats and racists. Regardless, when they had an explicit platform, it had language about giving a "rebirth" to the original US Constitution, and the original Constitution has slavery in it, so yeah, they're a party who used to have a platform with slavery in it.

For example, their 2016 platform explicitly said, "We affirm that all legislation, regulation, and official actions must conform to the Constitution’s original meaning as understood at the time the language was adopted." (See Republican Platform 2016, under "A Rebirth of Constitutional Government" pages 9-10, https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/2016-republican-party-platform#rebirth)

Well, the US Constitution at the time it was adopted not only mentioned slavery, but protected it. The specific clauses of the Constitution related to slavery were the Three-Fifths Clause (Article I, Section 2), the ban on Congress ending the slave trade for twenty years (Article I, Section 9), the fugitive slave clause, and the slave insurrections clause (Article I, Section 8). https://billofrightsinstitute.org/essays/slavery-and-the-constitution

Of course now the US Constitution has the 13th Amendment which states, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States," but that Amendment did not exist at the time the original Constitution was adopted.

[Polybius]

43. A bit of a stretch

Saying you want the constitution as originally intended isn't exactly same as having it in their platform. The word "slavery" was never in theirs.

[SunSeeker]

45. How is it a stretch when the Constitution as originally intended protected slavery?

I mean, it's a lot less of a stretch than claiming the Democratic Party of the 1860s is the same as the Democratic Party of today.

[Polybius]

46. No one is claiming that it's the same Party

Both have flipped, ours for the better.

[SunSeeker]

48. Literally every Republican claims the Democratic Party of 1860 and of today are the same.

Even though most Republicans know better. They just do it to smear Democrats and to deflect from their own racist positions.

[Polybius]

49. Then they are idiots

Lincoln would hate Trumpers.

[Catherine Vincent]

29. Then I say cancel every Republican that uttered the words

Democrat Plantation.

[LoisB]

30. At least the Democratic Party moved FORWARD, the Republican Party is daily marching

BACKWARD. Is there a MAGAT committee somewhere that thinks up these insane proposals?

[maxsolomon]

33. Legislating as Trolling.

Politics > Governing.

[XorXor]

35. This is really just trolling and not much different than "shitposting" on internet message boards

Except these people are elected officials and could in theory cause real damage if they continue to get elected.

[Otterdaemmerung]

36. "Let's have those conversations."

Sure, let’s have the conversation about how the racists and segregationists in the Democratic Party became Dixiecrats and then Republicans. Let’s talk about how the faction that defended slavery in the Civil War era were CONSERVATIVES, regardless of party name, and are the same faction that pushed Jim Crow laws, resisted integration, and continue to oppose basic civil rights for women, LGBT+ people, African-Americans, and everyone else who isn’t a WASP.
The Democratic Party shrugged off its bigots and moved forward. The Republican Party has embraced outright lies, Q-Anonsense, conspiracy theories, disproven economic theory, and fascist white-nationalism.

[SunSeeker]

47. Exactly. The Republican Party of today is NOT the "Party of Lincoln."

It's just the opposite.

Plus, this proposed legislation on the face of it violates the 1st and 14th Amendments of all Democrats, i.e. over half of American voters. And the vast majority of African Americans are members of the Democratic Party. This legislation discriminates against African Americans by disenrolling them from the party of their choice. Party of Lincoln my ass. More like the party of Jim Crow.

[J_William_Ryan]

50. "The First Amendment right to assemble doesn't cover it?"

It would violate the First Amendment right to freedom of association.

Not that neo-fascist conservatives care about the Constitution and the rights of citizens, of course.

[MayReasonRule]

51. Neo-Fascist Conservatives are Y'all Qaeda GOP Nat-C Fascists

I agree, they absolutely do not care about either our Constitution nor, the rights of our citizenry.

They have three goals:

Intimidation
Incarceration
Extermination

...of anyone or anything that dare impede their ongoing, depraved crimes against our populace, and humanity writ large.

VOTE!!!

May reason rule.

[treestar]

53. I guess he forgot about the First Amendment

Nobody cancelled his dumb ass.

[2live is 2fly]

57. If these reactionary peckerwoods ever manage to pass this bill, it'll jump-up &

bite-em in their vile ass' (backfire). Democrats (the good-guys) will be able to wash our hands of any (old party) negatives while embracing both old (and new party) positives. Lets see, what shall we call ourselves??? How about, the New Common Sense Progressive Democrats!