Here’s Proof That the Modern Day GOP Built Itself on Racism

[buckeye45_73]

As far as Byrd, his criticism was of big spending DEMOCRAT LBJ.

I've plainly stated that the Democratic and Republican parties had an equal balance of liberals and conservatives around 1958. At no time did I ever say the Democrats had NO liberals.

Take a reading comprehension course, retard.

You then asked for examples of Democrats calling for smaller government and lower taxes. I have provided SEVERAL such examples.

You ignorant fucks have never even heard of Richard Russell and the conservative Southern Democrats of the US Senate. Every time I have posted Russell's face on this forum and asked one of you tards who it is, every single time the tards have come up blank. This man was a HUGE political figure of his time, and not one of you idiots knows a thing about him.

These are the exact same right wing conservatives who blocked all civil rights legislation for decades.

All you tards have been taught is that they were Democrats. You have been carefully kept ignorant and stupid of the fact they are YOUR political ancestors.

So other than ole Strom how many of these guys became republicans?

Millions upon millions of the rank and file did. The conservative Democrats of the South became conservative Republicans.

The elected politicians became Republicans through attrition of the conservative Democrats who retired.

Uh incorrect...again.....look.at state house seats and senators and congressman.....Democrats still controlled the South well into the 1990s...in fact TN state legislature wasn't majority republican until 2006

They didn't switch....its my point....all those Dixiecrats were Democrats til.death, except one.....

 

[buckeye45_73]

Also what city had the biggest race riots of the 70s.......
Hint it wasn't in the south.

 

[g5000]

As far as Byrd, his criticism was of big spending DEMOCRAT LBJ.

I've plainly stated that the Democratic and Republican parties had an equal balance of liberals and conservatives around 1958. At no time did I ever say the Democrats had NO liberals.

Take a reading comprehension course, retard.

You then asked for examples of Democrats calling for smaller government and lower taxes. I have provided SEVERAL such examples.

You ignorant fucks have never even heard of Richard Russell and the conservative Southern Democrats of the US Senate. Every time I have posted Russell's face on this forum and asked one of you tards who it is, every single time the tards have come up blank. This man was a HUGE political figure of his time, and not one of you idiots knows a thing about him.

These are the exact same right wing conservatives who blocked all civil rights legislation for decades.

All you tards have been taught is that they were Democrats. You have been carefully kept ignorant and stupid of the fact they are YOUR political ancestors.

So other than ole Strom how many of these guys became republicans?

Millions upon millions of the rank and file did. The conservative Democrats of the South became conservative Republicans.

The elected politicians became Republicans through attrition of the conservative Democrats who retired.

Uh incorrect...again.....look.at state house seats and senators and congressman.....Democrats still controlled the South well into the 1990s...in fact TN state legislature wasn't majority republican until 2006

They didn't switch....its my point....all those Dixiecrats were Democrats til.death, except one.....

Yes, til death or retirement. Exactly.

Elected officeholders became Republicans through attrition. Republican conservative elected politicians replaced the conservative Democrats who retired.

But the rank and file voted for, and still vote for, conservatives, without respect to party.

You tards only look at the party affiliation and not the political affiliation. The anti civil rights racists of the South were conservatives. Always have been.

 

[g5000]

When the tards slam the racist Democrats of the past, they are so ill-informed, they don't realize they are slamming their own political ancestors.

It is amazing their heads don't explode from cognitive dissonance.

I wear the Confederate flag because I am proud of my heritage!

Those old Confederates were slave owners and racists! Yeeeee-haaaaawwwww! That's my proud heritage!

 

[Pogo]

Sure both parties had liberals and conservatives then as today but the general ideology of the parties hasn't changed since the 1880s

Absolute bullshit. Go look up what happened between Taft and Roosevelt trying to take the party in two different directions in 1912. Oh shit --- that involves reading again. Which is why the fact that I already covered this back in post 63 continues to sail blithely over your head -- you can't read.

the only reason the conservative democrats weren't republicans sooner was BECAUSE they were racist and blamed republicans for freeing the slaves, killing republicans as well as blacks in the South.

