Setting the record straight on the the Civil Rights Act

[NYcarbineer]

And now the entire south is painted red. Why is that?

Because the Democratic Party abandoned its CONSERVATIVE wing and left those racist conservatives with nowhere else to go except to the Republican Party,

which welcomed them with open arms.

 

[rightwinger]

Uh-oh....old liewinger just got caught lying again...

In post #97 he states (and I quote) "Any way you slice it, it was conservatives who opposed civil rights". But in post #100 right here he said (in response to a great post about the Dumbocrats ugly history) "maybe if you tried some history that is not from 50 years ago". Well, wait a second, 50 years ago was the Civil Rights Act. And you just said that conservatives "opposed" civil rights. But then you turn around and state that conservatives need to point to 50 years ago to show what they've done for minorities.

Oops.... Like most liars, liewinger is literally too stupid to remember when he said just three posts later and contradicts himself. I love when you people get caught lying.

I know you are trying your best, but you just can't seem to get it right

You can't use Conservative and Republican interchangeably. Especially when you talk about 1965

That's the best you can do liewinger?!? You got caught lying and that's the best response you could come up with?

You know what can be used interchangeably? Dumbocrats and racism. In any era. For their entire miserable existence.

I can't tell if you are just lying or stupid. I suspect both

In the 50s and 60s you had both liberal and conservative Democrats. Same with the Republicans. The Conservative Democrats lived in the area we call "the south" along with conservative Republicans.
It was CONSERVATIVES who opposed Civil Rights. CONSERVATIVES from both parties

If you want to make it a Democrat/Republican issue, more Democrats voted for Civil Rights and a Democratic President signed it into law

 

[P@triot]

And now the entire south is painted red. Why is that?

Because hundreds of millions of people have died over the past 50 years. And hundreds of millions of people have moved states over the past 50 years.

Might I suggest you head to your nearest Hallmark store and purchase a little desktop calendar with puppies or kittens on it? You seem to be completely unaware that it is 2014 and nearly every racist Dumbocrat who voted for JFK and LBJ are dead. I mean, we're probably talking like 80% or more. JFK himself is dead. As is LBJ. As is Jackie Kennedy. Hell, even JFK Jr. is dead.

Now please tell us again how LBJ voters are alive and well and "switched" over to the Republican Party so we can all point and laugh at you. By the way, I'm still waiting for you to explain to me how you pulled all of the tolerant conservatives away from the a Republican Party and over to the Dumbocrats. I mean, if all of the racist Dumbocrats joined our side, all of the Civil Rights Republicans had to leave the party or there would be a one party system with about 95% of the population. So how did you pull all of those small-government, constitutional conservatives over to the party of big-government, anti-constitutional parasite party?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The South in 1964 wasn't conservative? That's funny.

Barry Goldwater, one of the FEW Republican Senators who voted AGAINST the Civil Rights Act in 1964, also ran for president in 1964,

about all he won in that election was the South.

He is also one of the most conservative candidates from either party in the modern era to run for president.

Now let the geniuses here explain why suddenly all those southern states with all their supposedly liberal Democrats suddenly became conservative Republicans at the ballot box

The 88th Congress (1963 - 1965):

88th United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The entire south is painted blue. ON].

Was I not referring to the 1964 presidential election, which looked like this?

Now what did I get wrong?

 

[P@triot]

And now the entire south is painted red. Why is that?

Because the Democratic Party abandoned its CONSERVATIVE wing and left those racist conservatives with nowhere else to go except to the Republican Party,

which welcomed them with open arms.

So you're admitting the Dumbocrats have become more and more radical and resemble nothing of the JFK-era party? Yeah, we've been telling you people that for 10 years now and you keep denying it. I love when Dumbocrats have an accidental moment of honesty...

The party has been hijacked by communists/socialists/marxists and that's why when people parrot JFK's policies they are attacked as "Tea Baggers". Tells you just how unhinged the Dumbocrats are today.

 

[KNB]

Wait..... Teabaggers are fans of JFK?

And do you think that the Republican party today is the same party as that of Lincoln?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[ So how did you pull all of those small-government, constitutional conservatives over to the party of big-government, anti-constitutional parasite party?

The Republican Party became a northern moderate conservative, southern racist conservative coalition party.

 

[Intense]

As TheBlaze reports, when it came time to pass the Civil Rights Act, six Senate Republicans voted against the bill, while 21 Senate Democrats opposed it. It ultimately passed by an overall vote of 73-27. In the House, 96 Democrats and 34 Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Act, and it passed with an overall 290-130 vote. While the majority of Democrats in both chambers voted for the legislation, the bulk of the opposition came from Democrats.

The Republicans who opposed the law did so primarily because of “discomfort about forcing private business to comply with public accommodation laws.” The majority of those Republicans actually supported the 1957 and 1960 bills signed by President Dwight Eisenhower.
[/url]

If you look at the results of that vote the VAST majority of votes against the bill came from the classic confederate states. Which are currently solidly republican. I'd blame the people instead of the parties in those states.

