150 Years Ago Today Republicans Freed the Slaves

[JakeStarkey]

Many Republicans are hating is the point, and we have to change that where we can.

The point is that the GOP is a right wing statist progressive party, committed to government growth, as is supported by the party's efforts when in power the last fifty sixty years.

Our GOP is not doing that, Avatar.

I know it's not hating, that's my point.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Slavery in the form of share cropping continued until Lyndon Johnson signed the civil rights laws of the mid 1960's.......100 years after Lincoln put something on paper.

Anyone who thinks slavery ended in the mid 1860's don't read much or didn't live in the southern U S during the 1940's and 1950's. Can you say Ku Klux Klan? A Christian organization by the way.

Paper freedom to blacks meant mass confusion all over the nation. It took nearly 100 years for the southern farmers to give an inch. The only thing that changed after the civil war was Blacks couldn't ride in the front of the bus. Ask Medgar Evers or Martin Luther King. Oh I forgot......you can't do that.

" On Monday, the U.S senate passed a non-binding resolution to apologize for its failure to enact anti-lynching legislation. The resolution states that the Senate "expresses the deepest sympathies and most solemn regrets of the Senate to the descendants of victims of lynching, the ancestors of whom were deprived of life, human dignity and the constitutional protections accorded all citizens of the United States."

More than 200 anti —lynching bills were introduced in congress in the first part of the century and the House of Representatives passed anti-lynching bills three times. However, the legislation was repeatedly blocked by [Democrat] Senators from the South and almost 5,000 people -— mostly African-Americans — were lynched between 1882 and 1968."
Senate Apologizes For Not Enacting Anti-Lynching Legislation, A Look at Journalist and Anti-Lynching Crusader Ida B. Wells


...

And as late as 2005, what happened?

Here are the 20 Senators who
1) refused to co-sponsor the anti-lynching resolution, and
2) refused a roll-call vote so they'd have to put their name on the resolution.

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Christopher Bond (R-MO)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Kent Conrad (D-ND)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Michael Crapo (R-ID)
Michael Enzi (R-WY)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Trent Lott (R-MS)
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Richard Shelby (R-AL)
John Sununu (R-NH)
Craig Thomas (R-WY)
George Voinovich (R-OH)

Notice the overwhelming R's there?

Wall of shame.
​

You really don't seem to understand, so let me explain it to you.


1. Did you read the resolution?

2. If you did, how many times did it lay the blame, correctly, at the feet of the party that blocked the anti-lynching bills?
Guess?

Zero.


3.What does that suggest to the reader, and allow the media to posit?
Right...that it was white folks at fault....all of 'em.

And, by implication, Republicans equally as well as Democrats.


4. Now, go back and read my post: it was Senate Democrats who spent 100 years endorsing, or at least, encouraging, lynching.


That is the shame.

Your lack of education on the topic is almost as large a shame.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You ask if George Wallace a conservative?
and Bull Connor?



Of course they were. Jezuz Christ.

The confederates were conservatives. Democratic conservative.

The later iterations of white supremacists were as well.

All one need do is look at the words of Wallace, they read just like current tea party slosh.

"However, we will not be intimidated by the vultures of the liberal left-wing press. We will not be deceived by their lies and distortions of truth. We will not be swayed by their brutal attacks upon the character and reputation of any honest citizen who dares stand up and fight for liberty . . .

You and I know that that's extremely difficult to do where our newspapers are owned by out-of-state interests. Newspapers which are run and operated by left-wing liberals, Communist sympathizers, and members of the Americans for Democratic Action and other Communist front organizations with high sounding names . . .

It is perfectly obvious from the left-wing liberal press and from the left-wing law journals that what the court is saying behind all the jargon is that they don't like our form of government.

They think they can establish a better one. In order to do so it is necessary that they overthrow our existing form, destroy the democratic institutions created by the people, change the outlook, religion, and philosophy . . . " - George Wallace

Now who does that sound like?