Now that's the first thing you've said right, although you're too illiterate to understand your own post.
Being in any way associated with "Republicans" was unthinkable in the South after the Civil War --- when it was a Liberal and a "big gumint" party --- because of its association with Lincoln, the man who had defeated and humiliated it. That tradition continued after the political reversal of the poles half a century later, but cultural tradition always runs deeper than rational thought, so the emotion carried the day for another half-century, leaving the Democratic Party with a dysfunctional bipolar relationship holding on to two diametrically opposed ideologies.

That's exactly why all these schisms went on. It's exactly why Thurmond and his bunch walked out of it in '48. It's exactly why Wallace bolted twenty years later and even tried to join Goldwater in '64. And it's exactly why the South as a whole moved from solid Dem to solid Rep, once Thurmond broke the ice and actually did the unthinkable. Because it finally dawned on them that Democrats weren't serving their conservative interests and weren't about to any time soon. LBJ and Thurmond were the catalysts that made that happen. As LBJ put it "we (the DP) have lost the South for a generation" -- a time span he underestimated.

Being a conservative does not equate to being a racist -- but being a racist does require being a conservative. The racist segment of the South bolted from the DP because it wasn't conservative enough, and they finally got over their emotional basis to admit that. Simple as that.

 

[Pogo]

The Southern Strategy turned the Deep South from blue to red. The Democratic Party's right wing conservatives began rebelling against the liberal wing of their party during FDR's administration.

FDR's right wing conservative Vice President, John Garner of Texas, was so fed up with FDR's liberal policies that he ran against FDR for the Democratic nomination in 1940. He went down in defeat and returned to Texas. FDR replaced his VP with Henry Wallace.

In the 1948 election, the Democratic Party suffered a three way split, with Strom Thurmond leading the right wing conservatives into forming the States' Rights Democratic Party in direct opposition to Truman's campaign.

States Rights. That right there indicates the conservatism of that wing of the party. The states righters wanted to preserve Jim Crow and white supremacy.

Strom Thurmond later gave up on the Democratic Party's liberalism and became a leading conservative of the Republican Party.

The leader of the Democratic conservative coalition in the Senate was Richard Russell. He kept every piece of civil rights legislation from being passed for decades. And he was as right wing conservative as it gets. The dipshits who focus on the fact these southerners were Democrats are deliberately kept ignorant of the fact they were far right conservatives. And they make themselves look like damned fools in their ignorance every time they reach back into our history of which they know NOTHING to point out the party affiliation of the far right wing southerners.

No one was ever sure what Lyndon Johnson's political bent was. When he was around liberals, he talked like a liberal. When he was around conservatives, he talked like a conservative. He was as weasely and slimy a politician as it gets. But he was also brilliant, and got himself into the good graces of the House Democratic Leader/Speaker (Sam Rayburn), and the leader of the Senate Democrats (Richard Russell).

Russell believed Johnson to be a conservative, and made LBJ the Senate Majority Leader in LBJ's first term. This violated more than a century's tradition of seniority. However, the Majority Leader position at that time was a figurehead position and not one anyone wanted. Majority Leaders were mocked for their ineffectiveness. All the power actually rested with Richard Russell.

Russell groomed LBJ for the Presidency, but LBJ was outmaneuvered by JFK. JFK then picked LBJ as his running mate in order to win the Southern conservative vote, since he knew LBJ was Russell's boy.

JFK proved to be too liberal for the Southerners. This is why JFK traveled to Texas that fateful November of 1963. He went to meet the Governor of Texas, John Connally, because Connally was the leader of the Southern conservative faction that was breaking away from the Democrats.

It was also suspected that JFK was going to dump LBJ for his second term run and was considering Connally for his running mate. Again, to win the conservative Democratic vote.



Anyway, the year 1958 is probably the year when the Republican and Democratic parties had an equal balance of conservatives and liberals in both parties.

