151 years ago today: Democrats founded and staffed the Ku Klux Klan

[Little-Acorn]

True that the Klan was not formed to fight, lynch or otherwise harm --- anybody. It was a simple social club.

Sure. And guys who get Playboy just read it for the articles.

Odd thing is, these liberals expect somebody to BELIEVE their tripe.

It seems to be a common theme among liberal fanatics, to tell any lie that comes to mind, no matter how easily debunked.

 

[2aguy]

Not a lie asshole......King was a black fighting for Civil Rights against democrats who were murdering blacks and Republicans......so you say he voted democrat? Are you really that dumb?....

He doubles down.

Next you'll be telling us King voted for Goldwater.

Yes....please...explain to us how King voted democrat until Kennedy...please...show us the link.......

and he supported LBJ and was a fool for doing it...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....LBJ was the democrat racist.....and now blacks are paying for that back stab against Goldwater with the lives of their children.....never, ever, trust democrats...they are racists through and through....

 

[paperview]

Not a lie asshole......King was a black fighting for Civil Rights against democrats who were murdering blacks and Republicans......so you say he voted democrat? Are you really that dumb?....

He doubles down.

Next you'll be telling us King voted for Goldwater.

Yes....please...explain to us how King voted democrat until Kennedy...please...show us the link.......

and he supported LBJ and was a fool for doing it...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....LBJ was the democrat racist.....and now blacks are paying for that back stab against Goldwater with the lives of their children.....never, ever, trust democrats...they are racists through and through....

"Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero."

You're cracking me up here man.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.

The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

...

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist.

His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America,

I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy. " - MLK,Jr.

The King Institute | The Works of Martin Luther King, Jr ..

 

[Pogo]

My understanding of the Klan was it arose from a citizens patrol afraid of crime and backlash against whites by loose numbers of freed slaves with access to weapons who had no means of support and no education, but relied on either charity or robbing others.

What started as defense against crimes quickly turned to lynch mobs.

Sort of. Technically it started as a simple social club engaging in burlesque as a comic relief in troubled times but what you describe here is kind of along the lines of the Klan's own slant on itself, seeing itself as "defenders" and "chivalrous" and serving as "the law" in lawless times and places. Indeed several of the similar groups formed at the same time literally called themselves "Knights" (Knights of the Black Cross (Mississippi); Knights of the Rising Sun (Texas 1868); Knights of the White Camellia (Louisiana 1867-69); Knights of the White Carnation (Alabama); the Seymour Knights (Louisiana)) -- and when "Colonel Joe" Simmons went to re-found the Klan in 1915 he officially called it the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, taking with him members of the Knights of Mary Phagan, an ad hoc group that had committed a recent lynching.

So their own self-image was one of a high-falutin' Protectorate insofar as its own propaganda. But of course when you have vigilantes whipping and lynching people your claim to the moral high ground rings hollow.

There may have been some truth to early stories of persecutions by Union Leagues and carpetbaggers but as you note it quickly spread out of control. But yes all those references to "Knights" and "brotherhoods' and "union guards" display a motivation for social order, not politics.

So I would compare to post war Germany where criminal mobs loose on the streets led to the rise of Hitler. People wanted safety from crime and chaos run amok with no law and order.

So what started as imposing law and order turned out to be strong armed dictatorship that didn't respect due process but went overboard lynching people by association by label.

One extreme to the other.

Yup, exactly.

Edgetho this is the first I heard the Klan was purely political against Republicans and not blacks per se.
Could it be both, that the lynch mobs rose in reaction to fear of black criminal mobs, and the political organization arose in opposition to party leadership. One part was political and one part was physical response to criminal threats against property and security. Could it be both combined?

Politics really didn't enter into it as I see it. The mistake these revisionists keep on making is ass-uming that the polarized binary-bot dichotomy they see today where literally everything in the world is made up of either "Democrat" or "Republican" atoms --- was actually the world people of the past were living in. They don't seem to get that not everything has a political-party basis nor is every living person part of a political party.

There was little in the way of everyday politics in 1865 Tennessee or the South. The focus was far more on simple survival and the usurpation of life as they had known it. Simple things like what to find to eat or how to stay employed. Plus, the Confederacy was already disenfranchised by the War until one by one states were reinstated. So politics wasn't in what they were doing -- the social structure was. Those simple questions of what everybody's role was in the social structure --- which was radially changing and which they were there to specifically resist.

The other mistake they keep making is focusing on "Republican" targets. It's true the Klan targeted Republicans as representatives of (what they saw as) an invading army. It's equally true they also targeted "carpetbaggers" -- who were connected with business, not politics --- and "scalawags" which were their own (white) neighbors who played along with the new despised paradigm. So they're doing a bit of cherrypicking here, missing the forest because they find one of its trees useful.

 

[paperview]

"In the past, I always voted the Democratic ticket." -1956, MLK, Jr. - from his autobiography.

 

[2aguy]

Not a lie asshole......King was a black fighting for Civil Rights against democrats who were murdering blacks and Republicans......so you say he voted democrat? Are you really that dumb?....

He doubles down.

Next you'll be telling us King voted for Goldwater.

Yes....please...explain to us how King voted democrat until Kennedy...please...show us the link.......

and he supported LBJ and was a fool for doing it...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....LBJ was the democrat racist.....and now blacks are paying for that back stab against Goldwater with the lives of their children.....never, ever, trust democrats...they are racists through and through....

"Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero."

You're cracking me up here man.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.

The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

...

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist.

His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America,

I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy. " - MLK,Jr.

The King Institute | The Works of Martin Luther King, Jr ..

You have no idea what you are talking about....all you know about Goldwater is the lies the democrats keep telling you.....of the two, Goldwater and LBJ, the Civil Rights leader was Goldwater....who worked on civil rights issues his entire life.....lbj....turned to the 1964 civil rights act after voting against all the others and voting against anti-lynching laws......

Martin Luther was a fool......he sided with the racist over the Civil Rights hero......simply to get a flawed civil rights bill passed...and black children are dying to this day because of it....

Here you go moron.....this is the man King didn't support...to support lbj, the man who voted against every civil rights act he could...until he realized they couldn't murder enough blacks to keep them from voting....

The Truth About Goldwater...and King's folly...

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign. Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.

 

[2aguy]

And more on the Civil Rights leader Barry Goldwater.....

