Racism and The Democratic party

[Big Don]

Wall Street Journal editorial
Very interesting.

 

[CuongNhuka]

my computer cann't find the website http, or so it say's.

 

[michaeledward]

EDIT - You know what ... I need to withdraw this comment. Something about feeding something or other - END EDIT

 

[Big Don]

EDIT - You know what ... I need to withdraw this comment. Something about feeding something or other - END EDIT

Yeah, but a humongous thread bashing republicans isn't trolling...
Right, because republicans are EVIL, right?

 

[Big Don]

my computer cann't find the website http, or so it say's.

I typoed the link, fixed it.

 

[Big Don]

Blacks are "a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race."

--Chief Justice Roger Taney, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1856
Appointed Attorney General by Andrew Jackson in 1831
Appointed Secretary of the Treasury by Andrew Jackson in 1833
Appointed to the Supreme Court by Andrew Jackson in 1836

"I hold that a Negro is not and never ought to be a citizen of the United States. I hold that this government was made on the white basis; made by the white men, for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and should be administered by white men and none others."

--Sen. Stephen A. Douglas (D., Ill.), 1858
Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, 1860

You know, the Lincoln/Douglas debates.

"Republicanism means Negro equality, while the Democratic Party means that the white man is supreme. That is why we Southerners are all Democrats."

--Sen. Ben Tillman (D., S.C.), 1906
Chairman, Committee on Naval Affairs, 1913-19

Our buddy Fritz:

"Everybody likes to go to Geneva. I used to do it for the Law of the Sea conferences and you'd find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva."

--Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D., S.C.) 1993
Chairman, Commerce Committee, 1987-95 and 2001-03
Candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, 1984

Prediction: various posters will claim these quotes are taken out of context, false, or misinterpreted. Odds of prediction:100%

 

[tellner]

Good Lord. It's as predictable as the Sun rising in the East.

The Republicans do something contemptible. So they turn around and accuse the Democrats of the same thing.

Shrubus Minimus the Smirking Chimp goes AWOL and can't be bothered to actually finish duty at the cushy safe post his Daddy got him. So he accuses a real war hero of cowardice.

The Gay Old Pedophiles seem to have real problems keeping their hands off little children, bathroom whores, undercover policemen, other people's wives and sleeping guests. So the Democrats must be sexually immoral.

The Greedy Old Plutocrats own the boardroom, the newsroom, and all the big media outlets from Clear Channel and Fox down to Newhouse and Entercom. But we have a "Liberal Media" which won't take pro-union or civil liberties ads.

Shrubus Maximus, Shrubus Minimus, Swingin' Dick Cheney, Rummie and Saint Ronald The Blessed (Laaa!) sold weapons to Iran, gave Saddam Hussein his poisoned gas and personally assured him he could use it against civilians. They approved the sale of nuclear technology to North Korea. And they created the Taliban. But it's the Dems who are "soft on terrorism".

Anyone who doesn't blindly support the Ghastly Old Patricians' wholesale destruction of every single one of our precious rights and liberties is a friend of the terrorists and "hates America".

And now, Rupert Murdoch's latest conquest has broken all records in hypocrisy and outrageousness. The stated strategy of the Republicans for fifty freaking years has been the checkerboard. Fear the Reds. Fear the Blacks. From the notorious race mixer and racist Strom to Richard "Don't Vote Jewish" Nixon and his explicitly racist "Southern Strategy", Willie Horton, Bob Barr and the White Citizens' Councils, the ethnic cleansing of New Orleans, the explicit purging of Blacks and Latinos from voter roles in Florida and Ohio and on and on and freaking on racism has been the core emotional draw of Party of Jesse Helms, Tom DeLay and Katherine Harris.

And it's the Democrats who are racist.

Those smug bastards are like Caesar. They have a whole lot of Gaul.

 

[Big Don]

Good Lord. It's as predictable as the Sun rising in the East.

The Republicans do something contemptible. So they turn around and accuse the Democrats of the same thing.

Shrubus Minimus the Smirking Chimp goes AWOL and can't be bothered to actually finish duty at the cushy safe post his Daddy got him. So he accuses a real war hero of cowardice.