And, now for reality.

a. The most important points: all the segregationists in the Senate were Democrats, and remained same for the rest of their lives…except for two. And they were not conservative.

b. Strom Thurmond became a Republican, albeit 16 years later. Lets see how many of the 12 in the Senate were conservative.

c. Senator Harry Byrd, staunch opponent of anti-communist McCarthy

d. Senator Robert Byrd, proabortion, opposed Gulf Wars, supported ERA, high grades from NARAL and ACLU

e. Senator Allen Ellender, McCarthy opponent, pacifist

f. Senator Sam Ervin, McCarthy opponent, anti-Vietnam War, Nixon antagonist

g. Senator Albert Gore, Sr., McCarthy opponent, anti-Vietnam War

h. Senator James Eastland, strong anti-communist

i. Senator Wm. Fulbright, McCarthy opponent, anti-Vietnam War, big UN supporter

j. Senator Walter F. George, supported TVA, and Great Society programs

k. Senator Ernest Hollings, initiated federal food stamp program, …but supported Clarence Thomas’ nomination

l. Senator Russell Long, led the campaign for Great Society programs

m. Senator Richard Russell, McCarthy opponent, anti-Vietnam War, supported FDR’s New Deal

n. Senator John Stennis, McCarthy opponent, opposed Robert Bork’s nomination

Notice how segregationist positions went hand-in-hand with opposition to McCarthy? Not all Democrats….Robert Kennedy worked for McCarthy, and Senator John F. Kenned refused to censure him.
Covered fully and in detail in Coulter's "Mugged"

 

[Dragonlady]

2. If you did, how many times did it lay the blame, correctly, at the feet of the party that blocked the anti-lynching bills?
Guess?

Zero.

Why does an apology have to lay blame on someone? Why can't you just say "On behalf of the Senate and the people of the United States, we apologize".

Laying blame accomplishes nothing and dilutes the apology. "We're sorry it happened but it wasn't our fault" is not an apology.

 

[paperview]

109th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. RES. 39 Apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
February 7, 2005

Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. FRIST, Mr. REID, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BAYH, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. ENSIGN, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. CORZINE, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. DAYTON, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. DODD, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. STEVENS, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. TALENT, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KOHL, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. NELSON of Florida, Mr. PRYOR, and Mr. SCHUMER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION Apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation.
Whereas the crime of lynching succeeded slavery as the ultimate expression of racism in the United States following Reconstruction;
Whereas lynching was a widely acknowledged practice in the United States until the middle of the 20th century;
Whereas lynching was a crime that occurred throughout the United States, with documented incidents in all but 4 States;
Whereas at least 4,742 people, predominantly African-Americans, were reported lynched in the United States between 1882 and 1968;
Whereas 99 percent of all perpetrators of lynching escaped from punishment by State or local officials;
Whereas lynching prompted African-Americans to form the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and prompted members of B'nai B'rith to found the Anti-Defamation League;
Whereas nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress during the first half of the 20th century;
Whereas, between 1890 and 1952, 7 Presidents petitioned Congress to end lynching;
Whereas, between 1920 and 1940, the House of Representatives passed 3 strong anti-lynching measures;
Whereas protection against lynching was the minimum and most basic of Federal responsibilities, and the Senate considered but failed to enact anti-lynching legislation despite repeated requests by civil rights groups, Presidents, and the House of Representatives to do so;
Whereas the recent publication of `Without Sanctuary: Lynching Photography in America' helped bring greater awareness and proper recognition of the victims of lynching;
Whereas only by coming to terms with history can the United States effectively champion human rights abroad; and
Whereas an apology offered in the spirit of true repentance moves the United States toward reconciliation and may become central to a new understanding, on which improved racial relations can be forged: Now, therefore, be it

• Resolved, That the Senate--
  
  • (1) apologizes to the victims of lynching for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation;
    (2) expresses the deepest sympathies and most solemn regrets of the Senate to the descendants of victims of lynching, the ancestors of whom were deprived of life, human dignity, and the constitutional protections accorded all citizens of the United States; and
    (3) remembers the history of lynching, to ensure that these tragedies will be neither forgotten nor repeated.
    
    
    Full Text of S.Res. 39 (109th): Lynching Victims Senate Apology resolution - GovTrack.us
    

It's a damn shame - in 2005, 19 republican senators refuse to tack their name onto this Resolution. Damn shame.

