Martin Luther King was a republican shot by a Democrat

[Misty]

"It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s."

Why Martin Luther King Was Republican | Conservative News, Views & Books


"Ray arrived in Los Angeles on November 19. While in L.A., Ray attended a local bartending school and took dance lessons. His chief interest, however, was the George Wallace presidential campaign. Ray harbored a strong prejudice against African Americans and was quickly drawn to Wallace’s segregationist platform. He spent much of his time in Los Angeles volunteering at the Wallace campaign headquarters in North Hollywood."

James Earl Ray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

George Corley Wallace Jr. (August 25, 1919 – September 13, 1998) was an American politician and the 45th governor of Alabama, having served two nonconsecutive terms and two consecutive terms: 1963–1967, 1971–1979 and 1983–1987.After four runs for U.S. president (three as a Democrat).

George Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Misty]

"Democrats believe that their party has always been the "party of civil rights"; that theirs was the side that fought against slavery, and for equal rights, citizenship, and the right of blacks to vote, even women's suffrage. In fact, they (democrats) have been on the wrong side of every single one of these civil rights issues, and more--much more."

"The Republican Policy Committee of the United States House of Representatives, to celebrate 150 years since the founding of the Republican Party, have put together a calendar that tracks their achievements in advancing individual freedom."

"Al Franken, feeling the need to respond to the calender, yet unable to refute any of the items in the calender by factual means, resorts to childish means: he makes fun of the fact some of the dates of the achievements listed on the calender are old. Why this seems relevant to Franken, in view of the fact that the calender celebrates 150 years of achievements, is not immediately apparent. Franken's intellectual powers seldom seem more limited than they do in this opinion piece. He, unlike the rank and file of his party, is part of the misinformation machine."

*Al Franken: "Now, it is true that Republicans have been involved in civil rights issues for a century and a half. For the first 100 or so years, they were the party that was "for" civil rights.
Then they switched sides with the Democrats, and for half a century they've been more involved on the "against" side."

"The first paragraph is right, the second is what he wants you to believe; there was no switching of sides--the Democrats merely switched their rhetoric.

Everything I Know Is Wrong: History of the Republican Party

 

[Truthmatters]

who shot MLK????

 

[rightwinger]

Martin Luther King was not Republican
His father was

James Earl Ray supported George Wallace because he was a segregationist not because he was a Democrat

 

[Truthmatters]

why do you REFUSE to say or write democractic party?


full of lies and distortion arent you

 

[Misty]

""The so-called “Dixiecrats” remained Democrats and did not migrate to the Republican Party. *The Dixiecrats were a group of Southern Democrats who, in the 1948 national election, formed a third party, the State’s Rights Democratic Party with the slogan: *“Segregation Forever!” *Even so, they continued to be Democrats for all local and state elections, as well as for all future national elections."

Frequently Asked Questions | National Black Republican Association

 

[Misty]

"While hiding the racist past of the Democratic Party, Obama refuses to give credit to the Republican Party that: (1) started in 1854 as the anti-slavery party and fought to free blacks from slavery; (2) amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom, citizenship and the right to vote; (3) started the NAACP to stop the Democrats from lynching blacks; (4) passed the civil rights laws of the 1860's that were overturned by the Democrats when they took over Congress in 1892; (5) founded the HBCUs; (6) started affirmative action enforcement in 1969 to help blacks get jobs and contracts based on merit; and (7) fought the Democrats for over six decades until Republicans finally achieved passage of the civil rights laws of the 1950's and 1960's under the leadership of Republican Senator Everett Dirksen of Illinois.

Black Democrats Vs. Black Republicans (In pictures and deeds) :: Political News and commentaries :: Hyscience

 

[rightwinger]

I love these threads

They remind voters of what a great party the GOP was 50 years ago

 

[Pheonixops]

Thanks for the laugh Misty! Let's say that your assertion is correct; was what I am going to list below, the republican agenda and do you agree with Martin Luther King Jr. (the "republican") stances?

"A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for him, to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis." To do this he expressed support for quotas. In a 1968 Playboy interview, he said, "If a city has a 30% Negro population, then it is logical to assume that Negroes should have at least 30% of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas." King was more than just talk in this regard. Working through his Operation Breadbasket, King threatened boycotts of businesses that did not hire blacks in proportion to their population. "

"King was even an early proponent of reparations. In his 1964 book, Why We Can’t Wait, he wrote,
No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries…Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of a the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American Negroes. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law."

"King also took stands that most in the Christian Right would disagree with. When asked about the Supreme Court’s decision to ban school prayer, King responded,

I endorse it. I think it was correct. Contrary to what many have said, it sought to outlaw neither prayer nor belief in god. In a pluralistic society such as ours, who is to determine what prayer shall be spoken and by whom? Legally, constitutionally or otherwise, the state certainly has no such right."

"King of course was a great opponent of the free economy. In a speech in front of his staff in 1966 he said,

You can’t talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can’t talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You’re really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry… Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong…with capitalism… There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a Democratic Socialism."

 

[rightwinger]

I love how conservatives hounded Martin Luther King as a Communist while he was alive and now they claim him as their own

 

[koshergrl]

Uh huh.

It was the KENNEDYS who were concerned about his communism, genius:

snopes.com: Four Things You Didn't Know About Martin Luther King

 

[Pheonixops]

I love how conservatives hounded Martin Luther King as a Communist while he was alive and now they claim him as their own

Yep, that's because the conservatives doing that are full of shit and hypocrisy. Have you ever read about "Mr. Conservative" William F. Buckley's stances on the Civil Rights Movement during that era? Where were all of the conservatives who fought for and not against the Civil Rights movement?