The Gay Old Pedophiles seem to have real problems keeping their hands off little children, bathroom whores, undercover policemen, other people's wives and sleeping guests. So the Democrats must be sexually immoral.

The Greedy Old Plutocrats own the boardroom, the newsroom, and all the big media outlets from Clear Channel and Fox down to Newhouse and Entercom. But we have a "Liberal Media" which won't take pro-union or civil liberties ads.

Shrubus Maximus, Shrubus Minimus, Swingin' Dick Cheney, Rummie and Saint Ronald The Blessed (Laaa!) sold weapons to Iran, gave Saddam Hussein his poisoned gas and personally assured him he could use it against civilians. They approved the sale of nuclear technology to North Korea. And they created the Taliban. But it's the Dems who are "soft on terrorism".

Anyone who doesn't blindly support the Ghastly Old Patricians' wholesale destruction of every single one of our precious rights and liberties is a friend of the terrorists and "hates America".

And now, Rupert Murdoch's latest conquest has broken all records in hypocrisy and outrageousness. The stated strategy of the Republicans for fifty freaking years has been the checkerboard. Fear the Reds. Fear the Blacks. From the notorious race mixer and racist Strom to Richard "Don't Vote Jewish" Nixon and his explicitly racist "Southern Strategy", Willie Horton, Bob Barr and the White Citizens' Councils, the ethnic cleansing of New Orleans, the explicit purging of Blacks and Latinos from voter roles in Florida and Ohio and on and on and freaking on racism has been the core emotional draw of Party of Jesse Helms, Tom DeLay and Katherine Harris.

And it's the Democrats who are racist.

Those smug bastards are like Caesar. They have a whole lot of Gaul.

So, none of those quotes are accurate? Or, are those things ok, as long as we acknowledge the EVILNESS

and STUPIDITY

of the republicans? Are these some
of the
ruthless republicans who

own the boardroom, the newsroom, and all the big media outlets

?
Is the indisputable fact that the republican party was Founded in 1854 by anti-slavery expansion activists hurtfull in some way?
Or that Republican (and thus, evil bastard) Dwight Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights act of 1957, which was proposed by his Attorney General Herbert Brownell shamefull?
Or that Ike also signed the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which democrats fought?
Or that more republican members of Congress voted for the Civil Rights act of 1964?

The original House version:

• Democratic Party: 153-96 (64%-39%)
• Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

The Senate version:

• Democratic Party: 46-22 (68%-32%)
• Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:

• Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
• Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)

• Yeah, those republicans are racist bastards all right...

 

[Big Don]

How about the fact that the (other) main target of the KKK's attacks after it's inception were republicans?
The facts probably aren't important when they show republicans in a good light though, are they?

 

[Tez3]

The weirdest thing I read last week was that political commentators were saying people wouldn't vote for Hilary Clinton because they wouldn't want to watch a woman aging in public!

Can someone before your election make a thread please for us non Americans explaining in simple unpolitical terms all thats happening? We have huge coverage of the elections in our media which assumes that we actually understand all the terms etc. Whether people like it or not what goes on in America politically affects us all ie Iraq, oil prices etc. In the UK we have the 'special relationship' and it's nice to know who's who exactly. yes I'm sure wikipedia could supply terms etc but you guys are the ones on the ground!!

Okay, time out over- fight on!

 

[tellner]

How about the fact that the (other) main target of the KKK's attacks after it's inception were republicans?
The facts probably aren't important when they show republicans in a good light though, are they?

Nice try. After Reconstruction the entire South was Jim Crow all the way. The South, including the Klan, tended Democratic for several decades. But what split Party was the Dixiecrat walkout in 1948. Southern Democrats led by Strom Thurmond walked out and joined the Republicans because they could not stand Truman's support for civil rights for Black people. We note that Strom's deeply held segregationist principles did not extend as far as his genitals.

As Kennedy and Johnson took the horrible un-American position that the Negro should be able to eat at the same restaurants, vote in the same elections and otherwise be treated like human beings White Southerners fled screaming into the arms of the GOP which has stood against civil rights for dark skinned people ever since.