As shameful as those conservative democrats in the Senate (and a few republicans) who refused to pass anti-lyching legislation.

The difference is, some of those republicans in the list above are still with us and continue to be voted into office.

 

[paperview]

Covered fully and in detail in Coulter's "Mugged"

 

[Againsheila]

Slavery in the form of share cropping continued until Lyndon Johnson signed the civil rights laws of the mid 1960's.......100 years after Lincoln put something on paper.

Anyone who thinks slavery ended in the mid 1860's don't read much or didn't live in the southern U S during the 1940's and 1950's. Can you say Ku Klux Klan? A Christian organization by the way.

Paper freedom to blacks meant mass confusion all over the nation. It took nearly 100 years for the southern farmers to give an inch. The only thing that changed after the civil war was Blacks couldn't ride in the front of the bus. Ask Medgar Evers or Martin Luther King. Oh I forgot......you can't do that.

Just a note, blacks also belonged to the KKK. I know, it shocked me too. google it.

 

[paperview]

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, a few fools did, like a few Jews served the Nazis.

Slavery in the form of share cropping continued until Lyndon Johnson signed the civil rights laws of the mid 1960's.......100 years after Lincoln put something on paper.

Anyone who thinks slavery ended in the mid 1860's don't read much or didn't live in the southern U S during the 1940's and 1950's. Can you say Ku Klux Klan? A Christian organization by the way.

Paper freedom to blacks meant mass confusion all over the nation. It took nearly 100 years for the southern farmers to give an inch. The only thing that changed after the civil war was Blacks couldn't ride in the front of the bus. Ask Medgar Evers or Martin Luther King. Oh I forgot......you can't do that.

Just a note, blacks also belonged to the KKK. I know, it shocked me too. google it.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

You ask if George Wallace a conservative?
and Bull Connor?



Of course they were. Jezuz Christ.

The confederates were conservatives. Democratic conservative.

The later iterations of white supremacists were as well.

All one need do is look at the words of Wallace, they read just like current tea party slosh.

"However, we will not be intimidated by the vultures of the liberal left-wing press. We will not be deceived by their lies and distortions of truth. We will not be swayed by their brutal attacks upon the character and reputation of any honest citizen who dares stand up and fight for liberty . . .

You and I know that that's extremely difficult to do where our newspapers are owned by out-of-state interests. Newspapers which are run and operated by left-wing liberals, Communist sympathizers, and members of the Americans for Democratic Action and other Communist front organizations with high sounding names . . .

It is perfectly obvious from the left-wing liberal press and from the left-wing law journals that what the court is saying behind all the jargon is that they don't like our form of government.

They think they can establish a better one. In order to do so it is necessary that they overthrow our existing form, destroy the democratic institutions created by the people, change the outlook, religion, and philosophy . . . " - George Wallace

Now who does that sound like?

Hmm... Democratic Party Conservative Liberals.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The slavers and the segregationists were conservatives, yes. Now it seems if the Dems and the Pubs have switched.

 

[Avatar4321]

The slavers and the segregationists were conservatives, yes. Now it seems if the Dems and the Pubs have switched.

So Woodrow Wilson, the first Progressive Democrat President, was really a conservative now?

Talk about a rewrite.

 

[Plasmaball]

We need to do it again.

Democrats quickly managed to get those freed slaves descendants back into slavery.

There are alot more people than them in chains.

yes, for the love of god yes. This is what you run on in 2016.

You will get slaughtered. You people are fucking fools.

 

[BlindBoo]

The slavers and the segregationists were conservatives, yes. Now it seems if the Dems and the Pubs have switched.

So Woodrow Wilson, the first Progressive Democrat President, was really a conservative now?

Talk about a rewrite.

He ran against the monopolist before he joined them. He was also a foreign interventionist.

 

[Jroc]

What people on this forums don't understand is this...........party representation. See if any of you had half a brain, or better yet picked up one of the MANY pieces of lititure on the subject, you would see that any social scientist with even an ounce of cred. To their name will tell you this. Party repensetation has changed of the years, the republican party that was licoln and that won the northern states during the civil rights movement is what we would call the democratic party of today. In today's terms the republican party represents the consertives in the USA, this includes .....the kkk, neo nazis, many white power militias in the mid west. So the op is a slow slow slow person, and anyone won agrees with him needs to read some of the social science that is out there.

