What I disgreed with: "...while progressives sought to "progress" past them"
Basic civil rights is not progressing past anything.
Upvote
0
How the GOP became the White Man's Party
- Thread starter stamperben
- Start date
What I disgreed with: "...while progressives sought to "progress" past them"
Basic civil rights is not progressing past anything.
It's irrational to claim that the Democratic party exemplifies inclusion when they push they have racism as part of their platform. Think about it: how can you claim to be against racism when you're for racist quotas/profiling?
Racism like that is not only offensive, but violates forum rules. I'm appalled that you think that being white makes someone racist. You know, you're really proving my point for me.Who's talking about a fringe?
From 2012:
See the blizzard she talked about? And I ain't talking Dairy Queen.
Upvote
0
Traditional conservatism finds its roots in the French Revolution. Men like Edmund Burke saw reactionaries making liberal, untested changes that were bound to fail. When they inevitably did, the people in office were guillotined. This happened over and over. Burke came along and pointed out that change is not intrinsically bad or good; just don't make such liberal sweeping changes. Instead, make incremental, tested and verified changes; id est: conservative changes.
The "Far Left" has nothing to do with progress in the sense of improvement. With small government individualism on the right, and large government collectivism on the left, then we see members such as the National Socialists, Mao Tse Tung(arguably the worst human ever), Kim Jung Un, Che Guevara, and other totalitarians. Oligarchy is the hallmark of the far left. It is the antitheses of equality under the law; a ruling few have the overwhelming majority of power under the law, and the majority have none.
Upvote
0
What do you think the victims of racism feel about quotas leveling the field? What they think about the civil rights legislation? About voting rights? Or are you going to deny people of color are victims?
It's against forum rules to post a picture of a convention where the vast majority of its participants were white?
I'm having a bit of forums blur, but I asked somewhere today just exactly what it is that the GOP has in place to help lift people of color out of poverty? Any people out of poverty? What laws? What programs? Anything? Try researching that KC, and get back by Sunday if you can.
Upvote
0
Your question was irrational. Whatever 'inclusion' means, it doesn't make racism suddenly not racism. That makes no sense. Also, the various other bigotries euphemized by affirmative action doesn't change the fact that Democrats are openly racist.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Forum Runner. Pardon my brevity and spelling.
Upvote
0
- Jun 9, 2012
- 6,488
- 3,399
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in. - YouTube
History is what it is. It was FDR who appointed a former Klan member to the supreme court, and Ike who sent federal troops to enforce civil rights law. As has been illustrated every civil rights act initiated since the end of the Civil War were overwhelmingly backed by Republicans. It seems you are attempting to make the same claim as the writer of the OP article, that yesterday's racist Democrats are today's racist Republicans.
Far left as in Progressive? The Progressive movement has a history as well. Quote:
“We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for the crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.... Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”
This was said by Oliver Wendell Holmes, at the time a sitting judge on the Supreme Court. What imbeciles do you think he was referring to?
It was, and continues to be, exactly color blind. I would agree it is not culture blind, but that is a different issue. My sense is here you are making a backhand reference to gay rights. But as I have said elsewhere the gay rights movement is not a civil rights movement. It is a special rights movement, one seized upon by the left largely in order to create another victim class.
So the Dixiecrats were conservatives? Oh, wait, that is the revisionist narrative. But with the exception of epic landslide election results, Republicans did not begin routinely winning the so-called Goldwater southern states for another 30 years. That represents an entire new generation of voters, voters who did not grow up in during the heyday of the civil rights movement. Again, there is no logic in claiming the year 2000 election results reflect the same attitudes as the 1968 results. Wallace was running in 1968. Southern voters over at least the last 20 years have been far more motivated by voting against the Democratic platform of gun control, abortion on demand, weak national defense and bashing America than by secret racist code words.
This is projection, plain and simple. Since blacks became a noticeable voting block liberals have spouting the narrative they are horribly oppressed wretches, victims of the evil white man (that is to say, the evil white Conservative/Republican man), only able to achieve anything in life if they remain subservient to their white liberal masters. That is why any successful conservative black is so vilified by the left, as their success is anathema to that message.