NPR Wrong on Goldwater '64, Civil Rights, Say 4 Who Were There

As for the Republican nominee's position on the Civil Rights Act, Goldwater had said he would vote for passage if Section II on public accommodations and Section VII on equal employment opportunity were removed. With his view reinforced by a detailed memorandum from Phoenix lawyer and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Goldwater felt these sections were unconstitutional, were unenforceable without a federal police force, and would lead to the creation of racial quotas and affirmative action.


"He was absolutely right about [the two sections of the Civil Rights Act] and they did lead to precisely what Goldwater and most conservatives were afraid of," said Tom Winter, then executive editor of Human Events, who would join Ryskind as its co-owner a year later. As for the "extremism in the defense of liberty" speech, Winter recalled watching it from a San Francisco restaurant "and cheering it because it was clearly about freedom and fighting communism. I certainly didn't think it had anything to do with race."

and he was right on this...ask the bakers, pizza makers and wedding photographers today how they have been sued out of existance based on this act......violating their freedom of religion....

 

[2aguy]

And what did Goldwater actually vote for in his career....

The conservative ascendency of 1964 saw the nomination of Barry Goldwater, a western libertarian who had never been strongly identified with racial issues one way or the other, but who was a principled critic of the 1964 act and its extension of federal power.

Goldwater had supported the 1957 and 1960 acts but believed that Title II and Title VII of the 1964 bill were unconstitutional, based in part on a 75-page brief from Robert Bork. But far from extending a welcoming hand to southern segregationists, he named as his running mate a New York representative, William E. Miller, who had been the co-author of Republican civil-rights legislation in the 1950s.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300432/party-civil-rights-kevin-d-williamson

 

[Pogo]

There are 13 Congressional Volumes which detail how the KKK was formed as the terrorist wing of the Democratic Party for the express purpose of taking back their statehouses from BLACK REPUBLICANS through force and intimidation.

Full text of "Report of the Joint select committee appointed to inquire in to the condition of affairs in the late insurrectionary states : so far as regards the execution of the laws, and the safety of the lives and property of the citizens of the United States and Testimony taken"

Uh -----nnnnnno, there are not.

Oh there are the Congressional documents. I've got 'em right here, seen 'em before. But they don't say what you claim here. They don't go into the formation of the Klan at all at that time. Prove me wrong. Give me a citation. Page number.

See, I've already been down this road. There's no there there. Go ahead --- find it.

Of course the 13 Congressional Volumes prove that the KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

Ku Klux Klan - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

WGBH American Experience . U.S. Grant: Warrior | PBS

Oh please. Whittle Bill on YouTube? I'll tear that poser to shreds. See if you can come up with a legitimate source.

Actually see if you can answer the damn question I posted instead of running away from it.

This Wittle Bill video is actually one of my favorite pieces of low-hanging fruit. Seen this before too. He actually goes out of his way to whine that Lincoln didn't get any votes in the South (he did, but not Electoral votes, a distinction that seems over his head). He neglects to mention that the six-year-old Republican Party didn't even put Lincoln's name on ballots in the South. He wasn't a candidate there.

In those days you didn't get a single ballot listing every candidate for every office --- you got a ballot printed by the political party with all their candidates on it. Whelp --- the Republican Party hadn't done that in the South in 1856 with Frémont, and it didn't do it in 1860 with Lincoln (or in 1864 either for that matter --- Lincoln wasn't even on a ballot in his own state of Kentucky until 1864). The Party didn't bother to do that because it concentrated its resources in the North and Midwest, calculating (correctly) that that's where their support was and betting they could amass enough votes from that area to carry an election -- which they did.

Wittle Bill also fails to mention that while Republican Lincoln got zero of the South's then-88 electoral votes, the Democratic candidate Stephen Douglas got exactly the same number from the South --- zero. Wonder why he forgets to mention that. Maybe because he's a pilot and not a historian.

Here's the deal Wittle Bill ------ I won't tell you how to fly a ******* plane......

None of the southerners would stand as his electors.....

He didn't EARN any electors. He wasn't on the ******* ballot.

Stephen Douglas was on the ballots. He didn't earn any electors from the South either. Douglas came away with a total of one state, coming in fourth.

 

[2aguy]

My understanding of the Klan was it arose from a citizens patrol afraid of crime and backlash against whites by loose numbers of freed slaves with access to weapons who had no means of support and no education, but relied on either charity or robbing others.

What started as defense against crimes quickly turned to lynch mobs.

Sort of. Technically it started as a simple social club engaging in burlesque as a comic relief in troubled times but what you describe here is kind of along the lines of the Klan's own slant on itself, seeing itself as "defenders" and "chivalrous" and serving as "the law" in lawless times and places. Indeed several of the similar groups formed at the same time literally called themselves "Knights" (Knights of the Black Cross (Mississippi); Knights of the Rising Sun (Texas 1868); Knights of the White Camellia (Louisiana 1867-69); Knights of the White Carnation (Alabama); the Seymour Knights (Louisiana)) -- and when "Colonel Joe" Simmons went to re-found the Klan in 1915 he officially called it the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, taking with him members of the Knights of Mary Phagan, an ad hoc group that had committed a recent lynching.

So their own self-image was one of a high-falutin' Protectorate insofar as its own propaganda. But of course when you have vigilantes whipping and lynching people your claim to the moral high ground rings hollow.

There may have been some truth to early stories of persecutions by Union Leagues and carpetbaggers but as you note it quickly spread out of control. But yes all those references to "Knights" and "brotherhoods' and "union guards" display a motivation for social order, not politics.

So I would compare to post war Germany where criminal mobs loose on the streets led to the rise of Hitler. People wanted safety from crime and chaos run amok with no law and order.

So what started as imposing law and order turned out to be strong armed dictatorship that didn't respect due process but went overboard lynching people by association by label.

One extreme to the other.

Yup, exactly.

Edgetho this is the first I heard the Klan was purely political against Republicans and not blacks per se.
Could it be both, that the lynch mobs rose in reaction to fear of black criminal mobs, and the political organization arose in opposition to party leadership. One part was political and one part was physical response to criminal threats against property and security. Could it be both combined?

Politics really didn't enter into it as I see it. The mistake these revisionists keep on making is ass-uming that the polarized binary-bot dichotomy they see today where literally everything in the world is made up of either "Democrat" or "Republican" atoms --- was actually the world people of the past were living in. They don't seem to get that not everything has a political-party basis nor is every living person part of a political party.

