 |
|  |
 |
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001 time: 06:32
|
|
Yes, it was the GOP who supported segregation. Yes it was President Lincoln (GOP) who said "If I can save the Union without freeing a slave I will do it. If I can save the Union by freeing all the slaves, I will do it." Yes it was the GOP who
quote: Now, if you believe that such people cannot change and that Thurmon must have remained a segregationist his entire life, I give you Robert F. Byrd, Senate Democrat majority leader and member of the KKK. |
Now where have I said that I support the democrats? And btw, Strom Thurmond was the biggest of weasels. He flip flopped on segregation because he saw how the wind was blowing. He said whatever he could to get elected, which proves that his electorate were racist.
quote: They switched parties when the Democrats went soft on communism and elected McGovern. |
Tell me how Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, a dozen middle eastern and latin american countries constitute a threat to US security. Oh yeah, they don't. Thats not soft on communism. Thats not sending off the poor of america to fight for the rich, elitists whos asses arnt on the line.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by uh Clem
Strom Thurmond switched parties in 1964. The proximate cause was the (Democratic) Johnson administration's push for the Civil Rights bill in Congress.
Goldwater (Republican) voted against it, and carried only Deep South states (plus Arizona) in the presidentail election that year. It's pretty obvious where his support was coming from.
I remember these events quite well.
As always, I have to mention that this is how things were here on Earth; I can't speak for Planet Ned. |
"Byline: Thomas Sowell
Dateline: September 28, 2000
No group votes more solidly for the Democrats than blacks - and no group suffers more as a result than blacks. Political spin makes Democrats the best friends of blacks, the party of civil rights laws, the party of affirmative action and the party of social programs to help the poor in general and blacks in particular. But spin and facts are very different things. The fact is that a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Despite all the media hype about the confederate flag flying over the state capitol in South Carolina, no Republican put that flag there.
The Democrats' Senator Fritz Hollings, who was governor of South Carolina in the 1960s, put that confederate flag there at a time when it was used all across the South as a symbol of resistance to the civil rights movement. With all the criticism of Texas Governor George W. Bush for not telling the state of South Carolina what to do, there was scarcely a word anywhere about Democrat Fritz Hollings. That's the media for you."
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/fo...cks.member.html
Uh Clem, care to tell what party controlled the South when it seceeded? Which party controlled the South through the latter half of the 19th and for most of the 20th. Tell us who supported slavery and who supported segregation?
According to earlier posts here, it was the Republicans. But in truth, it was the Democrats.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Japher
|
 |
Ook! Ook! Ack! Ack! Ack!
Jun 2002 time: 05:32
|
|
We can find racism, or the seemingness of it, in both (or any) party. Democrats, however, are more quick at pointing it out, and a lot better at whinning about until the force the nay-sayer from their political seat. Republicans need to do a better job at this (Robert Byrd).
Democrats also endorse programs to keep the minorities poor. They support legislation to extend welfare, to keep the poor poor, so they can get votes. Then, when they can't figure out what is going on, they hand over their problems to Republicans to fix (i.e. hunger in welfare since Newt got a hold of it).
Democratic party was founded on the basis to oppose Lincoln and anti-slavery laws.
Why anybody is a Democrat is beyond me, yet why any self respecting minority would be a Democrat just baffles me.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999 time: 23:32
|
|
Ned, can you put down your partisan blinders for a minute and take a good look at reality? Let's go over this one more time:
Racist democratics joined the Republican ticket after the Civil Rights Act (put together and pushed by a Democratic administration) and Goldwater's Southern strategy. Nowadays, the South is almost completely Republican. Thus, the Republicans, not the Democrats, inherit most of the political baggage of the South.
quote: No group votes more solidly for the Democrats than blacks - and no group suffers more as a result than blacks. Political spin makes Democrats the best friends of blacks, the party of civil rights laws, the party of affirmative action and the party of social programs to help the poor in general and blacks in particular. But spin and facts are very different things. |
It is the party of civil rights laws, the party of affirmative action, and the party of social programs (if you exclude third parties). Are you trying to tell me that Republicans support these things more than Democrats (now, not many decades years ago)?
quote: The fact is that a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Despite all the media hype about the confederate flag flying over the state capitol in South Carolina, no Republican put that flag there. |
And it's Republicans who want to keep it there. In fact, when Mississippi's Governer recently removed that symbol of hate and racism from the state capitol building, the Republicans got angry and kicked him out of office.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:32
|
|
Here is a fascinating history of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Republican Everett Dirksen organized the Republicans to vote with Northern Democrats to break the filibuster by Southern Democrats.
"On June 10,1964, after an impassioned plea by Dirksen on behalf of the compromise bill, the Senate voted 71 to 29 to close off the civil rights filibuster. Every member of the Senate was present for the vote, including Senator Engle of California who had suffered a stroke and could not speak but pointed to his eye as a sign of his "aye" vote. The margin was four votes larger than the 67 required. It ended 57 days of debate, the longest debate since the cloture rule had been adopted in 1917. Forty four Democrats and 27 Republicans supported cloture; 23 Democrats and 6 Republicans opposed it. "
Earlier in the piece, it shows that the Republicans in the House voted heavily in favor of the Act. It also shows that Republicans had always had a record, 96%, in supporting civil rights legislation since 1933 while the Democrats had an 80% record of opposing such legislation.
"Since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes. "
http://www.congresslink.org/civil/essay.html
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001 time: 06:32
|
|
Thats a new low. Quoting Rush Limbaugh, the hypocrite druggy who didnt go to jail because he's rich and famous.
quote: Lawrence of the Leftist Propaganda, do you truly believe that the civil war was fought over States Rights and that Lincoln was not steadfastly opposed to slavery but actually supported it? |
The civil war was fought over states rights. As for what Lincoln thought, I cant say.
Hey Ned, try reading the 1964 Civil Rights acts.
Title IV Authorized but did not require withdrawal of federal funds from programs which practiced discrimination.
Title III Encouraged the desegregation of public schools and authorized the U. S. AttorneyGeneral to file suits to force desegregation, but did not authorize busing as a means to overcome segregation based on residence.
Title II Outlawed discrimination in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce; exempted private clubs without defining "private," thereby allowing a loophole.
Title V Outlawed discrimination in employment in any business exceeding twenty five people and creates an Equal Employment Opportunities Commission to review complaints, although it lacked meaningful enforcement powers
Maybe the reason why all those repugs supported this legislation is that it doesnt do anything. It 'encourages' desegregation, outlaws descrimination is business over 25 people (how about under 25? why can they still be descriminated against?)
The list goes on.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32. Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|