After that, the Democrats began shifting left, and the Republicans began shifting right.

Nixon's Southern Strategy was greatly responsible for the acceleration of that shift.

Except that it didn't happen. He gave NOTHING to the racist.


"The Nixon presidency witnessed the first large-scale integration of public schools in the South.[182] Nixon sought a middle way between the segregationist Wallace and liberal Democrats, whose support of integration was alienating some Southern whites.[183] Hopeful of doing well in the South in 1972, he sought to dispose of desegregation as a political issue before then. Soon after his inauguration, he appointed Vice President Agnew to lead a task force, which worked with local leaders—both white and black—to determine how to integrate local schools. Agnew had little interest in the work, and most of it was done by Labor Secretary George Shultz. Federal aid was available, and a meeting with President Nixon was a possible reward for compliant committees. By September 1970, less than ten percent of black children were attending segregated schools. By 1971, however, tensions over desegregation surfaced in Northern cities, with angry protests over the busing of children to schools outside their neighborhood to achieve racial balance. Nixon opposed busing personally but enforced court orders requiring its use.[184]

In addition to desegregating public schools, Nixon implemented the Philadelphia Plan in 1970—the first significant federal affirmative action program."

Nixon's Southern Strategy: "It's All In The Charts":

"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that...but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."

Nixon's southern strategy was to move so fast on desegregation that it would be a done deal by his re-election.

He did nothing for the racist, except pull the band aid off fast.


"The Nixon presidency witnessed the first large-scale integration of public schools in the South.[182] Nixon sought a middle way between the segregationist Wallace and liberal Democrats, whose support of integration was alienating some Southern whites.[183] Hopeful of doing well in the South in 1972, he sought to dispose of desegregation as a political issue before then. Soon after his inauguration, he appointed Vice President Agnew to lead a task force, which worked with local leaders—both white and black—to determine how to integrate local schools. Agnew had little interest in the work, and most of it was done by Labor Secretary George Shultz. Federal aid was available, and a meeting with President Nixon was a possible reward for compliant committees. By September 1970, less than ten percent of black children were attending segregated schools. By 1971, however, tensions over desegregation surfaced in Northern cities, with angry protests over the busing of children to schools outside their neighborhood to achieve racial balance. Nixon opposed busing personally but enforced court orders requiring its use.[184]

In addition to desegregating public schools, Nixon implemented the Philadelphia Plan in 1970—the first significant federal affirmative action program.
"






Your entire world view is based on a lie.

Academics don't search for truth, just for political social justice now.....they don't teach this stuff anymore......so it's easy to believe in a complete hoax like the southern strategy or even climate change

I quoted an actual Nixon strategist you stupid revisionist dumb fucks.

And he quite plainly said part of the strategy was to NOT resist the integration of blacks and the Voting Rights Act, precisely to scare the negrophobe whites away from the Democratic Party and into the Republican Party.

You tards are confirming the success of Nixon's Southern Strategy and don't even know it.

I did too, I quoted two of them plus the party Chair, and in response from the crew I got "that's one guy".

 

[buckeye45_73]

As far as Byrd, his criticism was of big spending DEMOCRAT LBJ.

I've plainly stated that the Democratic and Republican parties had an equal balance of liberals and conservatives around 1958. At no time did I ever say the Democrats had NO liberals.

Take a reading comprehension course, retard.

You then asked for examples of Democrats calling for smaller government and lower taxes. I have provided SEVERAL such examples.

You ignorant fucks have never even heard of Richard Russell and the conservative Southern Democrats of the US Senate. Every time I have posted Russell's face on this forum and asked one of you tards who it is, every single time the tards have come up blank. This man was a HUGE political figure of his time, and not one of you idiots knows a thing about him.

These are the exact same right wing conservatives who blocked all civil rights legislation for decades.

All you tards have been taught is that they were Democrats. You have been carefully kept ignorant and stupid of the fact they are YOUR political ancestors.

So other than ole Strom how many of these guys became republicans?