Conservatives (Republicans) stand for individual liberty unlike Democratic Party who still stand and always have stood for slavery and limited if any liberty

Explain if you can why the Republcian Party opposes same sex marriage and abortion if it supports individual liberty? Explain why the Republican Party opposed the Equal Rights Amendment and the Lily Leadbetter fair pay act if they support individual liberty? Explain if you can the Republican effort to suppress the vote, a movement that has since slowed since the people spoke on November 6, 2012?

Umm...Marriage is a state issue not federal, abortion is also a state issue althoughit is barrick after a certain point sick really. You liberals and your stupid brainless talking points. Making sure only people who are eligible to vote can vote is only voter 'Suppression" in the minds of the liberal voter fraud promoters. "Lily Leadbetter" what a waste of time that was, all for show and more money for the lawyers, You people are an embarrassment

 

[Dragonlady]

Umm...Marriage is a state issue not federal, abortion is also a state issue althoughit is barrick after a certain point sick really. You liberals and your stupid brainless talking points. Making sure only people who are eligible to vote can vote is only voter 'Suppression" in the minds of the liberal voter fraud promoters. You people are an embarrassment

Striking names off voter rolls with in Democratic wards with no evidence that the voter has moved or is otherwise ineligible, but not doing the same thing in Republican wards is not voter suppression? Signing up Republican voters and throwing applications from Democrats in the trash is not voter suppression. Why were all of the voter suppression measure in Republican states? Why were the Republican financed True the Vote people charged with election irregularities?

Every one of the voter vigilante groups was tied to or financed by the RNP.

But nice try.

 

[Jroc]

The slavers and the segregationists were conservatives, yes. Now it seems if the Dems and the Pubs have switched.

In other words I'm a rep whore.... "Slavers and Segregationist" where tyrants not classic liberals, not conservative in today’s sense at all

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Slavers and Segregationist" were tyrants not classic liberals, and many of today's conservatives in the GOP share that sense of the Old South: a disrespect for the decency and dignity of the individual.

Yes, that's right, Jroc, you would happily have been either a slaver or a segregationist.

The Southerners were certainly imperialistic, much like you, for overseas adventures of conquering lesser peoples, at least in their mind.

l

The slavers and the segregationists were conservatives, yes. Now it seems if the Dems and the Pubs have switched.

In other words I'm a rep whore.... "Slavers and Segregationist" where tyrants not classic liberals, not conservative in today’s sense at all

 

[Jroc]

Umm...Marriage is a state issue not federal, abortion is also a state issue althoughit is barrick after a certain point sick really. You liberals and your stupid brainless talking points. Making sure only people who are eligible to vote can vote is only voter 'Suppression" in the minds of the liberal voter fraud promoters. You people are an embarrassment

Striking names off voter rolls with in Democratic wards with no evidence that the voter has moved or is otherwise ineligible, but not doing the same thing in Republican wards is not voter suppression? Signing up Republican voters and throwing applications from Democrats in the trash is not voter suppression. Why were all of the voter suppression measure in Republican states? Why were the Republican financed True the Vote people charged with election irregularities?

Every one of the voter vigilante groups was tied to or financed by the RNP.

But nice try.

Some of you live in your own little made up world, propaganda works well on people like you. Any organized voter fraud is usually on the left. Voter I.D. laws are not voter suppression...now go watch MSNBC, media matters so you'll know what else to say

 

[Jroc]

"Slavers and Segregationist" were tyrants not classic liberals, and many of today's conservatives in the GOP share that sense of the Old South: a disrespect for the decency and dignity of the individual.

Yes, that's right, Jroc, you would happily have been either a slaver or a segregationist.

The Southerners were certainly imperialistic, much like you, for overseas adventures of conquering lesser peoples, at least in their mind.

l

The slavers and the segregationists were conservatives, yes. Now it seems if the Dems and the Pubs have switched.

In other words I'm a rep whore.... "Slavers and Segregationist" where tyrants not classic liberals, not conservative in today’s sense at all

Wow...That was barely coherent you’re a funny little man always seeking approval from the left