Obama pandering on MLK day

[clevergirl]

Northern Republicans supported the Civil Rights movement. So did Northern Democrats.

Southern Republicans most certainly did NOT support the Civil Rights movement. Neither did Southern Democrats. It was a regional thing, not a party thing.

The Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 60s was led by Socialists and Communists, not "Republicans".

How about you cite your claim with name and party affiliation going back to the first bill on CR and then the subsequent bills and how they were voted on and the changes (pork) added. How about you actually do some work on your opinions before stating them as facts.

clevergirl, that is merely your allusion and assertion. It means nothing until YOU give us the evidence because those are YOUR suggestions.

I have. You really need to come up for some air jake...seriously.

 

[clevergirl]

Ok.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There were 94 southern democrats who voted- there were 10 southern republicans. In other words there existed a democratic stronghold in the south. But I digress...you only proved my point and I note you failed to go all the way back-

the first Civil Rights Act, in 1866- was passed by republicans. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was introduced in Eisenhower’s presidency and was the act that kick-started the civil rights legislative program that was to include the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 doesn't have anything at all to do with the Civil Rights movement of the 50s and 60s.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was also overwhelmingly supported by Northern Democrats.

Your insipid insinuation that republicans were a party against civil rights is only proof of your idiocy.

I made no such "insinuation". In fact, I clearly stated that it was not a partisan divide, but a geographical one. Which I also pretty clearly backed up with facts.

from your link:

Howard W. Smith, a Democrat and avid segregationist from Virginia, indicated his intention to keep the bill bottled up indefinitely.

Johnson, who wanted the bill passed as soon as possible, ensured that the bill would be quickly considered by the Senate. Normally, the bill would have been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator James O. Eastland, Democrat from Mississippi. Given Eastland's firm opposition, it seemed impossible that the bill would reach the Senate floor. Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (a republican) took a novel approach to prevent the bill from being relegated to Judiciary Committee limbo.

The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the "Southern Bloc" of 18 southern Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage.

On the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) completed a filibustering address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier opposing the legislation.


further reading

On August 29, 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights Act of 1957 into law. One of the main goals of the act was to help ensure that all African-Americans were ensured their right to vote. It set up the Civil Rights Commission to monitor civil rights abuses. Unfortunately, the bill lost a lot of its teeth due to opposition from southern Democrats. The resulting bill was not universally lauded as many such as Ralph Bunche felt it was worthless in achieving its aims. However, it became the first of many bills and measures to help fight against Jim Crow laws and anti-voting actions in the South.

I don't know what that has to do with anything we're talking about.

No, the insinuation in this thread is that democrats were for civil rights and republicans against them.

The reason the entire history of "civil rights" not merely the Civil Rights Bill of 64, are important to a partisan discussion, is that the impetus for civil rights in the country, originated and found its success, from within the republican party. THAT is why it is not a stretch to understand why MLK's niece made the claim her uncle was a republican. In addition, the further fact that there was such a democratic stronghold of anti civil rights politicians in the South, amplifies, the likely antipathy most black Americans would have had towards the democrat party during MLK's era.

 

[JakeStarkey]

How about you cite your claim with name and party affiliation going back to the first bill on CR and then the subsequent bills and how they were voted on and the changes (pork) added. How about you actually do some work on your opinions before stating them as facts.

clevergirl, that is merely your allusion and assertion. It means nothing until YOU give us the evidence because those are YOUR suggestions.

I have. You really need to come up for some air jake...seriously.

No, you have not. We have been through this before. Your assertions are not evidence.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There were 94 southern democrats who voted- there were 10 southern republicans. In other words there existed a democratic stronghold in the south. But I digress...you only proved my point and I note you failed to go all the way back-

the first Civil Rights Act, in 1866- was passed by republicans. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was introduced in Eisenhower’s presidency and was the act that kick-started the civil rights legislative program that was to include the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

The Civil Rights Act of 1866 doesn't have anything at all to do with the Civil Rights movement of the 50s and 60s.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was also overwhelmingly supported by Northern Democrats.

I made no such "insinuation". In fact, I clearly stated that it was not a partisan divide, but a geographical one. Which I also pretty clearly backed up with facts.

from your link:

Howard W. Smith, a Democrat and avid segregationist from Virginia, indicated his intention to keep the bill bottled up indefinitely.

Johnson, who wanted the bill passed as soon as possible, ensured that the bill would be quickly considered by the Senate. Normally, the bill would have been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator James O. Eastland, Democrat from Mississippi. Given Eastland's firm opposition, it seemed impossible that the bill would reach the Senate floor. Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (a republican) took a novel approach to prevent the bill from being relegated to Judiciary Committee limbo.

The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the "Southern Bloc" of 18 southern Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage.

On the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) completed a filibustering address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier opposing the legislation.


further reading

On August 29, 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights Act of 1957 into law. One of the main goals of the act was to help ensure that all African-Americans were ensured their right to vote. It set up the Civil Rights Commission to monitor civil rights abuses. Unfortunately, the bill lost a lot of its teeth due to opposition from southern Democrats. The resulting bill was not universally lauded as many such as Ralph Bunche felt it was worthless in achieving its aims. However, it became the first of many bills and measures to help fight against Jim Crow laws and anti-voting actions in the South.

I don't know what that has to do with anything we're talking about.

No, the insinuation in this thread is that democrats were for civil rights and republicans against them.

Then I'm sure you'll be able to find a post of mine where I said that, right?

The reason the entire history of "civil rights" not merely the Civil Rights Bill of 64, are important to a partisan discussion, is that the impetus for civil rights in the country, originated and found its success, from within the republican party. THAT is why it is not a stretch to understand why MLK's niece made the claim her uncle was a republican. In addition, the further fact that there was such a democratic stronghold of anti civil rights politicians in the South, amplifies, the likely antipathy most black Americans would have had towards the democrat party during MLK's era.

The political parties in 1866 were not the same thing 100 years later.