Millions upon millions of the rank and file did. The conservative Democrats of the South became conservative Republicans.

The elected politicians became Republicans through attrition of the conservative Democrats who retired.

Uh incorrect...again.....look.at state house seats and senators and congressman.....Democrats still controlled the South well into the 1990s...in fact TN state legislature wasn't majority republican until 2006

They didn't switch....its my point....all those Dixiecrats were Democrats til.death, except one.....

Yes, til death or retirement. Exactly.

Elected officeholders became Republicans through attrition. Republican conservative elected politicians replaced the conservative Democrats who retired.

But the rank and file voted for, and still vote for, conservatives, without respect to party.

You tards only look at the party affiliation and not the political affiliation. The anti civil rights racists of the South were conservatives. Always have been.

The problem is you have lots of racist progressives....Wilson, fdr, fulbright, long, Johnson, ect
And conservatives like mckinley, cooledge, taft, Nixon, Eisenhower, Reagan, ect were not.

So it's ludicrous to make that supposition, blacks voted democrat in the 30s, when they were full racist mode

And us republicans look at modern cities as plantations.....gun control, shabby homes, free crappy food, violence......
New boss same as the old boss

They just talk nicer, but results are the same

 

[g5000]

So it's ludicrous to make that supposition, blacks voted democrat in the 30s, when they were full racist mode

After the Civil War, those blacks who could vote, voted mostly Republican until FDR.

It was because FDR was a big liberal Democrat from the North that he achieved a majority of black votes for the Democrats for the first time in the 1936 election. So your claim about "full racist mode" is total bullshit. It was the exact opposite. The black voters of the North switched precisely because FDR was not "full racist". FDR was all about the New Deal and pouring money into poverty-stricken areas. By today's standards, some nitwits could frame FDR as a racist, but for his time he was revolutionary and the black voters sensed it.

Most blacks lived in the South, and they couldn't vote at all. And it was because of Jim Crow that it was conventional wisdom for nearly a century that no Southern Democrat could be elected President. The stench of Southern racism could not be washed off.

The GOP still scored 28 percent of the black vote in 1936. Ike scored 39 percent of the black vote. Nixon got 28 percent in 1960. Any modern day Republican would kill for those numbers.

But after LJB passed the Civil Rights Act, he got 94 percent of the black vote in 1964. And things have not been the same for the GOP since.

This was precisely the point when Nixon's strategist devised the Southern Strategy. He saw the implications of the Civil Rights Act. Let the Democrats have the black vote, and let the liberals push civil rights. That would scare the larger population of right wing negrophobe Democrats into the Republican camp. And that is exactly what happened.

Read the link I provided. It's a piece from that time period. It's even called "Nixon's Southern Strategy". It's not something written after the fact, years later, unlike your revisionist bullshit.

 

[Pogo]

The problem is you have lots of racist progressives....Wilson, fdr, fulbright, long, Johnson, ect
And conservatives like mckinley, cooledge, taft, Nixon, Eisenhower, Reagan, ect were not.

So it's ludicrous to make that supposition, blacks voted democrat in the 30s, when they were full racist mode

As far as Coolidge, Hoover and that era and the shift of the black vote from loyal Republican to loyal Democrat, reflecting this political reversal of the poles: This is from The Defender: How the Legendary Black Newspaper Changed America by Ethan Michaeli....

>> In the final weeks of the 1928 General Election, The Defender printed a series of articles and editorials that listed postwar grievances with the Republican Party. In Washington D.C., where the federal government was in direct authority, Republican presidents Harding and Coolidge, as well as Republican majorities in the U.S. Congress, had not only acquiesced to the segregation of public transit, but failed to stop or even criticize parades by thousands of Ku Klux Klansmen before the White House. The newspaper was particularly dissatisfied with the current Republican nominee for president, Herbert Hoover, who had spoken favorably of making the party “lily white” and excluded African Americans from their traditional role in that year’s Republican National Convention. Most troubling of all was the candidate’s covert backing from the Ku Klux Klan, whose members despised the Democratic nominee, New York Governor Al Smith, because he was Catholic.