There was little in the way of everyday politics in 1865 Tennessee or the South. The focus was far more on simple survival and the usurpation of life as they had known it. Simple things like what to find to eat or how to stay employed. Plus, the Confederacy was already disenfranchised by the War until one by one states were reinstated. So politics wasn't in what they were doing -- the social structure was. Those simple questions of what everybody's role was in the social structure --- which was radially changing and which they were there to specifically resist.

The other mistake they keep making is focusing on "Republican" targets. It's true the Klan targeted Republicans as representatives of (what they saw as) an invading army. It's equally true they also targeted "carpetbaggers" -- who were connected with business, not politics --- and "scalawags" which were their own (white) neighbors who played along with the new despised paradigm. So they're doing a bit of cherrypicking here, missing the forest because they find one of its trees useful.

Yeah......right. Ask a democrat in the Civil War what he thought of republicans...see what they said.....keep the lie going pogo........the democrat party has been and still is the party of racism......

Tell us again how confederate army officers had no political beliefs and loved republicans......

 

[2aguy]

Uh -----nnnnnno, there are not.

Oh there are the Congressional documents. I've got 'em right here, seen 'em before. But they don't say what you claim here. They don't go into the formation of the Klan at all at that time. Prove me wrong. Give me a citation. Page number.

See, I've already been down this road. There's no there there. Go ahead --- find it.

Of course the 13 Congressional Volumes prove that the KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

Ku Klux Klan - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

WGBH American Experience . U.S. Grant: Warrior | PBS

Oh please. Whittle Bill on YouTube? I'll tear that poser to shreds. See if you can come up with a legitimate source.

Actually see if you can answer the damn question I posted instead of running away from it.

This Wittle Bill video is actually one of my favorite pieces of low-hanging fruit. Seen this before too. He actually goes out of his way to whine that Lincoln didn't get any votes in the South (he did, but not Electoral votes, a distinction that seems over his head). He neglects to mention that the six-year-old Republican Party didn't even put Lincoln's name on ballots in the South. He wasn't a candidate there.

In those days you didn't get a single ballot listing every candidate for every office --- you got a ballot printed by the political party with all their candidates on it. Whelp --- the Republican Party hadn't done that in the South in 1856 with Frémont, and it didn't do it in 1860 with Lincoln (or in 1864 either for that matter --- Lincoln wasn't even on a ballot in his own state of Kentucky until 1864). The Party didn't bother to do that because it concentrated its resources in the North and Midwest, calculating (correctly) that that's where their support was and betting they could amass enough votes from that area to carry an election -- which they did.

Wittle Bill also fails to mention that while Republican Lincoln got zero of the South's then-88 electoral votes, the Democratic candidate Stephen Douglas got exactly the same number from the South --- zero. Wonder why he forgets to mention that. Maybe because he's a pilot and not a historian.

Here's the deal Wittle Bill ------ I won't tell you how to fly a ******* plane......

None of the southerners would stand as his electors.....

He didn't EARN any electors. He wasn't on the ******* ballot.

Stephen Douglas was on the ballots. He didn't earn any electors from the South either. Douglas came away with a total of one state, coming in fourth.

Moron....

United States presidential election, 1860 - Wikipedia

In the eleven states that would later declare their secession from the Union and be controlled by Confederate armies, ballots for Lincoln were cast only in Virginia,[nb 2] where he received only 1.1 percent of the popular vote.[16][20]

In order to distribute ballots in a state, candidates needed citizens in that state who would pledge to vote for the candidate in the Electoral College.

In ten southern slave states, no citizens would publicly pledge such support for Lincoln.

 

[Pogo]

I betcha dingo here prolly thinks MLK, Jr. was a republican too.

and he was.....

Really Sprinkles? Haven't been ass-whipped enough on revisionista mythology? You actually want to go for ANOTHER one?

Fine. We've done this before too. Roll tape.

>> I have few regrets in my life. At the top of the list is the demise of two children in my womb, and one miscarriage. Next to that, I regret having said to a group of peers that my Uncle M. L. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) was a Republican. My Grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr. was a registered Republican. Uncle M. L. was an independent. I assumed that since Granddaddy was a Republican, Uncle M. L. was too. After all, before the election of President John F. Kennedy, the majority of African American voters were Republicans*. Granddaddy convinced a large block of Blacks to vote for President John Kennedy after he helped to get my uncle out of jail during those turbulent days. Uncle M. L. tended to vote Democrat, but remained independent because he found weaknesses in both parties. The truth of the matter is that God isn't a Republican or a Democrat or a Tea Party voter. God doesn't vote. The squabbling and division among the parties is tragic. << -- Alveda King: 'Put the Political Strife Out to Pasture'
Which aligns with what King himself said:

>> I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses.
And I’m not inextricably bound to either party. I’m not concerned about telling you what party to vote for. But what I’m saying is this, that we must gain the ballot and use it wisely2.”

(2. During a sermon in Atlanta one month earlier, King revealed that he had been offered money by both political parties to rally black voters for the 1956 election: They told me they had $75,000 to spend towards obtaining the Negro vote. A large part of this money would have been set aside for my own advantage. I studied their offers long and prayed over it again and again. Then I told them I couldn’t do it. I knew it would have given me anopportunity to educate my children and would have given me my first possessions in the world, but I could not sacrifice my soul in the structure of partisan politics” (“King Warns Leaders Of PartisanPolitics,” Montgomery Advertiser, 14 January 1958). << -- Interview transcript here
--- and of course that letter to a supporter that said:

>> Thanks for your very kind letter of September 17, making inquiry concerning the way the Negro will vote in the coming election. I am of the impression that the Negro voter will go largely for the Democratic Party.

I haven’t fully decided which candidate I will vote for. In the past I have always voted the Democratic ticket. At this point I am still in a state of indecision. Stevenson seems to be more forthright on the race question than Eisenhower, but the Democratic Party is so inexplicably bound to the South that it does leave doubt in the minds of those interested in civil rights. Let us all hope that the candidate most concerned with the welfare for all people of America will win the election.

Sincerely yours,
M. L. King, Jr.,
President
(letter to Viva Sloan, 2 October 1956) << -- The Martin Luther King Jr. Papers

(*Actually Alveda King is wrong here; prior to Kennedy blacks had been voting Democrat since the 1930s)

/offtopic

Uh -----nnnnnno, there are not.