Easy. As others have said the promotion of affirmative action has as its heart the notion some people, notably blacks, are incapable of achieving success unless they have assistance from their benevolent white superiors. It is perfectly acceptable, not to mention moral and correct, to pass a law which prohibits, for example, an educational institution from barring someone admittance based on their skin color. It is something entirely different to pass a law which states applicants must be admitted based on nothing but their skin color.
In addition, why insist on keeping a group of people perpetually on public assistance other than to perpetuate a dependent class? A dependent class who would wouldn't dare vote you out of office? Toss in decades of blaming it on the other guy and you have quite a racket.
That the Republicans have lost the majority of the black vote is not entirely the fault of Republicans. As stated, decades of being told those people over there hate you takes its toll.
Review Johnson's 1965 State of the Union speech. In the entire speech he only devotes about 35 words to civil rights. I mean, here is most of what he said:
"--to Negro Americans, through enforcement of the civil rights law and elimination of barriers to the right to vote;"
Listen to liberal/Democrats give speeches now and decades after the laws were passed you would think none of it ever happened.
Johnson, in that same speech, also said this, quote:
"I propose that we make new efforts to control and prevent crime and delinquency."
Control and prevent crime and delinquency? He must have been using code words and dog whistles in order to pander to the racist southerners listening in that night.
Source for quotes: Lyndon B. Johnson: Annual Message to the Congress on the State of the Union
History is what it is. It was FDR who appointed a former Klan member to the supreme court, and Ike who sent federal troops to enforce civil rights law. As has been illustrated every civil rights act initiated since the end of the Civil War were overwhelmingly backed by Republicans. It seems you are attempting to make the same claim as the writer of the OP article, that yesterday's racist Democrats are today's racist Republicans.
Far left as in Progressive? The Progressive movement has a history as well. Quote:
“We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for the crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.... Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”
This was said by Oliver Wendell Holmes, at the time a sitting judge on the Supreme Court. What imbeciles do you think he was referring to?
It was, and continues to be, exactly color blind. I would agree it is not culture blind, but that is a different issue. My sense is here you are making a backhand reference to gay rights. But as I have said elsewhere the gay rights movement is not a civil rights movement. It is a special rights movement, one seized upon by the left largely in order to create another victim class.
So the Dixiecrats were conservatives? Oh, wait, that is the revisionist narrative. But with the exception of epic landslide election results, Republicans did not begin routinely winning the so-called Goldwater southern states for another 30 years. That represents an entire new generation of voters, voters who did not grow up in during the heyday of the civil rights movement. Again, there is no logic in claiming the year 2000 election results reflect the same attitudes as the 1968 results. Wallace was running in 1968. Southern voters over at least the last 20 years have been far more motivated by voting against the Democratic platform of gun control, abortion on demand, weak national defense and bashing America than by secret racist code words.
This is projection, plain and simple. Since blacks became a noticeable voting block liberals have spouting the narrative they are horribly oppressed wretches, victims of the evil white man (that is to say, the evil white Conservative/Republican man), only able to achieve anything in life if they remain subservient to their white liberal masters. That is why any successful conservative black is so vilified by the left, as their success is anathema to that message.
Easy. As others have said the promotion of affirmative action has as its heart the notion some people, notably blacks, are incapable of achieving success unless they have assistance from their benevolent white superiors. It is perfectly acceptable, not to mention moral and correct, to pass a law which prohibits, for example, an educational institution from barring someone admittance based on their skin color. It is something entirely different to pass a law which states applicants must be admitted based on nothing but their skin color.
In addition, why insist on keeping a group of people perpetually on public assistance other than to perpetuate a dependent class? A dependent class who would wouldn't dare vote you out of office? Toss in decades of blaming it on the other guy and you have quite a racket.
That the Republicans have lost the majority of the black vote is not entirely the fault of Republicans. As stated, decades of being told those people over there hate you takes its toll.