Finally, in an October 20, 1928 editorial entitled “What We Want,” The Defender made a dramatic announcement: “We want justice in America and we mean to get it. If 50 years of support to the Republican Party doesn’t get us justice, then we must of necessity shift our allegiance to new quarters.”

It was the first time The Defender had failed to endorse the Republican presidential candidate since 1912<< (Chapter 10)​

More here: How the Party of Lincoln Lost Virtually the Entire Black Vote in 88 Years


Wilson, to cite the same era, was as I've posted many times on this site, a racist asshole. There's evidence for that. The others in your list --- not so much. But all of them were reflections of the time in which they lived, which was at the absolute nadir of race relations (Ku Klux Klan re-established 1915; "Red Summer" (red = blood) of race riots, 1919; Tulsa Race Riot, 1921)...

And this from 1924:

​

So in this case the passive inactions of Coolidge and Hoover helped shift the black vote away from Republican; the active actions of FDR helped solidify it to Democratic; and the Klan was a catalyst in the whole shift.

The result:

 

[Uncensored2008]

[I've plainly stated that the Democratic and Republican parties had an equal balance of liberals and conservatives around 1958. At no time did I ever say the Democrats had NO liberals.

Take a reading comprehension course, retard.

You then asked for examples of Democrats calling for smaller government and lower taxes. I have provided SEVERAL such examples.

You ignorant fucks have never even heard of Richard Russell and the conservative Southern Democrats of the US Senate. Every time I have posted Russell's face on this forum and asked one of you tards who it is, every single time the tards have come up blank. This man was a HUGE political figure of his time, and not one of you idiots knows a thing about him.

These are the exact same right wing conservatives who blocked all civil rights legislation for decades.

All you tards have been taught is that they were Democrats. You have been carefully kept ignorant and stupid of the fact they are YOUR political ancestors.

Your thesis, as is the thesis of Marxists in general, is the big lie that democrats and Republicans switched positions from "conservative" to "liberal."

I have pointed out, as has anyone with integrity (look it up, you dolt) that such a claim is at best disingenuous, given the modern meaning of these terms has virtually no bearing on the historical parties.

Of course you lied that you were only speaking "recent history," on the heels of posting;

I was going to go back that far, but not to show the conservatism of Democrats. I was going to show the liberalism of Lincoln went beyond freeing the slaves. Under Lincoln, the Republicans vastly expanded the power of the federal government.

As with your fellow Marxists, you seek to sully the opposition with the crimes of your filthy party - a VERY Alinsky move on your part - but that is what you leftists do.

Lincoln was not a Conservative by modern meaning, but he sure the fuck wasn't a leftist/progressive as you have perverted the term "liberal" to mean, either.

Yes, your filthy party created the KKK to wage war on Republicans. No, you don't get to lie that "well, the Republicans then are my beloved Marxist democrats now."

 

[Pogo]

[I've plainly stated that the Democratic and Republican parties had an equal balance of liberals and conservatives around 1958. At no time did I ever say the Democrats had NO liberals.

Take a reading comprehension course, retard.

You then asked for examples of Democrats calling for smaller government and lower taxes. I have provided SEVERAL such examples.

You ignorant fucks have never even heard of Richard Russell and the conservative Southern Democrats of the US Senate. Every time I have posted Russell's face on this forum and asked one of you tards who it is, every single time the tards have come up blank. This man was a HUGE political figure of his time, and not one of you idiots knows a thing about him.

These are the exact same right wing conservatives who blocked all civil rights legislation for decades.

All you tards have been taught is that they were Democrats. You have been carefully kept ignorant and stupid of the fact they are YOUR political ancestors.

Your thesis, as is the thesis of Marxists in general, is the big lie that democrats and Republicans switched positions from "conservative" to "liberal."

I have pointed out, as has anyone with integrity (look it up, you dolt) that such a claim is at best disingenuous, given the modern meaning of these terms has virtually no bearing on the historical parties.