Oh there are the Congressional documents. I've got 'em right here, seen 'em before. But they don't say what you claim here. They don't go into the formation of the Klan at all at that time. Prove me wrong. Give me a citation. Page number.

See, I've already been down this road. There's no there there. Go ahead --- find it.

Of course the 13 Congressional Volumes prove that the KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

Ku Klux Klan - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

WGBH American Experience . U.S. Grant: Warrior | PBS

Oh please. Whittle Bill on YouTube? I'll tear that poser to shreds. See if you can come up with a legitimate source.

Actually see if you can answer the damn question I posted instead of running away from it.

I can go on for weeks with never having to repost the same thing. I can parade historical accounts, historians, historical documents and public record personal testimony. I can go on and on and on. Let's go.

Then it's odd you keep resorting to the candyass bastion of YouTube.

You got docs -- bring 'em on. I challenged anyone anywhere, both in this thread and way before, to show me any political connections for Capt. John B. Kennedy, Capt. John Lester, Frank McCord, Richard Reed, Calvin Jones or James Crowe. Whatcha got? Or for that matter any racial or political motivations for any of them. Whatcha got?

How 'bout the bonus track --- any political activity or affiliation for William J. "Colonel Joe" Simmons?
Again ---- whatcha got? Something a bit more tangible than YouFuckingTube if you please.

Bring it.

YEs....officers of the confederate army.......had absolutely no political affiliation or sympathies after having fought republicans and lost.....that is just an insane proposition that holds no water.

Two were officers as far as we know. And yes, no known political affiliations at all. No such references exist --- go ahead, try to find one. They were after all in their twenties.

And the Civil War wasn't "Democrats" against "Republicans" --- it was "Union" versus "Confederacy". And again --- NOT EVERYBODY BELONGS TO A ******* POLITICAL PARTY. I'm afraid just because you live in that tiny little swimming pool .............. it doesn't mean everybody else has to follow your lack of imagination.

So your burden of proof continues to hang around without a dance partner.

 

[2aguy]

I betcha dingo here prolly thinks MLK, Jr. was a republican too.

and he was.....

Really Sprinkles? Haven't been ass-whipped enough on revisionista mythology? You actually want to go for ANOTHER one?

Fine. We've done this before too. Roll tape.

>> I have few regrets in my life. At the top of the list is the demise of two children in my womb, and one miscarriage. Next to that, I regret having said to a group of peers that my Uncle M. L. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) was a Republican. My Grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr. was a registered Republican. Uncle M. L. was an independent. I assumed that since Granddaddy was a Republican, Uncle M. L. was too. After all, before the election of President John F. Kennedy, the majority of African American voters were Republicans*. Granddaddy convinced a large block of Blacks to vote for President John Kennedy after he helped to get my uncle out of jail during those turbulent days. Uncle M. L. tended to vote Democrat, but remained independent because he found weaknesses in both parties. The truth of the matter is that God isn't a Republican or a Democrat or a Tea Party voter. God doesn't vote. The squabbling and division among the parties is tragic. << -- Alveda King: 'Put the Political Strife Out to Pasture'
Which aligns with what King himself said:

>> I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses.
And I’m not inextricably bound to either party. I’m not concerned about telling you what party to vote for. But what I’m saying is this, that we must gain the ballot and use it wisely2.”

(2. During a sermon in Atlanta one month earlier, King revealed that he had been offered money by both political parties to rally black voters for the 1956 election: They told me they had $75,000 to spend towards obtaining the Negro vote. A large part of this money would have been set aside for my own advantage. I studied their offers long and prayed over it again and again. Then I told them I couldn’t do it. I knew it would have given me anopportunity to educate my children and would have given me my first possessions in the world, but I could not sacrifice my soul in the structure of partisan politics” (“King Warns Leaders Of PartisanPolitics,” Montgomery Advertiser, 14 January 1958). << -- Interview transcript here
--- and of course that letter to a supporter that said:

>> Thanks for your very kind letter of September 17, making inquiry concerning the way the Negro will vote in the coming election. I am of the impression that the Negro voter will go largely for the Democratic Party.

I haven’t fully decided which candidate I will vote for. In the past I have always voted the Democratic ticket. At this point I am still in a state of indecision. Stevenson seems to be more forthright on the race question than Eisenhower, but the Democratic Party is so inexplicably bound to the South that it does leave doubt in the minds of those interested in civil rights. Let us all hope that the candidate most concerned with the welfare for all people of America will win the election.

Sincerely yours,
M. L. King, Jr.,
President
(letter to Viva Sloan, 2 October 1956) << -- The Martin Luther King Jr. Papers

(*Actually Alveda King is wrong here; prior to Kennedy blacks had been voting Democrat since the 1930s)

/offtopic

Of course the 13 Congressional Volumes prove that the KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

Ku Klux Klan - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

WGBH American Experience . U.S. Grant: Warrior | PBS

Oh please. Whittle Bill on YouTube? I'll tear that poser to shreds. See if you can come up with a legitimate source.

Actually see if you can answer the damn question I posted instead of running away from it.

I can go on for weeks with never having to repost the same thing. I can parade historical accounts, historians, historical documents and public record personal testimony. I can go on and on and on. Let's go.

Then it's odd you keep resorting to the candyass bastion of YouTube.

You got docs -- bring 'em on. I challenged anyone anywhere, both in this thread and way before, to show me any political connections for Capt. John B. Kennedy, Capt. John Lester, Frank McCord, Richard Reed, Calvin Jones or James Crowe. Whatcha got? Or for that matter any racial or political motivations for any of them. Whatcha got?

How 'bout the bonus track --- any political activity or affiliation for William J. "Colonel Joe" Simmons?
Again ---- whatcha got? Something a bit more tangible than YouFuckingTube if you please.

Bring it.

YEs....officers of the confederate army.......had absolutely no political affiliation or sympathies after having fought republicans and lost.....that is just an insane proposition that holds no water.

Two were officers as far as we know. And yes, no known political affiliations at all. No such references exist --- go ahead, try to find one. They were after all in their twenties.

And the Civil War wasn't "Democrats" against "Republicans" --- it was "Union" versus "Confederacy". And again --- NOT EVERYBODY BELONGS TO A ******* POLITICAL PARTY. I'm afraid just because you live in that tiny little swimming pool .............. it doesn't mean everybody else has to follow your lack of imagination.

So your burden of proof continues to hang around without a dance partner.