 

[ClosedCaption]

First Hitler now this....20 years from now GWB will be a Liberal and 9/11 was Bill Clintons fault (they are working on this one now btw)

 

[ClosedCaption]

Thanks for the laugh Misty! Let's say that your assertion is correct; was what I am going to list below, the republican agenda and do you agree with Martin Luther King Jr. (the "republican") stances?

"A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for him, to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis." To do this he expressed support for quotas. In a 1968 Playboy interview, he said, "If a city has a 30% Negro population, then it is logical to assume that Negroes should have at least 30% of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas." King was more than just talk in this regard. Working through his Operation Breadbasket, King threatened boycotts of businesses that did not hire blacks in proportion to their population. "

"King was even an early proponent of reparations. In his 1964 book, Why We Can’t Wait, he wrote,
No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries…Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of a the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American Negroes. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law."

"King also took stands that most in the Christian Right would disagree with. When asked about the Supreme Court’s decision to ban school prayer, King responded,

I endorse it. I think it was correct. Contrary to what many have said, it sought to outlaw neither prayer nor belief in god. In a pluralistic society such as ours, who is to determine what prayer shall be spoken and by whom? Legally, constitutionally or otherwise, the state certainly has no such right."

"King of course was a great opponent of the free economy. In a speech in front of his staff in 1966 he said,

You can’t talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can’t talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You’re really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry… Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong…with capitalism… There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a Democratic Socialism."

 

[t_polkow]

"It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s."

Why Martin Luther King Was Republican | Conservative News, Views & Books


"Ray arrived in Los Angeles on November 19. While in L.A., Ray attended a local bartending school and took dance lessons. His chief interest, however, was the George Wallace presidential campaign. Ray harbored a strong prejudice against African Americans and was quickly drawn to Wallace’s segregationist platform. He spent much of his time in Los Angeles volunteering at the Wallace campaign headquarters in North Hollywood."

James Earl Ray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

George Corley Wallace Jr. (August 25, 1919 – September 13, 1998) was an American politician and the 45th governor of Alabama, having served two nonconsecutive terms and two consecutive terms: 1963–1967, 1971–1979 and 1983–1987.After four runs for U.S. president (three as a Democrat).

George Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dr King was killed by a Cracker in Jesusland , he was their to march in support of the sanitation workers.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

LBJ Ordered the hit on MLK

on Malcolm X too

 

[rightwinger]

LBJ Ordered the hit on MLK

on Malcolm X too

LBJ shot JR in the shower

 

[katsteve2012]

I love how conservatives hounded Martin Luther King as a Communist while he was alive and now they claim him as their own

Yep, that's because the conservatives doing that are full of shit and hypocrisy. Have you ever read about "Mr. Conservative" William F. Buckley's stances on the Civil Rights Movement during that era? Where were all of the conservatives who fought for and not against the Civil Rights movement?

Correct me if I am wrong. But as I recall, sitting around the dinner table with my elders when the Civil Rights act of 1964 was in the decision process, it was still a primarily "North and South" issue, with the south being backward in both parties.


Basically meaning that as always, the southern Democrats AND Republicans opposed the bill, and it was the liberals in BOTH parties that backed it. I was talking to an uncle of mine who is almost 90 years old now, and he emailed me the distribution of how it was voted in, and it looked like this:


The bill was supported by people in both parties, but introduced and signed into law by Democrats (JFK and LBJ). Johnson commented after signing it into law that he had just handed the southern states to the Republicans for probably the next century. Guess he was right.


Vote totals

Totals are in "Yea-Nay" format:

* The original House version: 290-130 (69%-31%)
* The Senate version: 73-27 (73%-27%)
* The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%-30%)

[edit] By party

The original House version:[9]

* Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
* Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

The Senate version:[9]

* Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
* Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]

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

[edit] By party and region

Note : "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:

* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)

So in retrospect, it was NOT a brownie point for conservatives, but it was the liberal side of both parties.

Your thoughts?

 

[Pheonixops]

I love how conservatives hounded Martin Luther King as a Communist while he was alive and now they claim him as their own

Yep, that's because the conservatives doing that are full of shit and hypocrisy. Have you ever read about "Mr. Conservative" William F. Buckley's stances on the Civil Rights Movement during that era? Where were all of the conservatives who fought for and not against the Civil Rights movement?

Correct me if I am wrong. But as I recall, sitting around the dinner table with my elders when the Civil Rights act of 1964 was in the decision process, it was still a primarily "North and South" issue, with the south being backward in both parties.


Basically meaning that as always, the southern Democrats AND Republicans opposed the bill, and it was the liberals in BOTH parties that backed it. I was talking to an uncle of mine who is almost 90 years old now, and he emailed me the distribution of how it was voted in, and it looked like this:


The bill was supported by people in both parties, but introduced and signed into law by Democrats (JFK and LBJ). Johnson commented after signing it into law that he had just handed the southern states to the Republicans for probably the next century. Guess he was right.


Vote totals

Totals are in "Yea-Nay" format:

* The original House version: 290-130 (69%-31%)
* The Senate version: 73-27 (73%-27%)
* The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%-30%)

[edit] By party

The original House version:[9]

* Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
* Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

The Senate version:[9]

* Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
* Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]

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

[edit] By party and region

Note : "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:

* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)

So in retrospect, it was NOT a brownie point for conservatives, but it was the liberal side of both parties.

Your thoughts?

You are 100% correct brother! The white conservatives and black accommodationists respectively were against and wanted to slow down the Civil Rights struggle. The Liberals of this country were and are fighting for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.

 

[S.J.]

Democrats have always been racist. They were the slave owners, then they were the segregationists who started the KKK, then they filibustered the civil rights act in '64. They finally found a way to keep blacks on the plantation - Welfare. It's been working great for 50 years now.