Review Johnson's 1965 State of the Union speech. In the entire speech he only devotes about 35 words to civil rights. I mean, here is most of what he said:
"--to Negro Americans, through enforcement of the civil rights law and elimination of barriers to the right to vote;"
Listen to liberal/Democrats give speeches now and decades after the laws were passed you would think none of it ever happened.
Johnson, in that same speech, also said this, quote:
"I propose that we make new efforts to control and prevent crime and delinquency."
Control and prevent crime and delinquency? He must have been using code words and dog whistles in order to pander to the racist southerners listening in that night.
Source for quotes: Lyndon B. Johnson: Annual Message to the Congress on the State of the Union
Last edited:
Upvote
0
That is because they literally are. Do you think the populations of southern states were switched out for another set of completely different people?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_marWaSj8mQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
I think this is kinda relevant to the whole discussion.
I think this is kinda relevant to the whole discussion.
Upvote
0
What is the current outreach to people of color by either the conservative movement or the GOP? What is being offered to the victims of racial discrimination?
And since you continue to bring up the past in your arguments, what was offered to southern blacks by the Republican party that would have drawn them to the GOP during Reconstruction and after? Why didn't that work and/or last?
(And nowhere has it been said that dog whistles weren't used by racist Dems [LBJ] either. But the focus of the thread is on the GOP.)
Upvote
0
- Jun 9, 2012
- 6,488
- 3,399
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Time has a way of doing just that. The issue here, however, is not that following the Civil Rights Act of 1964 all the racism in America just vanished. The issue is the claim all the racist gravitated over to the Republican party because Nixon employed a campaign of secret code words. He didn't, that is a myth. As has been illustrated prior, in 1976 every Southern state except Virginia went for Jimmy Carter.
How did Carter attract the southern racist vote without employing code words and dog whistles? How did Clinton in 1992? I asked this question before but received no answer, so I will try again. Why does this notion of southern racist whites voting in mass for a candidate only apply when their state happens to go for a Republican?
Every piece of civil rights legislation introduced and passed since the end of the American Civil War. Following the Civil War the Republicans ratified the 13th and 14 Amendments. The Democrats founded the KKK.
Because when blacks became a noticeable voting block, a voting block with power, liberals/Democrats immediately began to pander to them. Democrats began their campaign of revisionist history an slander against the other white guys, all while embracing Robert Byrd as a permanent member of the liberal elite and marveling at how clean and articulate Obama was.
The OP article narrative isn't new, nor has it evolved over time. The liberal establishment has been looking for signs of racism on the part of any Republican for so long now they see it everywhere and in everything. Back in 2002 Bob Herbert wrote an article for the New York Times entitled "Racism and the G.O.P." From that article, quote:
"The Republican Party has become a haven for white racist attitudes and anti-black policies. The party of Lincoln is now a safe house for bigotry. It's the party of the Southern strategies and the Willie Horton campaigns and Bob Jones University and the relentless and unconscionable efforts to disenfranchise black voters. For those who now think the Democratic Party is not racist enough, the answer is the G.O.P. And there are precious few voices anywhere in the G.O.P. willing to step up and say that this is wrong."
Source: Racism and the G.O.P. - NYTimes.com
But Herbert's conclusions are based on the same half-truths, prevarications, and outright disinformation as the OP article here. What evidence does he base this conclusion on? In his diatribe Herbert makes the following claim:
"One of the things I remember about Mr. Reagan's 1980 presidential run was that his first major appearance in the general election campaign was in Philadelphia, Miss., which just happened to be the place where three civil rights workers -- Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner and James Chaney -- were murdered in 1964."
Except that this speech did not take place in Philadelphia, Mississippi, but rather on the grounds of the Neshoba County Fair. You can even read what he had to say.
Link: Transcript of Ronald Reagan's 1980 Neshoba County Fair speech - The Neshoba Democrat - Philadelphia, Mississippi
The Neshoba County fair grounds are just over seven miles from Philadelphia, Mississippi. But in the mind of a liberal that is concrete, rock solid, indisputable, undeniable, fool-proof and glaring evidence Reagan chose that spot to give a speech so he could send coded messages to the racist Mississippians all while trashing on the memories of three dead civil rights workers.