We started off as a very racist country. No doubt about it. We have made an awful lot of progress in the last sixty years. In that time the Republican Party always stood firmly against it from the EEOC and the Voting Rights Act to Brown vs. the Board of Education and the end of miscegenation laws. The South switched over to the Republicans almost entirely because the GOP stood against civil rights, against integration and for Jim Crow.

And that's simply the truth. The Democratic Party changed for the better. The Republicans didn't and made every effort to appeal to the worst of the South - the Klan and its disgusting ilk.

 

[michaeledward]

Tez3, it is probably not possible for any of us Yankee's to answer your question. Sadly. You see, those of us who pay attention, develop strong feelings about what is occurring. And the equal number of us who don't pay attention, have even less understanding than you.

So, when you read my posts, you need to understand that I come at almost all issues in our politics from the point of view of a collectivist; we are all in this together, two heads are better than one, each according to their gifts,

On the other side, you will find the 'rugged individualists'; the self made man, personal responsibility, or my favorite (biased) description "hooray for me, and to hell with everyone else.

Between these two opinions, and actually pulling the strings, are the large, now multinational corporations, that seek to influence the discussion for their betterment (the top one half of one percent). They own the media, the military, the medicine and other industries. And if they can get the government to take the people's money and attention, and re-distribute it to themselves, they are happy. But, because they own the media (GE Disney Viacom), they keep the airwaves and papers filled with 'Bread and Circuses' to amuse and distract the public; lest we see what is really happening.

Just this past week, our Federal Communications Commission, a government body that is supposed to ensure that the broadcast spectrum of radio and television signals that travel over the public airwaves actually serves the public, as handed over more power and control to business. It is actually pretty similiar to when a 'President' is some third rate country shuts down all the media in their country ~ so he can control the message. I think Mussaraff was the latest tin horn dictator to pull that stunt.

So, Tez3, I'm sorry ... I can't answer your question.

But, related to this thread, in 1964 the Democratic President and Democratic Congress passed the 'Civil Rights Act' - which attempted to make good on the Promises of President Lincoln at the end of our Civil War. Directly because of the passage of this legislation, many bigotted members of the Democratic Party - primarily from Southern States - switched parties and became Republicans. So, there is a measure of truth in what Big Don says; many of the Democrats in the American South through the first half of the last century were racist. In 1964, most of those left the party and became Republicans. And I suppose we could even connect a thread from that party re-alignment to the anti-immigration language we hear today by Republicans like Tom Tancredo.

Hope that helps.

 

[tellner]

michael, it started earlier with Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats in 1948

 

[Big Don]

Nice try. In that time the Republican Party always stood firmly against it from the EEOC and the Voting Rights Act to Brown vs. the Board of Education and the end of miscegenation laws. The South switched over to the Republicans almost entirely because the GOP stood against civil rights, against integration and for Jim Crow.

And that's simply the truth. The Democratic Party changed for the better. The Republicans didn't and made every effort to appeal to the worst of the South - the Klan and its disgusting ilk.

Gee, Did I miss something, or did IKE nominate Earl Warren to the USSC?
PBS article

The Democratic Party identified itself as the "white man's party" and demonized the Republican Party as being "Negro dominated," even though whites were in control. Determined to re-capture the South, Southern Democrats "redeemed" state after state -- sometimes peacefully, other times by fraud and violence. By 1877, when Reconstruction was officially over, the Democratic Party controlled every Southern state.

The South remained a one-party region until the Civil Rights movement began in the 1960s. Northern Democrats, most of whom had prejudicial attitudes towards blacks, offered no challenge to the discriminatory policies of the Southern Democrats.

Those evil racist bastards!
How dare the republicans call themselves the "white man's party"?
Wait, that was the DEMOCRATS. See, Tellner, you can't just change and obfuscate facts you don't like.

Virginia Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, won both the 1912 and 1916 presidential elections. He encouraged the introduction and passage of discriminatory legislation, such as a bill passed by the House that made interracial marriage in the District of Columbia a felony.

Such tolerance, such diversity, I can hardly stand it!