Hey, Einstein, at the time, what was the political persuasion of those states???

If you have any argument at all it would be that the South was heavily against the Civil Rights Bill, both the strong Democrat Majority and the weak Republican Minority.

 

[Freewill]

[q

and its the democrat who continue to keep them enslaved on welfare. so when is this "helping hand" going to break the cycle? when do the poor stop being poor? when do they become educated and competitive in the job market? they don't do they. the cycle goes on and on and on. they continue to rely on the hand outs. they continue to live in poverty. they continue to remain uneducated and without skills.

1) most black folks have jobs.

BlackDemographics.com | EMPLOYMENT

2) The majority of folks on Welfare are white

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/who-benefits-from-the-safety-net/?_r=0

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.

3) You spew out shit like this, you kind of sound like this guy....

your second point, that there are more white people on welfare than black kind of messes up their "welfare mother" dog whistle meme.

you and your ilk point out very well the problem with the liberal mindset. If a person was to mention welfare reform what is the first words out of the liberal's mouth? You got it, RACISM. But as the liberals like to point out most on welfare are not black. The welfare mother thing is just a liberal lying talking point. Maybe a few said that a few years ago and the left took off with it.

As I said, if the poor are mentioned the liberal left automatically equates that to blacks.

If welfare is mentioned the liberal mind equates that to blacks.

Really I have to wonder how long the blacks are going to let the white liberal use them for their political agenda. Quite remarkable that the black man has not got fed up with the party that actually did put them in chains.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And now the entire south is painted red. Why is that?

Because the Democratic Party abandoned its CONSERVATIVE wing and left those racist conservatives with nowhere else to go except to the Republican Party,

which welcomed them with open arms.

So you're admitting the Dumbocrats have become more and more radical and resemble nothing of the JFK-era party? Yeah, we've been telling you people that for 10 years now and you keep denying it. I love when Dumbocrats have an accidental moment of honesty...

The party has been hijacked by communists/socialists/marxists and that's why when people parrot JFK's policies they are attacked as "Tea Baggers". Tells you just how unhinged the Dumbocrats are today.

I'm not surprised that a racist **** like you would consider becoming anti-segregationist a 'radicalization' of the Democrats.

In the 1850's the most ardent anti-slavery faction in the Republican Party was referred to as the 'Radical Republicans'.

 

[Freewill]

As TheBlaze reports, when it came time to pass the Civil Rights Act, six Senate Republicans voted against the bill, while 21 Senate Democrats opposed it. It ultimately passed by an overall vote of 73-27. In the House, 96 Democrats and 34 Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Act, and it passed with an overall 290-130 vote. While the majority of Democrats in both chambers voted for the legislation, the bulk of the opposition came from Democrats.

The Republicans who opposed the law did so primarily because of “discomfort about forcing private business to comply with public accommodation laws.” The majority of those Republicans actually supported the 1957 and 1960 bills signed by President Dwight Eisenhower.
[/url]

If you look at the results of that vote the VAST majority of votes against the bill came from the classic confederate states. Which are currently solidly republican. I'd blame the people instead of the parties in those states.

Hey, Einstein, at the time, what was the political persuasion of those states???

If you have any argument at all it would be that the South was heavily against the Civil Rights Bill, both the strong Democrat Majority and the weak Republican Minority.

According to democrats the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

 

[Intense]

[ So how did you pull all of those small-government, constitutional conservatives over to the party of big-government, anti-constitutional parasite party?

The Republican Party became a northern moderate conservative, southern racist conservative coalition party.

I think you are hanging around with too many State Employees, as opposed to those that actually work for a living. When was the last time you either broke a sweat or worked 40 hours? How many paid days off do you get a year? Don't you think that your judgement is just a tiny bit tainted?

 

[KNB]

What is the alternative for poor families besides food stamps? Get yet another minimum wage job? What if they're already working two minimum wage jobs and it still isn't enough to keep up with rising prices on everything?

 

[NYcarbineer]

As TheBlaze reports, when it came time to pass the Civil Rights Act, six Senate Republicans voted against the bill, while 21 Senate Democrats opposed it. It ultimately passed by an overall vote of 73-27. In the House, 96 Democrats and 34 Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Act, and it passed with an overall 290-130 vote. While the majority of Democrats in both chambers voted for the legislation, the bulk of the opposition came from Democrats.

The Republicans who opposed the law did so primarily because of “discomfort about forcing private business to comply with public accommodation laws.” The majority of those Republicans actually supported the 1957 and 1960 bills signed by President Dwight Eisenhower.
[/url]

If you look at the results of that vote the VAST majority of votes against the bill came from the classic confederate states. Which are currently solidly republican. I'd blame the people instead of the parties in those states.

Hey, Einstein, at the time, what was the political persuasion of those states???

Conservative.