Yeah...except that for the 1980 presidential campaign Jimmy Carter gave his kickoff speech in Tuscumbia, Alabama. Tuscumbia Alabama is where the national headquarters of the Kinghts of the Ku Klux Klan was located.
See how this works?
Reagan, seven miles from where three civil rights workers were murdered...Reagan is promoting racism and trampling on the sacred memories of the dead.
Carter, in the town where the KKK is headquartered...don't mean nuthin'.
But between the two candidates of the 1980 election, which one said there was nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained?
Look it up, you may be surprised.
You are missing the point. The point is when LBJ used spoke of law and order he was no more using a dog whistle code word than Nixon was.
In today's America who is being racially discriminated against? I'm guessing the answer here is going to be illegal aliens. However that very term defeats the argument they are being discriminated against based on the color of their skin.
To answer the outreach question, growth and opportunity as opposed to hope and change. You know, something like a job as opposed to an unemployment check.
From GOP.com:
Eight of the 10 states with the lowest unemployment in America have Republican governors.
In Georgia, Governor Nathan Deal saved the states popular college scholarship program from bankruptcy. His plan could serve as a role model for how the federal government can enact well-thought-out entitlement reforms.
In Kansas, Governor Sam Brownback reformed the state Medicaid program to improve and expand services while saving the state more than $800 million over five years without cutting provider rates or removing people from Medicaid.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie saved retirees their pensions through pension reform, which also resulted in taxpayers saving $120 billion over 30 years.
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walkers historic collective-bargaining reforms saved taxpayers more than $1 billion.
Ohio Governor John Kasich closed an $8 billion shortfall without raising taxes. He revamped economic development and diversified his states employment base, and Ohios unemployment rate has dropped steadily.
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal transformed education in his state by enacting parental choice and teacher accountability measures into law. Education reforms that focus on the needs of children, not adults, have been passed in many GOP states. These changes include lengthening the time a teacher can qualify for tenure from just three years to five years in Tennessee, while linking tenure status to ongoing performance evaluations.
Minority children have been empowered in many GOP states thanks to scholarship programs and charter schools.
Many GOP governors have successfully eliminated duplicative programs and streamlined the size of government, making their states more customer focused and responsive to their citizens.
Legal reform, ethics reform, and civil service reform have been passed in many GOP states, changing old and ossified systems to make them more responsive to the needs of taxpayers in the 21st century, while creating stronger environments for job growth.
Upvote
0
So I ask again - Why did the GOP roll over and play dead? Where was the outreach to minorities and why TODAY is there such a push toward outreach to minorities? And why isn't it working today? Maybe you might want to read some writings of this guy, GOPlifer. He at least is presenting some ideas on how to bring the GOP into the 21st century rather than continue to bring up how grand they were in the past.
Upvote
0
I asked you what does racism mean to you. Is that irrational to ask what a term that you use mean to you?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
South Bound
I stand with Israel.
iluvatar5150 said:
Funny thing about history. It always seems to be made up of things that happened in the past.
The only "shift" I can see is in perception, not in philosophy, as conservatives are still inviting blacks to join us, while the Democrats are still playing racial identity politics and trying to keep the black man under their thumb.
iluvatar5150 said:
Actually, that's a Wikipedia article explaining what the Southern Strategy is, not an example of "Republicans copping to it".
In any event, how is wooing segregationist Democrats who happen to hold similar views on issues unrelated to race an example of racism on the part of Republicans?
iluvatar5150 said:
Do you have a source for this?
JoyJuice said:
I'll let you argue that with LBJ and the Congressional voting record.
I'll stick with the historical record. LBJ was a strong partisan and even he acknowledged that it was the Republicans who saved the law from the Democrats.
"The South" is not a legal entity.
Except for three small problems:
The first is that the Duixiecrats were not Republicans. They were members of the States Rights Democratic Party. Not Republicans, but an offshoot of the Democrat party.