To ensure the passage of New Deal legislation, Roosevelt could not afford to offend Southern Democrats by challenging the white supremacist system of Jim Crow. Roosevelt did not publicly support civil rights for blacks, and his administration was silent on the issue until the late 1930s, when the First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt, began to speak up on behalf of black Americans

Get that, had his wife not intervened, FDR would have likely continued as he had begun and done NOTHING to help blacks or foster equality.

Byrd has often referred to his Klan membership as a mistake of his youth. As recently as 1997, he told an interviewer he'd encourage young people to become involved in politics, but with this warning: "Be sure you avoid the Ku Klux Klan. Don't get that albatross around your neck. Once you've made that mistake, you inhibit your operations in the political arena." Conservatives repeatedly point up his KKK membership to discredit him today, and his fellow Democratic Senators, as hypocritical. [3]
During the campaign, Byrd's Republican opponent "uncovered a letter Byrd had handwritten to [...] the KKK Imperial Wizard, recommending a friend as a Kleagle and urging promotion of the Klan throughout the country. The letter was dated 1946 -- when Byrd was 29 years old and long after the time Byrd claimed he had lost interest in the Klan. 'The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia,' Byrd wrote, according to newspaper accounts of that period."ibid
During his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 1958, when Byrd was 41 years old, Byrd defended the Klan. He argued that the KKK had been incorrectly blamed for much of the violence in the South.

Who? Oh, Sen Robert Byrd (D) WV... Wait the KKK wasn't to blame? This will be news to the Blacks an REPUBLICANS they lynched...
It is ok to be biased, when you are right. When your bias is based on lies, and when those same lies are pointed out to you and you still believe it, well, then you are a fool.

 

[Big Don]

By the way, your characterization of Tancredo's stance as "Anti-immigration" is a crock of bull, he, like anyone else who believes in the rule of law, is ANTI- ILLEGAL immigration. It is a subtle, yet important difference.

 

[grydth]

Prior to coming to this Forum, I was completely unaware that any one nation/political party/race/ethnic group had a monopoly on racism, bigotry and other such mental disturbances... and that all members of their opponents were, for all time(s), pure, patriotic, intelligent and just.

Who'd have ever thunk it was all soooooo simple and clear?

 

[Big Don]

Prior to coming to this Forum, I was completely unaware that any one nation/political party/race/ethnic group had a monopoly on racism, bigotry and other such mental disturbances... and that all members of their opponents were, for all time(s), pure, patriotic, intelligent and just.

Who'd have ever thunk it was all soooooo simple and clear?

Oh no, it is just that the democrats lie and try to hide their long history of racism. It sucks when facts get in the way of their arguments...

 

[Ray]

In any group of people of significant size we should expect to see the full range of personalities, motiviations and actions. Surely the democrats have scoundrels and people who seek to do good. Surely the republicans have the same spectrum of personalities and motiviations.

Good ideas will come from the left; they will come from the right. Bad ideas will come from the left and from the right. It would be a sad day when every American thinks exactly alike and holds exactly the same beliefs.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Indeed. But it seems right now we're at the other, equally undesirable extreme where both sides are so polarized that they view the other as the "enemy" almost like opposing gangs. How many times just in the last five years alone can you find an instance where one party may have brought upp a good idea only to have it killed for no other reason than the fact the "wrong side" brought it up?

 

[tellner]

Most of the time. That's the result of turning politics into an exercise in advertising.

Don, really, you are ignoring all the facts and everything remotely related to logic here. It's a simple matter of public record that the Southern Democrats mostly left as a result of civil rights laws. It started in 1948 with Truman vs. the Dixiecrats. The GOP has been against every single bit of legislation and every single program which tries to ensure equal rights for women and those who are not White. It's been the keystone of their electoral strategy for sixty years. That's just the simple fact.

Can Democrats be every bad thing? Of course. As a Party have they moved beyond racism and oppression of women as bedrock policy? Definitely. Have the Republicans done this? Hell, no. Keeping women, Blacks, Latinos and the rest "in their place" has been explicit stated policy since Dewey.