 

[rightwinger]

Any way you slice it, it was conservatives who opposed civil rights

They still do

except it was a democratic party who fought a war to keep them as slaves while republicans fought for their freedom. republicans voted for their civil rights while many democrats opposed them. we know how liberals slice things. always cutting into someone elses piece and offering nothing in return.

Imagine that..


150 years ago Republicans supported the rights of blacks. You should be proud. Unfortunately, you have since turned blacks against you for good

 

[P@triot]

Wait..... Teabaggers are fans of JFK?

And do you think that the Republican party today is the same party as that of Lincoln?

Do I think the Republican's are the same party? No. They are just JFK-era liberals.

But the Tea Party on the other hand, where real conservatives are, yes they are still the same party as that of Lincoln. We still believe that slavery is wrong (while a Dumbocrats still demand it in the form of Medicaid, Welfare, SNAP, Obamacare, etc.). We still believe that the Constitution is to be adhered to. We stand for all of the things are founders did - freedom from oppression, the right to bear arms, etc.

 

[P@triot]

The 88th Congress (1963 - 1965):

88th United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The entire south is painted blue. ON].

Was I not referring to the 1964 presidential election, which looked like this?

Now what did I get wrong?

Based on that I'd say you got everything wrong. Texas is blue. Florida is blue. South Carolina is blue. North Carolina is blue. So is Tennessee. West Virginia. Virginia. Kentucky.

Shall I continue? You seem to be a bit confused here. And ALL of them (including Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, etc.) were represented by Dumbocrats in Congress. Gee, how did that happen of they were all "republicans"???

 

[KNB]

Wait..... Teabaggers are fans of JFK?

And do you think that the Republican party today is the same party as that of Lincoln?

Do I think the Republican's are the same party? No. They are just JFK-era liberals.

But the Tea Party on the other hand, where real conservatives are, yes they are still the same party as that of Lincoln. We still believe that slavery is wrong (while a Dumbocrats still demand it in the form of Medicaid, Welfare, SNAP, Obamacare, etc.). We still believe that the Constitution is to be adhered to. We stand for all of the things are founders did - freedom from oppression, the right to bear arms, etc.

You obviously have the freedom from education, as well.

You claim that the Tea Party is the party of Lincoln who opposes slavery, and supports everything that "ARE" founders did, like freedom, gun rights, etc.

Of course, "etc." means everything except SLAVERY, right?

 

[P@triot]

Because the Democratic Party abandoned its CONSERVATIVE wing and left those racist conservatives with nowhere else to go except to the Republican Party,

which welcomed them with open arms.

So you're admitting the Dumbocrats have become more and more radical and resemble nothing of the JFK-era party? Yeah, we've been telling you people that for 10 years now and you keep denying it. I love when Dumbocrats have an accidental moment of honesty...

The party has been hijacked by communists/socialists/marxists and that's why when people parrot JFK's policies they are attacked as "Tea Baggers". Tells you just how unhinged the Dumbocrats are today.

I'm not surprised that a racist **** like you would consider becoming anti-segregationist a 'radicalization' of the Democrats.

In the 1850's the most ardent anti-slavery faction in the Republican Party was referred to as the 'Radical Republicans'.

Uh, you're the one who proudly stands with the racist Dumbocrats of the KKK. I stand with the party which freed the slaves and lead the Civil Rights movement.

Your party is not "radicalized" because of your "anti-segregationist" views (hell, you people still hate minorities). You're "radicalized" because the party was hijacked by greedy, lazy communists/marxists/socialists such as yourself!

 

[P@triot]

Wait..... Teabaggers are fans of JFK?

And do you think that the Republican party today is the same party as that of Lincoln?

Do I think the Republican's are the same party? No. They are just JFK-era liberals.

But the Tea Party on the other hand, where real conservatives are, yes they are still the same party as that of Lincoln. We still believe that slavery is wrong (while a Dumbocrats still demand it in the form of Medicaid, Welfare, SNAP, Obamacare, etc.). We still believe that the Constitution is to be adhered to. We stand for all of the things are founders did - freedom from oppression, the right to bear arms, etc.

You obviously have the freedom from education, as well.

You claim that the Tea Party is the party of Lincoln who opposes slavery, and supports everything that "ARE" founders did, like freedom, gun rights, etc.

Of course, "etc." means everything except SLAVERY, right?

Uh, genius, your the party who believes in slavery. You cry every day on USMB like a little baby ***** that Americans should have to labor all day and have the fruits of that labor turned over to you (welfare checks, food stamps, "free" healthcare).

How do I know this? Well, your bizarre tantrum for one. You've been incapable of disputing one thing I've said (because it has all been factual) and so despite stating "freedom of oppression" you come back with the irrational and bizarre response that "etc means everything except slavery".

So while I clearly stated "freedom from oppression" and you demand that the American workers is forced into slavery on your behalf, you turn it around and try to make the case that I'm the one for slavery because I said "etc."

Yeah, that's some modern day libtard-logic for you. "Etc." is now code word for "I'm for slavery"

Meanwhile bozo here demands that people are forced to labor for his benefit.