The second is that, while the States Rights Democratic Party was segregationist in nature (the one fact you managed to get right), their issue was not segregation, itself, but an overreaching federal government and the right of men to hold segregationist views.
While you and I may see segregation as distasteful, the fact remains that it is the right of every man to hold his own opinions, no matter how distasteful others may find them, without government interference.
The third problem is that, as I've already explained, wooing segregationist Democrats who happen to hold similar views on issues unrelated to race doesn't make Republicans racists.
JoyJuice said:
Now, when you say "progressive", do you mean progressive like Woodrow Wilson was a progressive?
I understand racism to be the view that other races are inferior to your own, incapable of participating in society on an equal footing as your own, or governing themselves and exercising their liberty to make their own decisions and either reap the rewards of those decisions or face the consequences of those decisions.
Creech said:
Then why was it liberals and progressives who led the fight against civil rights? Would you mind explaining to us on what grounds you believe, say, Woodrow Wilson and FDR were "conservatives"?
Creech said:
You realize that democracy, that is, the rule of the majority (or, as Benjamin Franklin said, "two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for dinner") has always been very bad for blacks wherever they were in the minority, right?
stamperben said:
I don't deny that blacks are one of many groups who have been mistreated. But claiming they're victims doesn't help. Victimhood is a cop-out. Victimhood is an excuse.
As long as somebody is a victim, then they have no responsibilities for themselves. As long as they're a victim, they're to be pitied and taken care of.
Liberals love to make black people out to be "victims" because they know that victims are dependent on others for help. What better way to make them wards of the liberal state than to declare them "victims"?
What, exactly, are black people victims of?
Or do liberals just declare them victims so that they have an excuse to save them?
The only blacks who are victims are those who have been convinced that they're victims and must stay on the Democrat plantation because they can't handle the big, bad, scary world without the government to help them.
Sorry, but I refuse to treat them as victims. I choose to treat them as equals. That you insist on treating them as victims says a lot more about you than it dos about us.
stamperben said:
Why does there have to be an "outreach" based on race? Why can't we just present our ideas and let people decide, you know, treat them like they're our equals?
Why do you insist on separating everybody into racial groups?
What should be offered? If it's a violation of the law, then they have the right to pursue legal redress.
Actually, it did. The fact that it was the GOP that ended slavery was not lost on blacks. As sistren pointed out to you, not only was it a Republican president who emancipated the slaves, but virtually every piece of legislation passed following the Civil War was passed by Republicans.
I pointed these things out to you in a previous post, but, just to refresh your memory:
June 28, 1864 Republican majority in Congress repeals Fugitive Slave Acts
October 29, 1864 African-American abolitionist Sojourner Truth says of President Lincoln: “I never was treated by anyone with more kindness and cordiality than were shown to me by that great and good man”
January 31, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition
March 3, 1865 Republican Congress establishes Freedmen’s Bureau to provide health care, education, and technical assistance to emancipated slaves
April 8, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition
June 19, 1865 On “Juneteenth,” U.S. troops land in Galveston, TX to enforce ban on slavery that had been declared more than two years before by the Emancipation Proclamation
November 22, 1865 Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination
December 6, 1865 Republican Party’s 13th Amendment, banning slavery, is ratified
February 5, 1866 U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves
April 9, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law
May 10, 1866 U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no
June 8, 1866 U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no
July 16, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of Freedman's Bureau Act, which protected former slaves from “black codes” denying their rights
July 28, 1866 Republican Congress authorizes formation of the Buffalo Soldiers, two regiments of African-American cavalrymen
July 30, 1866 Democrat-controlled City of New Orleans orders police to storm racially-integrated Republican meeting; raid kills 40 and wounds more than 150
January 8, 1867 Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.