Yes.....tell us how Martin Luther king voted for the democrats......the party that created Jim Crow, and whose terrorist arm the kkk murdered black Civil Rights activists...please...keep telling us he voted for that party......as opposed to the party that freed the slaves, actually fought against the democrat klan and fought to get blacks their Civil Rights...keep telling us that, and then you can stop pissing on our legs and telling us it is raining....

 

[2aguy]

I betcha dingo here prolly thinks MLK, Jr. was a republican too.

and he was.....

Really Sprinkles? Haven't been ass-whipped enough on revisionista mythology? You actually want to go for ANOTHER one?

Fine. We've done this before too. Roll tape.

>> I have few regrets in my life. At the top of the list is the demise of two children in my womb, and one miscarriage. Next to that, I regret having said to a group of peers that my Uncle M. L. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) was a Republican. My Grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr. was a registered Republican. Uncle M. L. was an independent. I assumed that since Granddaddy was a Republican, Uncle M. L. was too. After all, before the election of President John F. Kennedy, the majority of African American voters were Republicans*. Granddaddy convinced a large block of Blacks to vote for President John Kennedy after he helped to get my uncle out of jail during those turbulent days. Uncle M. L. tended to vote Democrat, but remained independent because he found weaknesses in both parties. The truth of the matter is that God isn't a Republican or a Democrat or a Tea Party voter. God doesn't vote. The squabbling and division among the parties is tragic. << -- Alveda King: 'Put the Political Strife Out to Pasture'
Which aligns with what King himself said:

>> I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses.
And I’m not inextricably bound to either party. I’m not concerned about telling you what party to vote for. But what I’m saying is this, that we must gain the ballot and use it wisely2.”

(2. During a sermon in Atlanta one month earlier, King revealed that he had been offered money by both political parties to rally black voters for the 1956 election: They told me they had $75,000 to spend towards obtaining the Negro vote. A large part of this money would have been set aside for my own advantage. I studied their offers long and prayed over it again and again. Then I told them I couldn’t do it. I knew it would have given me anopportunity to educate my children and would have given me my first possessions in the world, but I could not sacrifice my soul in the structure of partisan politics” (“King Warns Leaders Of PartisanPolitics,” Montgomery Advertiser, 14 January 1958). << -- Interview transcript here
--- and of course that letter to a supporter that said:

>> Thanks for your very kind letter of September 17, making inquiry concerning the way the Negro will vote in the coming election. I am of the impression that the Negro voter will go largely for the Democratic Party.

I haven’t fully decided which candidate I will vote for. In the past I have always voted the Democratic ticket. At this point I am still in a state of indecision. Stevenson seems to be more forthright on the race question than Eisenhower, but the Democratic Party is so inexplicably bound to the South that it does leave doubt in the minds of those interested in civil rights. Let us all hope that the candidate most concerned with the welfare for all people of America will win the election.

Sincerely yours,
M. L. King, Jr.,
President
(letter to Viva Sloan, 2 October 1956) << -- The Martin Luther King Jr. Papers

(*Actually Alveda King is wrong here; prior to Kennedy blacks had been voting Democrat since the 1930s)

/offtopic

Of course the 13 Congressional Volumes prove that the KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

Ku Klux Klan - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

WGBH American Experience . U.S. Grant: Warrior | PBS

Oh please. Whittle Bill on YouTube? I'll tear that poser to shreds. See if you can come up with a legitimate source.

Actually see if you can answer the damn question I posted instead of running away from it.

I can go on for weeks with never having to repost the same thing. I can parade historical accounts, historians, historical documents and public record personal testimony. I can go on and on and on. Let's go.

Then it's odd you keep resorting to the candyass bastion of YouTube.

You got docs -- bring 'em on. I challenged anyone anywhere, both in this thread and way before, to show me any political connections for Capt. John B. Kennedy, Capt. John Lester, Frank McCord, Richard Reed, Calvin Jones or James Crowe. Whatcha got? Or for that matter any racial or political motivations for any of them. Whatcha got?

How 'bout the bonus track --- any political activity or affiliation for William J. "Colonel Joe" Simmons?
Again ---- whatcha got? Something a bit more tangible than YouFuckingTube if you please.

Bring it.

YEs....officers of the confederate army.......had absolutely no political affiliation or sympathies after having fought republicans and lost.....that is just an insane proposition that holds no water.

Two were officers as far as we know. And yes, no known political affiliations at all. No such references exist --- go ahead, try to find one. They were after all in their twenties.

And the Civil War wasn't "Democrats" against "Republicans" --- it was "Union" versus "Confederacy". And again --- NOT EVERYBODY BELONGS TO A ******* POLITICAL PARTY. I'm afraid just because you live in that tiny little swimming pool .............. it doesn't mean everybody else has to follow your lack of imagination.

So your burden of proof continues to hang around without a dance partner.

The democrat party supported the institution of slavery...went to war to keep it regardless of the reason the uneducated, poor farmers went to war...the democrat party and it's leadership fought to keep and expand slavery......

 

[Pogo]

Not a lie asshole......King was a black fighting for Civil Rights against democrats who were murdering blacks and Republicans......so you say he voted democrat? Are you really that dumb?....

He doubles down.

Next you'll be telling us King voted for Goldwater.

Yes....please...explain to us how King voted democrat until Kennedy...please...show us the link.......

and he supported LBJ and was a fool for doing it...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....LBJ was the democrat racist.....and now blacks are paying for that back stab against Goldwater with the lives of their children.....never, ever, trust democrats...they are racists through and through....

"Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero."

You're cracking me up here man.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.

The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

...

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist.

His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America,

I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy. " - MLK,Jr.

The King Institute | The Works of Martin Luther King, Jr ..

You have no idea what you are talking about....all you know about Goldwater is the lies the democrats keep telling you.....of the two, Goldwater and LBJ, the Civil Rights leader was Goldwater....who worked on civil rights issues his entire life.....lbj....turned to the 1964 civil rights act after voting against all the others and voting against anti-lynching laws......

Martin Luther was a fool......he sided with the racist over the Civil Rights hero......simply to get a flawed civil rights bill passed...and black children are dying to this day because of it....

Here you go moron.....this is the man King didn't support...to support lbj, the man who voted against every civil rights act he could...until he realized they couldn't murder enough blacks to keep them from voting....

The Truth About Goldwater...and King's folly...

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign. Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.

You don't get it Punkles.

You're ass----- uming here that Composition Fallacy is a valid argument.

It isn't.

