Could The Civil Rights Act of 1964 Be Passed Today?

[Edgetho]

^^^^ What complete idiotic drivel.

I negged the bitch.

I recommend it. It makes you feel better

 

[WelfareQueen]

MarcATL.....any response to the fact Northern Liberals made Jim Crow the Law of the Land. I really would be fascinated by your input.

 

[Steinlight]

Yes, unfortunately.

Why you say that?

Cause I don't want blacks in my store. They steal all the skittles and ice tea when I am not looking for their sizzurp. Trayvon Martian 2.0

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It should have been the Civil Rights Bill of 1957, since it was nearly identical to the one Ike tried to pass, but Senate Majority Leader LBJ refused to let the "****** Bill" pass in his Senate.

 

[Plasmaball]

It's an asinine question from an asinine poster.

Had the bill not been passed we would have already fought a war, a Civil War, because of the lack of it.

And I would have been on the side fighting for its passage while most of the white dimocraps in here would have been on the sidelines hiding under something.

Stupid question by a stupid, and juvenile, poster

god you are stupid. Its a fun exercise in politics. Not lets blame people.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

In this current political climate?

Why/why not?

It would all depend on if the Republicans could break a 57 day filibuster by the Democrats, which is what occurred in 1964.

 

[MarcATL]

In this current political climate?

Why/why not?

No, it would not pass. The parties we have today are not the parties we had in 1964. While the left may have moved to the left (debatable) the right has taken giant steps to the right (not debatable). In the past the parties had disagreements but the goal was always to make America a better place. Case in point: The Democrats believe it is best for the country if everyone has access to health care. The republicans have no problem with millions of people not being able to afford or get health care. You be the judge what is best for America. In the past differences were handled by compromise which is exactly how they are supposed to be handled in a democracy. That sentiment does not exist in the republican party of today. Don't believe me? Think about the word RINO. The republican goal is to win and the idea of compromise has ceased to exist in the republican party. Let a republican candidate even hint at compromise on anything and they are immediately thrown under the bus. How many times have we seen republicans say something that sounded vaguely like 'compromise' only to have to walk it back for the tea parties benefit. No, the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 would not have a chance of passing today and more's the sadness for that truth.

Spot On!

I'd like to see a USMB RWer refute these points one-by-one.

 

[MarcATL]

Yes, unfortunately.

Why you say that?

Cause I don't want blacks in my store. They steal all the skittles and ice tea when I am not looking for their sizzurp. Trayvon Martian 2.0

Thanks for showing your colors Steinlight.

 

[MarcATL]

MarcATL.....any response to the fact Northern Liberals made Jim Crow the Law of the Land. I really would be fascinated by your input.

Sure. My response is simple.

Despite all else, the "Northern Liberals" got it under control and got rid of it, then had to come down to the Dirty South to get rid of the rampant racist segregation there.

History bares this out.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If Republicans introduced the legislation, like they did many times between 1866 and 1959, dimocrap scum would fight it tooth and nail. Like they did EVERY time Republicans introduced it.

And to the GOP's credit, when LBJ was able to get the votes of the large majority of the Dem party, turning the fight into one of geography instead of party, the bill passed.

 

[Steinlight]

Why you say that?

Cause I don't want blacks in my store. They steal all the skittles and ice tea when I am not looking for their sizzurp. Trayvon Martian 2.0

Thanks for showing your colors Steinlight.

I am a person without color.

 

[Avorysuds]

Ah....why would it need to be passed today?

That wasn't the question.

But to indulge you...

If it wasn't passed then, and never had been, it would still be needed to have gotten passed.

racism was on it's way out, in fact it was Government that kept segregation live an well. It was law to segregate.

Government slowed the process down, if it were not for Government and the racist law you are asking about in the OP we would prolly have almost fully abolished segregation and racism in our society, but law keeps segregation, division and racism alive and well as it was intended.


Progressive policies are meant to divide, not make anything better.

 

[Darkwind]

In this current political climate?

Why/why not?