Of course you lied that you were only speaking "recent history," on the heels of posting;

I was going to go back that far, but not to show the conservatism of Democrats. I was going to show the liberalism of Lincoln went beyond freeing the slaves. Under Lincoln, the Republicans vastly expanded the power of the federal government.

As with your fellow Marxists, you seek to sully the opposition with the crimes of your filthy party - a VERY Alinsky move on your part - but that is what you leftists do.

Lincoln was not a Conservative by modern meaning, but he sure the fuck wasn't a leftist/progressive as you have perverted the term "liberal" to mean, either.

Yes, your filthy party created the KKK to wage war on Republicans. No, you don't get to lie that "well, the Republicans then are my beloved Marxist democrats now."

Once again Stupid --- the Klan was not created by any political party in any of its incarnations, ever --- nor was it created to wage war on anybody. As I've pointed out for years on this board. Prove me wrong.

That ^^ oughta send him whimpering under mommy's skirts for at least two days...

Lincoln was not a Conservative by modern meaning, but he sure the fuck wasn't a leftist/progressive as you have perverted the term "liberal" to mean, either.

Except that ISN'T what the term means and never has been. Dolt.

 

[g5000]

[I've plainly stated that the Democratic and Republican parties had an equal balance of liberals and conservatives around 1958. At no time did I ever say the Democrats had NO liberals.

Take a reading comprehension course, retard.

You then asked for examples of Democrats calling for smaller government and lower taxes. I have provided SEVERAL such examples.

You ignorant fucks have never even heard of Richard Russell and the conservative Southern Democrats of the US Senate. Every time I have posted Russell's face on this forum and asked one of you tards who it is, every single time the tards have come up blank. This man was a HUGE political figure of his time, and not one of you idiots knows a thing about him.

These are the exact same right wing conservatives who blocked all civil rights legislation for decades.

All you tards have been taught is that they were Democrats. You have been carefully kept ignorant and stupid of the fact they are YOUR political ancestors.

Your thesis, as is the thesis of Marxists in general, is the big lie that democrats and Republicans switched positions from "conservative" to "liberal."

I have pointed out, as has anyone with integrity (look it up, you dolt) that such a claim is at best disingenuous, given the modern meaning of these terms has virtually no bearing on the historical parties.

Of course you lied that you were only speaking "recent history," on the heels of posting;

I was going to go back that far, but not to show the conservatism of Democrats. I was going to show the liberalism of Lincoln went beyond freeing the slaves. Under Lincoln, the Republicans vastly expanded the power of the federal government.

As with your fellow Marxists, you seek to sully the opposition with the crimes of your filthy party - a VERY Alinsky move on your part - but that is what you leftists do.

Lincoln was not a Conservative by modern meaning, but he sure the fuck wasn't a leftist/progressive as you have perverted the term "liberal" to mean, either.

Yes, your filthy party created the KKK to wage war on Republicans. No, you don't get to lie that "well, the Republicans then are my beloved Marxist democrats now."

My party is the Republican party. The party of your political ancestors is the Democratic party, and I would appreciate it if you retards, bigots, racists, hypocrites, liars and psychopaths would go back there.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Once again Stupid --- the Klan was not created by any political party in any of its incarnations, ever

If this is a new "big lie" campaign, you will have to get a LOT more of your fellow Marxists on board.

--- nor was it created to wage war on anybody. As I've pointed out for years on this board. Prove me wrong.

What a fucking retard.

That ^^ oughta send him whimpering under mommy's skirts for at least two days...

Lincoln was not a Conservative by modern meaning, but he sure the fuck wasn't a leftist/progressive as you have perverted the term "liberal" to mean, either.

Except that ISN'T what the term means and never has been. Dolt.

Ah yes, your Humpty Dumpty routine, words mean only what you wish them to mean at any given moment..

Here retard; learn something for the first time in your life.