Goldwater was not a racist personally as far as I know, as already noted before in this thread --- but on no account does that mean either "therefore Republicans can't be racists" OR that "therefore the racists must be Democrats". That's a blatant Composition Fallacy on which this entire thread is based, and it fails just as miserably. Racism is not a political party thing anyway --- it's personal.

Go learn what a fallacy is, Dumbass.

 

[Pogo]

My understanding of the Klan was it arose from a citizens patrol afraid of crime and backlash against whites by loose numbers of freed slaves with access to weapons who had no means of support and no education, but relied on either charity or robbing others.

What started as defense against crimes quickly turned to lynch mobs.

Sort of. Technically it started as a simple social club engaging in burlesque as a comic relief in troubled times but what you describe here is kind of along the lines of the Klan's own slant on itself, seeing itself as "defenders" and "chivalrous" and serving as "the law" in lawless times and places. Indeed several of the similar groups formed at the same time literally called themselves "Knights" (Knights of the Black Cross (Mississippi); Knights of the Rising Sun (Texas 1868); Knights of the White Camellia (Louisiana 1867-69); Knights of the White Carnation (Alabama); the Seymour Knights (Louisiana)) -- and when "Colonel Joe" Simmons went to re-found the Klan in 1915 he officially called it the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, taking with him members of the Knights of Mary Phagan, an ad hoc group that had committed a recent lynching.

So their own self-image was one of a high-falutin' Protectorate insofar as its own propaganda. But of course when you have vigilantes whipping and lynching people your claim to the moral high ground rings hollow.

There may have been some truth to early stories of persecutions by Union Leagues and carpetbaggers but as you note it quickly spread out of control. But yes all those references to "Knights" and "brotherhoods' and "union guards" display a motivation for social order, not politics.

So I would compare to post war Germany where criminal mobs loose on the streets led to the rise of Hitler. People wanted safety from crime and chaos run amok with no law and order.

So what started as imposing law and order turned out to be strong armed dictatorship that didn't respect due process but went overboard lynching people by association by label.

One extreme to the other.

Yup, exactly.

Edgetho this is the first I heard the Klan was purely political against Republicans and not blacks per se.
Could it be both, that the lynch mobs rose in reaction to fear of black criminal mobs, and the political organization arose in opposition to party leadership. One part was political and one part was physical response to criminal threats against property and security. Could it be both combined?

Politics really didn't enter into it as I see it. The mistake these revisionists keep on making is ass-uming that the polarized binary-bot dichotomy they see today where literally everything in the world is made up of either "Democrat" or "Republican" atoms --- was actually the world people of the past were living in. They don't seem to get that not everything has a political-party basis nor is every living person part of a political party.

There was little in the way of everyday politics in 1865 Tennessee or the South. The focus was far more on simple survival and the usurpation of life as they had known it. Simple things like what to find to eat or how to stay employed. Plus, the Confederacy was already disenfranchised by the War until one by one states were reinstated. So politics wasn't in what they were doing -- the social structure was. Those simple questions of what everybody's role was in the social structure --- which was radially changing and which they were there to specifically resist.

The other mistake they keep making is focusing on "Republican" targets. It's true the Klan targeted Republicans as representatives of (what they saw as) an invading army. It's equally true they also targeted "carpetbaggers" -- who were connected with business, not politics --- and "scalawags" which were their own (white) neighbors who played along with the new despised paradigm. So they're doing a bit of cherrypicking here, missing the forest because they find one of its trees useful.

Yeah......right. Ask a democrat in the Civil War what he thought of republicans...see what they said.....keep the lie going pogo........the democrat party has been and still is the party of racism......

Tell us again how confederate army officers had no political beliefs and loved republicans......

Show us again ---- oh wait, make that for the first time ever --- that Kennedy, Crowe, McCord, Reed, Jones and/or Lester had any political connections or activities at all.

Cue crickets.

While they're chirping go learn what an Appeal to Probability fallacy is.

 

[2aguy]

Not a lie asshole......King was a black fighting for Civil Rights against democrats who were murdering blacks and Republicans......so you say he voted democrat? Are you really that dumb?....

He doubles down.

Next you'll be telling us King voted for Goldwater.

Yes....please...explain to us how King voted democrat until Kennedy...please...show us the link.......

and he supported LBJ and was a fool for doing it...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....LBJ was the democrat racist.....and now blacks are paying for that back stab against Goldwater with the lives of their children.....never, ever, trust democrats...they are racists through and through....

"Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero."

You're cracking me up here man.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.

The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

...

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist.

His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America,

I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy. " - MLK,Jr.

The King Institute | The Works of Martin Luther King, Jr ..

You have no idea what you are talking about....all you know about Goldwater is the lies the democrats keep telling you.....of the two, Goldwater and LBJ, the Civil Rights leader was Goldwater....who worked on civil rights issues his entire life.....lbj....turned to the 1964 civil rights act after voting against all the others and voting against anti-lynching laws......

Martin Luther was a fool......he sided with the racist over the Civil Rights hero......simply to get a flawed civil rights bill passed...and black children are dying to this day because of it....

Here you go moron.....this is the man King didn't support...to support lbj, the man who voted against every civil rights act he could...until he realized they couldn't murder enough blacks to keep them from voting....

The Truth About Goldwater...and King's folly...

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the United States, proposed that transcripts of the FBI tapes about Martin Luther King Jr.’s alleged indiscretions be published. An outraged Goldwater declared he would not be a party to destroying King’s reputation and strode out of the committee room. A fellow Senator recalled that Goldwater’s protest “injected some common sense into the proceedings,” and the electronic surveillance transcripts were not released.[21]

That his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on constitutional grounds and not political considerations was underscored in the final week of the fall campaign. Speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, Goldwater condemned segregation and declared that government must treat “all men as equal in the arena of law and civil order.”[22] He pledged if elected President to implement all provisions of the act. His forthright pro-civil rights speech was televised on 87 stations throughout the South.

You don't get it Punkles.

You're ass----- uming here that Composition Fallacy is a valid argument.

It isn't.

Goldwater was not a racist personally as far as I know, as already noted before in this thread --- but on no account does that mean either "therefore Republicans can't be racists" OR that "therefore the racists must be Democrats". That's a blatant Composition Fallacy on which this entire thread is based, and it fails just as miserably. Racism is not a political party thing anyway --- it's personal.

Go learn what a fallacy is, Dumbass.