July 19, 1867 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans
March 30, 1868 Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”
May 20, 1868 Republican National Convention marks debut of African-American politicians on national stage; two – Pinckney Pinchback and James Harris – attend as delegates, and several serve as presidential electors
September 3, 1868 25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress
September 12, 1868 Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress
September 28, 1868 Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana murder nearly 300 African-Americans who tried to prevent an assault against a Republican newspaper editor
October 7, 1868 Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”
October 22, 1868 While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan
November 3, 1868 Republican Ulysses Grant defeats Democrat Horatio Seymour in presidential election; Seymour had denounced Emancipation Proclamation
December 10, 1869 Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office
February 3, 1870 After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race
May 19, 1870 African-American John Langston, law professor and future Republican Congressman from Virginia, delivers influential speech supporting President Ulysses Grant’s civil rights policies
June 22, 1870 Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South
February 28, 1871 Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters
April 20, 1871 Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans
October 10, 1871 Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands
October 18, 1871 After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan
January 17, 1874 Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government
September 14, 1874 Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed
March 1, 1875 Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition
July 14, 1884 Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery
August 30, 1890 Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South
February 8, 1894 Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote
December 11, 1895 African-American Republican and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Miller (R-SC) denounces new state constitution written to disenfranchise African-Americans
May 18, 1896 Republican Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting from Supreme Court’s notorious Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, declares: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens”
But, that aside, there you go again. What is this thing with you about treating blacks as a separate class and not as equals?
stamperben said:
I beg your pardon. I thought you were talking about black people in general, not just black people who were lynched.
If you're only talking about black people who were lynched and, thus, are now dead, how is the GOP supposed to have an "outreach" to them?
How are you defining "success"?
Oh, the compassion shown!
Where is the compassion in making them slaves to a bureaucratic government program that only subsidizes their poverty?
Sistrin said:
I don't believe Clinton had to use "code words". When you call Orville Faubus "a great man" and say that William Fullbright "was the strongest male role model in my life", I think you've made it pretty clear.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jun 9, 2012
- 6,488
- 3,399
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I clicked your link but it just took me to the home page of CF. I will get to your other questions/points in a bit.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
- Jun 9, 2012
- 6,488
- 3,399
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
This is a fair question, in the sense that Republicans have and often continue to react to every petty little charge of racism which is made as if someone is holding up Medusa's head. For many years Republicans have ceded the race issue to the Democrats, failing to challenge the underlying claim the party is the party of, in not the overtly racist, at least the race insensitive. However we actually have the Obama loyalist to thank for beginning to correct that deficiency. Since the announcement he was running the liberal left has tossed around the racist disparagement so often it has become a joke. A joke on them.
As for GOPlifer, his conclusions are based on the same flawed underlying premise. Quote:
"At some point soon, Republicans will be forced to develop a governing agenda built on something other than white paranoia..."
This one statement places his views in context, that he agrees with the liberal/progressive view the conservative/Republican movement is one still dominated by the influence of racism and fear of anyone who does not look like them. From that flawed premise the odds favor a flawed conclusion. He also supports many of his comments by referring back to other of his comments. However I try to sign up and see if I can respond over there.
The outreach to minorities has been well documented here. As for today, South Bound made an excellent point, quote:
"Why does there have to be an "outreach" based on race? Why can't we just present our ideas and let people decide, you know, treat them like they're our equals? Why do you insist on separating everybody into racial groups?"
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Then here is the historical Civil rights vote record:
- Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
- Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
- Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
- Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
To say it was "Republican" that created the success is absolutely wrong.
I didn't say they were, and I noted the transition from Democrats, to Dixiecrats, and now to become the same "state rights" Republicans that gave us the southern strategy. They didn't hone in on the South for nothing. It took 7 out of 94 votes to embrace civil rights to caused the Democratic/Dixiecrat split. The Southern Reps voted 100% against civil rights and didn't bat an eye.
Right, states rights, and again not one Southern Rep voted for civil rights. So your inference to "states Rights Dems" is short, but yes state rights both Dem and Rep denied civil rights. In fact percentage wise of party vote, the GOP voted higher to deny those rights.
You, me, everyone is allowed to have opinions, however rights are not afforded to us by popular opinion no matter what state boundaries one may live in.
Are you kidding me? To hold the idea that states as a right should be able to deny a race the same rights as they have because they see themselves a superior to those they deny rights to; is the epitome of being racist.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