{Founded in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) extended into almost every southern state by 1870 and became a vehicle for white southern resistance to the Republican Party’s Reconstruction-era policies aimed at establishing political and economic equality for blacks. Its members waged an underground campaign of intimidation and violence directed at white and black Republican leaders.}

Ku Klux Klan - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

 

[Uncensored2008]

My party is the Republican party.

You are about as "Republican" as Barack Obama.

The party of your political ancestors is the Democratic party, and I would appreciate it if you retards, bigots, racists, hypocrites, liars and psychopaths would go back there.

Yawn, you really think your moronic lies will further the aims of your filthy party? You are a Hillary pimp, G-Tard, you are a bit more of a hack than rdean. You fool no one.

 

[flacaltenn]

And remember -- It might have been LESS than 50 years of freedom --- if those racist Republicans hadn't banded together to support the CRAct -- when Johnson's crew of Dems were reluctant to do that.

Once again a gross generalization and wildly inaccurate.
See post number (fittingly) 64 --- it was Southerners (Dem and Rep), not "Democrats" or "Republicans" (South or elsewhere) who opposed the CRA. And it was everybody else who supported it.

It's not even close. It was completely about geography, and the history therein -- not political parties. As demonstrated there.

Hey Pogo --- what was the final vote and what percent Dems versus Reps in the Senate voted for it?

Then we can fix your logic. Because the REPS who rescued it ---- Were not solidly IN THE SOUTH --- were they?
It was those racist DEMS that CONTROLLED the South at that point in history...

 

[flacaltenn]

No way in hell I'm gonna go thru this history again with Pogo and the other deniers. They never learn. Probably because they don't READ history.. They just mine web links. I'll do a Bull Ring with anyone on the CRA or how my Tenn neighbors in Pulaski VOTED for years before they formed the KKK... I live on a battlefield from that war. We KNOW the facts...

 

[mudwhistle]

If Trump isn't courting racists - why did he hire Breitbart chairman to run his campaign?

Donald Trump Is The Candidate From Breitbart News

See the "Telling The Truth Must Be Racist Now" thread.

 

[Pogo]

Once again Stupid --- the Klan was not created by any political party in any of its incarnations, ever

If this is a new "big lie" campaign, you will have to get a LOT more of your fellow Marxists on board.

--- nor was it created to wage war on anybody. As I've pointed out for years on this board. Prove me wrong.

What a fucking retard.

That ^^ oughta send him whimpering under mommy's skirts for at least two days...

Lincoln was not a Conservative by modern meaning, but he sure the fuck wasn't a leftist/progressive as you have perverted the term "liberal" to mean, either.

Except that ISN'T what the term means and never has been. Dolt.

Ah yes, your Humpty Dumpty routine, words mean only what you wish them to mean at any given moment..

Here retard; learn something for the first time in your life.

{Founded in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) extended into almost every southern state by 1870 and became a vehicle for white southern resistance to the Republican Party’s Reconstruction-era policies aimed at establishing political and economic equality for blacks. Its members waged an underground campaign of intimidation and violence directed at white and black Republican leaders.}

Ku Klux Klan - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

From YOUR OWN LINK:

Founding of the Ku Klux Klan
A group including many former Confederate veterans founded the first branch of the Ku Klux Klan as a social club in Pulaski, Tennessee, in 1866.​

The video says the same thing in more detail including its infiltration by the already-existing "slave patrols", of which it became a quasi-organized extension --- as I have posted precipitously on this site. .

YOUR OWN LINK.

Actually it gets the year wrong, it was Christmas 1865, and the founders were, specifically, (Capt) John Lester, (Capt) John Kennedy Frank McCord, James (Maj) James Crowe, Calvin Jones and Richard Reed, none of whom were politically active or had any known political affiliation at all; Which I already went over in post 73, and issued a challenge on the same mythology in 103, which went completely unanswered.