No, it would not pass. The parties we have today are not the parties we had in 1964. While the left may have moved to the left (debatable) the right has taken giant steps to the right (not debatable). In the past the parties had disagreements but the goal was always to make America a better place. Case in point: The Democrats believe it is best for the country if everyone has access to health care. The republicans have no problem with millions of people not being able to afford or get health care. You be the judge what is best for America. In the past differences were handled by compromise which is exactly how they are supposed to be handled in a democracy. That sentiment does not exist in the republican party of today. Don't believe me? Think about the word RINO. The republican goal is to win and the idea of compromise has ceased to exist in the republican party. Let a republican candidate even hint at compromise on anything and they are immediately thrown under the bus. How many times have we seen republicans say something that sounded vaguely like 'compromise' only to have to walk it back for the tea parties benefit. No, the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 would not have a chance of passing today and more's the sadness for that truth.

The fact that you think the right has moved right is indicative of your inability to process reality.

Today's moderate right would have been extreme leftists 50 years ago while the left of today would have been considered complete idiot extremists. The far right of today falls into a slightly left version of JFK.

To answer the OP. The answer is no. If it is a law prohibiting government from doing something, no Democrat (in truth, no politician today) would vote for it. The Democrats believe that government is the mana that people crave and need.

 

[Contumacious]

In this current political climate?

Why/why not?

Abso-fucking-lutely.

Because the populace is far more narcotized now that they were in 1964.

.

 

[WelfareQueen]

It should have been the Civil Rights Bill of 1957, since it was nearly identical to the one Ike tried to pass, but Senate Majority Leader LBJ refused to let the "****** Bill" pass in his Senate.

Please, don't confuse people with the facts....

 

[WelfareQueen]

MarcATL.....any response to the fact Northern Liberals made Jim Crow the Law of the Land. I really would be fascinated by your input.

Sure. My response is simple.

Despite all else, the "Northern Liberals" got it under control and got rid of it, then had to come down to the Dirty South to get rid of the rampant racist segregation there.

History bares this out.

So....the Northern Liberals helped to pass a law 70 years later to correct the fucked up Supreme Court decision they passed 70 years before. Got it.

 

[blackhawk]

I highly doubt anything passed in the 1960s could get passed in today's political climate a climate that both parties have created throwing that in before we get to far into the it's because of Republicans or Democrats stuff.

 

[MarcATL]

Ah....why would it need to be passed today?

That wasn't the question.

But to indulge you...

If it wasn't passed then, and never had been, it would still be needed to have gotten passed.

racism was on it's way out, in fact it was Government that kept segregation live an well. It was law to segregate.

Government slowed the process down, if it were not for Government and the racist law you are asking about in the OP we would prolly have almost fully abolished segregation and racism in our society, but law keeps segregation, division and racism alive and well as it was intended.


Progressive policies are meant to divide, not make anything better.

Laws don't write themselves, it's the PEOPLE that write them.

Those Southerners holding on to their so-called "traditional values" of cotton-pickin' and Jim Crow Laws.

Nice try.

 

[thereisnospoon]

In this current political climate?

Why/why not?

Probably 95% of Sens and Reps would vote yes...
The CRA of 1964 was an idea whose time had come.

 

[WelfareQueen]

That wasn't the question.

But to indulge you...

If it wasn't passed then, and never had been, it would still be needed to have gotten passed.

racism was on it's way out, in fact it was Government that kept segregation live an well. It was law to segregate.

Government slowed the process down, if it were not for Government and the racist law you are asking about in the OP we would prolly have almost fully abolished segregation and racism in our society, but law keeps segregation, division and racism alive and well as it was intended.


Progressive policies are meant to divide, not make anything better.

Laws don't write themselves, it's the PEOPLE that write them.

Those Southerners holding on to their so-called "traditional values" of cotton-pickin' and Jim Crow Laws.

Nice try.

Still missing that Northern Liberals made Jim Crow the Law of the Land. Nice try at deflection. Sorry = fail.