**** you moron......keep telling us that the founders of the kkk....confederate army veterans who had fought a war against the North.....fighting against Republicans who led the north...had no political leanings.......then tell us that MLK voted for democrats because he liked the way they used police dogs, bombs, fire hoses and jim crow laws to keep blacks from being full citizens......sell that bullshit to democrats...they believe all kinds of stupid crap....

 

[2aguy]

My understanding of the Klan was it arose from a citizens patrol afraid of crime and backlash against whites by loose numbers of freed slaves with access to weapons who had no means of support and no education, but relied on either charity or robbing others.

What started as defense against crimes quickly turned to lynch mobs.

Sort of. Technically it started as a simple social club engaging in burlesque as a comic relief in troubled times but what you describe here is kind of along the lines of the Klan's own slant on itself, seeing itself as "defenders" and "chivalrous" and serving as "the law" in lawless times and places. Indeed several of the similar groups formed at the same time literally called themselves "Knights" (Knights of the Black Cross (Mississippi); Knights of the Rising Sun (Texas 1868); Knights of the White Camellia (Louisiana 1867-69); Knights of the White Carnation (Alabama); the Seymour Knights (Louisiana)) -- and when "Colonel Joe" Simmons went to re-found the Klan in 1915 he officially called it the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, taking with him members of the Knights of Mary Phagan, an ad hoc group that had committed a recent lynching.

So their own self-image was one of a high-falutin' Protectorate insofar as its own propaganda. But of course when you have vigilantes whipping and lynching people your claim to the moral high ground rings hollow.

There may have been some truth to early stories of persecutions by Union Leagues and carpetbaggers but as you note it quickly spread out of control. But yes all those references to "Knights" and "brotherhoods' and "union guards" display a motivation for social order, not politics.

So I would compare to post war Germany where criminal mobs loose on the streets led to the rise of Hitler. People wanted safety from crime and chaos run amok with no law and order.

So what started as imposing law and order turned out to be strong armed dictatorship that didn't respect due process but went overboard lynching people by association by label.

One extreme to the other.

Yup, exactly.

Edgetho this is the first I heard the Klan was purely political against Republicans and not blacks per se.
Could it be both, that the lynch mobs rose in reaction to fear of black criminal mobs, and the political organization arose in opposition to party leadership. One part was political and one part was physical response to criminal threats against property and security. Could it be both combined?

Politics really didn't enter into it as I see it. The mistake these revisionists keep on making is ass-uming that the polarized binary-bot dichotomy they see today where literally everything in the world is made up of either "Democrat" or "Republican" atoms --- was actually the world people of the past were living in. They don't seem to get that not everything has a political-party basis nor is every living person part of a political party.

There was little in the way of everyday politics in 1865 Tennessee or the South. The focus was far more on simple survival and the usurpation of life as they had known it. Simple things like what to find to eat or how to stay employed. Plus, the Confederacy was already disenfranchised by the War until one by one states were reinstated. So politics wasn't in what they were doing -- the social structure was. Those simple questions of what everybody's role was in the social structure --- which was radially changing and which they were there to specifically resist.

The other mistake they keep making is focusing on "Republican" targets. It's true the Klan targeted Republicans as representatives of (what they saw as) an invading army. It's equally true they also targeted "carpetbaggers" -- who were connected with business, not politics --- and "scalawags" which were their own (white) neighbors who played along with the new despised paradigm. So they're doing a bit of cherrypicking here, missing the forest because they find one of its trees useful.

Yeah......right. Ask a democrat in the Civil War what he thought of republicans...see what they said.....keep the lie going pogo........the democrat party has been and still is the party of racism......

Tell us again how confederate army officers had no political beliefs and loved republicans......

Show us again ---- oh wait, make that for the first time ever --- that Kennedy, Crowe, McCord, Reed, Jones and/or Lester had any political connections or activities at all.

Cue crickets.

Show us they voted Republican, asswipe...and tell us again how Confederate officers who fought against Republicans...the Party of Lincoln, the man who ended slavery......tell us how they didn't vote democrat....

 

[Pogo]

I betcha dingo here prolly thinks MLK, Jr. was a republican too.

and he was.....

Really Sprinkles? Haven't been ass-whipped enough on revisionista mythology? You actually want to go for ANOTHER one?

Fine. We've done this before too. Roll tape.

>> I have few regrets in my life. At the top of the list is the demise of two children in my womb, and one miscarriage. Next to that, I regret having said to a group of peers that my Uncle M. L. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) was a Republican. My Grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr. was a registered Republican. Uncle M. L. was an independent. I assumed that since Granddaddy was a Republican, Uncle M. L. was too. After all, before the election of President John F. Kennedy, the majority of African American voters were Republicans*. Granddaddy convinced a large block of Blacks to vote for President John Kennedy after he helped to get my uncle out of jail during those turbulent days. Uncle M. L. tended to vote Democrat, but remained independent because he found weaknesses in both parties. The truth of the matter is that God isn't a Republican or a Democrat or a Tea Party voter. God doesn't vote. The squabbling and division among the parties is tragic. << -- Alveda King: 'Put the Political Strife Out to Pasture'
Which aligns with what King himself said:

>> I don’t think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses.
And I’m not inextricably bound to either party. I’m not concerned about telling you what party to vote for. But what I’m saying is this, that we must gain the ballot and use it wisely2.”

(2. During a sermon in Atlanta one month earlier, King revealed that he had been offered money by both political parties to rally black voters for the 1956 election: They told me they had $75,000 to spend towards obtaining the Negro vote. A large part of this money would have been set aside for my own advantage. I studied their offers long and prayed over it again and again. Then I told them I couldn’t do it. I knew it would have given me anopportunity to educate my children and would have given me my first possessions in the world, but I could not sacrifice my soul in the structure of partisan politics” (“King Warns Leaders Of PartisanPolitics,” Montgomery Advertiser, 14 January 1958). << -- Interview transcript here
--- and of course that letter to a supporter that said:

>> Thanks for your very kind letter of September 17, making inquiry concerning the way the Negro will vote in the coming election. I am of the impression that the Negro voter will go largely for the Democratic Party.

I haven’t fully decided which candidate I will vote for. In the past I have always voted the Democratic ticket. At this point I am still in a state of indecision. Stevenson seems to be more forthright on the race question than Eisenhower, but the Democratic Party is so inexplicably bound to the South that it does leave doubt in the minds of those interested in civil rights. Let us all hope that the candidate most concerned with the welfare for all people of America will win the election.