See that newspaper clipping above? The one where blacks are threatening to not vote for Republican candidates backed by the Klan? Care to essplain why an organization "created by Democrats" would be backing Republicans? Care to explain why it would be electing Clarence Morley, Owen Brewster, George Baker, Ed Jackson and Rice Means -- all of whom were Republicans? Care to essplain why they'd be backing Hoover over Al Smith, as also outlined above?

Dumbass.

More detail on the origins:

=> It was the boredom of small-town life that led six young Confederate veterans to gather around a fireplace one December evening in 1865 and form a social club. the place was Pulaski, Tenn., near the Alabama border. when they reassembled a week later, the six young men were full of ideas for their new society. it would be secret, to heighten the amusement of the thing, and the titles for the various offices were to have names as preposterous-sounding as possible, partly for the fun of it and partly to avoid any military or political implications. <= (much more detail follows; this is on page 11 of Ku Klux Klan: A History of Racism)​

-- This is also why the Klan has all those silly K-alliterations ... Klan, Klavern, Kleagle, etc. It was supposed to be a simple joke. That is the origin, and it was soon after taken over by the already-existing "slave patrols"....

=> Freedom for slaves represented for many white Southerners a bitter defeat — a defeat not only of their armies in the field but of their economic and social way of life. It was an age-old nightmare come true, for early in Southern life whites in general and plantation owners in particular had begun to view the large number of slaves living among them as a potential threat to their property and their lives. A series of bloody slave revolts in Virginia and other parts of the South resulted in the widespread practice of authorized night patrols composed of white men specially deputized for that purpose. White Southerners looked upon these night patrols as a civic duty, something akin to serving on a jury or in the militia. The mounted patrols, or regulators, as they were called, prowled Southern roads, enforcing the curfew for slaves, looking for runaways, and guarding rural areas against the threat of black uprisings. They were authorized by law to give a specific number of lashes to any violators they caught. The memory of these legal night riders and their whips was still fresh in the minds of both defeated Southerners and liberated blacks when the first Klansmen took to those same roads in 1866. (ibid) <=
​

A "civic duty". However perverse that characterization is, it's got nothing to do with political parties. If the Klan has any political ancestor/affinity at all it would be with the old Know Nothings. Which I posted about here recently on the anniversary of one of their riots.

 

[Pogo]

No way in hell I'm gonna go thru this history again with Pogo and the other deniers. They never learn. Probably because they don't READ history.. They just mine web links. I'll do a Bull Ring with anyone on the CRA or how my Tenn neighbors in Pulaski VOTED for years before they formed the KKK... I live on a battlefield from that war. We KNOW the facts...

Tell us wise one --- what political parties existed in Pulaski in 1865, and before?

And again --- I've issued this challenge for years to no response whatsoever --- where is any record of a political affiliation or activity for Lester? Or Kennedy? Or McCord? Or Crowe? Or Jones? Or Reed? Where is it? I've got volumes and volumes and books on top of books and I don't have one.

Actually -- you've NEVER gone through this history with me.

I live on a battlefield from that war. We KNOW the facts

You forget --- so do I. I'm in the state that used to own yours.

 

[flacaltenn]

No way in hell I'm gonna go thru this history again with Pogo and the other deniers. They never learn. Probably because they don't READ history.. They just mine web links. I'll do a Bull Ring with anyone on the CRA or how my Tenn neighbors in Pulaski VOTED for years before they formed the KKK... I live on a battlefield from that war. We KNOW the facts...

Tell us wise one --- what political parties existed in Pulaski in 1865, and before?

And again --- I've issued this challenge for years to no response whatsoever --- where is any record of a political affiliation or activity for Lester? Or Kennedy? Or McCord? Or Crowe? Or Jones? Or Reed? Where is it? I've got volumes and volumes and books on top of books and I don't have one.

Actually -- you've NEVER gone through this history with me.

I live on a battlefield from that war. We KNOW the facts

You forget --- so do I. I'm in the state that used to own yours.

The topic here is "racist MODERN GOP" THe CRA is a valid discussion point. The creation of the KKK is a valid point. 1865 ------ not so much...

That's why I'm not following you around the briar patch again..