Sincerely yours,
M. L. King, Jr.,
President
(letter to Viva Sloan, 2 October 1956) << -- The Martin Luther King Jr. Papers

(*Actually Alveda King is wrong here; prior to Kennedy blacks had been voting Democrat since the 1930s)

/offtopic

Oh please. Whittle Bill on YouTube? I'll tear that poser to shreds. See if you can come up with a legitimate source.

Actually see if you can answer the damn question I posted instead of running away from it.

I can go on for weeks with never having to repost the same thing. I can parade historical accounts, historians, historical documents and public record personal testimony. I can go on and on and on. Let's go.

Then it's odd you keep resorting to the candyass bastion of YouTube.

You got docs -- bring 'em on. I challenged anyone anywhere, both in this thread and way before, to show me any political connections for Capt. John B. Kennedy, Capt. John Lester, Frank McCord, Richard Reed, Calvin Jones or James Crowe. Whatcha got? Or for that matter any racial or political motivations for any of them. Whatcha got?

How 'bout the bonus track --- any political activity or affiliation for William J. "Colonel Joe" Simmons?
Again ---- whatcha got? Something a bit more tangible than YouFuckingTube if you please.

Bring it.

YEs....officers of the confederate army.......had absolutely no political affiliation or sympathies after having fought republicans and lost.....that is just an insane proposition that holds no water.

Two were officers as far as we know. And yes, no known political affiliations at all. No such references exist --- go ahead, try to find one. They were after all in their twenties.

And the Civil War wasn't "Democrats" against "Republicans" --- it was "Union" versus "Confederacy". And again --- NOT EVERYBODY BELONGS TO A ******* POLITICAL PARTY. I'm afraid just because you live in that tiny little swimming pool .............. it doesn't mean everybody else has to follow your lack of imagination.

So your burden of proof continues to hang around without a dance partner.

Yes.....tell us how Martin Luther king voted for the democrats......the party that created Jim Crow, and whose terrorist arm the kkk murdered black Civil Rights activists...please...keep telling us he voted for that party......as opposed to the party that freed the slaves, actually fought against the democrat klan and fought to get blacks their Civil Rights...keep telling us that, and then you can stop pissing on our legs and telling us it is raining....

In the 1870s President Grant fought the Klan valiantly. He was a Republican -- back in that party's early days when it was composed of Liberals and Radial Liberals. In the 1960s LBJ became the first POTUS since Grant to fight the Klan. He was a Democrat and another Liberal.

That doesn't make either political party 'racist' or 'non-racist'. You'd need a Composition Fallacy to do that. A fallacy you're already familiar with. But it does make them true events.

As for telling you how Martin Luther King voted --- I just did that. And you did too, calling him a "fool".

 

[paperview]

Not a lie asshole......King was a black fighting for Civil Rights against democrats who were murdering blacks and Republicans......so you say he voted democrat? Are you really that dumb?....

He doubles down.

Next you'll be telling us King voted for Goldwater.

Yes....please...explain to us how King voted democrat until Kennedy...please...show us the link.......

and he supported LBJ and was a fool for doing it...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....LBJ was the democrat racist.....and now blacks are paying for that back stab against Goldwater with the lives of their children.....never, ever, trust democrats...they are racists through and through....

"Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero."

You're cracking me up here man.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.

The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

...

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist.

His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America,

I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy. " - MLK,Jr.

The King Institute | The Works of Martin Luther King, Jr ..

You have no idea what you are talking about....all you know about Goldwater is the lies the democrats keep telling you.....of the two, Goldwater and LBJ, the Civil Rights leader was Goldwater....who worked on civil rights issues his entire life.....lbj....turned to the 1964 civil rights act after voting against all the others and voting against anti-lynching laws......

Martin Luther was a fool......he sided with the racist over the Civil Rights hero......simply to get a flawed civil rights bill passed...and black children are dying to this day because of it....

Here you go moron.....this is the man King didn't support...to support lbj, the man who voted against every civil rights act he could...until he realized they couldn't murder enough blacks to keep them from voting....

The Truth About Goldwater...and King's folly...

Barry M. Goldwater: The Most Consequential Loser in American Politics



Goldwater treated all people the same. As a private citizen, he flew mercy missions to Navaho reservations, never asking for recognition or accepting payment. He felt that “the red man seemed as much—if not more—a part of Arizona and America as any white or black person.”[20] Moreover, a few weeks after Goldwater was discharged from the Army in November 1945, Democratic Arizona Governor Sidney Preston Osborn asked him to organize the Arizona Air National Guard. One of Goldwater’s first recommendations, soon approved, was to desegregate the unit. Goldwater’s integration of the state’s Air National Guard took place more than two years before President Harry Truman integrated the U.S. armed forces.

Goldwater was an early member of the Arizona chapters of both the NAACP and the National Urban League, even making up the latter’s operating deficit when it was getting started. Later as a Senator, he desegregated the Senate cafeteria in 1953, demanding that his black legislative assistant, Kathrine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee after learning she had been denied service.

In the mid-1970s, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, investigating improper operations of the intelligence community in the

Not a lie asshole......King was a black fighting for Civil Rights against democrats who were murdering blacks and Republicans......so you say he voted democrat? Are you really that dumb?....

He doubles down.

Next you'll be telling us King voted for Goldwater.

Yes....please...explain to us how King voted democrat until Kennedy...please...show us the link.......

and he supported LBJ and was a fool for doing it...Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero....LBJ was the democrat racist.....and now blacks are paying for that back stab against Goldwater with the lives of their children.....never, ever, trust democrats...they are racists through and through....

"Goldwater was the Civil Rights hero."

You're cracking me up here man.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.

The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

...

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist.

His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America,

I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy. " - MLK,Jr.

The King Institute | The Works of Martin Luther King, Jr ..

You have no idea what you are talking about....all you know about Goldwater is the lies the democrats keep telling you.....

You can spam with that NRO shit till you're blue in the face -- I quoting MLK,Jr's OWN WORDS.

I think he knew what the **** he was talking about - As he LIVED THROUGH IT.

"The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism.

All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right.

The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

...

While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist."

Pay attention to that last line. He gave aid and comfort to the racist. Even as he said Goldwater was not a racist Someone else was just elected with the same dog whistle.

MLK, Jr. knew what the hell he was talking about, even as you spit on him