Setting the record straight on the the Civil Rights Act

[paperview]

It was explained earlier. Nutjobs refuse to acknowledge the Southern Strategy.

Lee Atwater, political consultant and strategist to the Republican Party. He was an advisor of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush and chairman of the Republican National Committee.

-- published in Southern Politics in the 1990s by Alexander P. Lamis, in which Lee Atwater discussed politics in the South:

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?
​

Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "******, ******, ******." By 1968 you can't say "******" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff.

You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "******, ******."

Alexander P. Lamis (1999). Southern Politics in the 1990s. Louisiana State University Press. p. 408.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Setting the record straight on the the Civil Rights Act

The genesis of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was that Democratic majority and Republican minority senators in the West and the North overwhelmed their conservative southern Republican and Democratic neighbors.

This was decency and geography over southern, conservative bigotry and intolerance.

 

[rightwinger]

If you look at the numbers, more Democrats voted for Civil Rights than Republicans did.

If you look at the numbers, all of the opposition came from the Dumbocrats.

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.

Lie much RW?

How is he "lying"? In spite of the nays, Democrats still represented 45 of the 73 votes in favor of in the Senate.

In the House the Democrats represented 152 out of the 290 in favor of, so yes, more Democrats voted in favor of. And if you look at the percentages for or against, the Democrats had a combined higher percentage of in favor of votes.

Republicans conveniently ignore that Civil Rghts was a North/South issue to try to turn it into a Democrat/Republican issue

Regardless, MORE Democrats voted for Civil Rights and a HIGHER Percentage of Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans

 

[natstew]

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.

One problem with your theory though chief - those "currently solidly Republican" states were clearly not Republican states back then or they wouldn't have been represented by Dumbocrats politicians.

No matter how you spin this chief, the left in this country vehemently opposed rights for African Americans. They have always looked at minorities as "useful idiots" for their cause.

Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson Lee, Elijah Cummings, John Lewis, James Clyburn, Fredrica Wilson............

 

[chikenwing]

It's important to note that the Republicans unanimously supported all Civil Rights legislation at the public level (public transportation, government buildings, etc.). The few that opposed the final Civil Rights legislation did so because they were opposed to the private sector being told what to do by government.

i don't think anyone disputes that republicans were instrumental in passing the civil rights act. but i do wonder why you're basking in self-congratulatory past glory.... you know, given that your party wouldn't support civil rights now, has actively worked to repeal the voters rights act and all the racist dems are now republicans.

so i'm not quite sure where you're going with this

Simp0le people like yourself like to bend the truth,he is just setting the record right. All the fond reflection going on recently,needs to be in the correct light.

 

[KNB]

"The left opposed civil rights"? Jesus nipple-twisting Christ, man. How do you people even tie your shoes let alone log onto the internet?

What does "Conservative" mean? Right-wing Conservatives did not fight for black people's right to vote. How the fuck can anyone even attempt to make that claim?

"The left opposed civil rights", meaning that in contrast, the right embraced it? Are you drunk or just retarded? Conservatives were also the ones who wanted to keep slavery, and not rebel against England. Black people wouldn't have any rights if Conservatives had their way.

 

[chikenwing]

If you look at the numbers, all of the opposition came from the Dumbocrats.

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.

Lie much RW?

How is he "lying"? In spite of the nays, Democrats still represented 45 of the 73 votes in favor of in the Senate.

In the House the Democrats represented 152 out of the 290 in favor of, so yes, more Democrats voted in favor of. And if you look at the percentages for or against, the Democrats had a combined higher percentage of in favor of votes.

Republicans conveniently ignore that Civil Rghts was a North/South issue to try to turn it into a Democrat/Republican issue

Regardless, MORE Democrats voted for Civil Rights and a HIGHER Percentage of Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans

wrong again.

 

[natstew]

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.

One problem with your theory though chief - those "currently solidly Republican" states were clearly not Republican states back then or they wouldn't have been represented by Dumbocrats politicians.

No matter how you spin this chief, the left in this country vehemently opposed rights for African Americans. They have always looked at minorities as "useful idiots" for their cause.

Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson Lee, Elijah Cummings, John Lewis, James Clyburn, Fredrica Wilson............ Oh...then there's this piece of work, Barbra Lee.

 

[katsteve2012]

If you look at the numbers, all of the opposition came from the Dumbocrats.

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.

Lie much RW?

How is he "lying"? In spite of the nays, Democrats still represented 45 of the 73 votes in favor of in the Senate.

In the House the Democrats represented 152 out of the 290 in favor of, so yes, more Democrats voted in favor of. And if you look at the percentages for or against, the Democrats had a combined higher percentage of in favor of votes.

Republicans conveniently ignore that Civil Rghts was a North/South issue to try to turn it into a Democrat/Republican issue

Regardless, MORE Democrats voted for Civil Rights and a HIGHER Percentage of Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans

Exactly. I can't understand why this so difficult for some to accept. Especially considering that the majority of the activity meant to start the process of change during the Civil Rights Movement took place in the south. It certainly was not because of the weather, lol.

 

[rightwinger]

How is he "lying"? In spite of the nays, Democrats still represented 45 of the 73 votes in favor of in the Senate.

In the House the Democrats represented 152 out of the 290 in favor of, so yes, more Democrats voted in favor of. And if you look at the percentages for or against, the Democrats had a combined higher percentage of in favor of votes.

Republicans conveniently ignore that Civil Rghts was a North/South issue to try to turn it into a Democrat/Republican issue

Regardless, MORE Democrats voted for Civil Rights and a HIGHER Percentage of Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans

wrong again.

How are the vote totals posted on this thread wrong?

Please do tell

 

[katsteve2012]

How is he "lying"? In spite of the nays, Democrats still represented 45 of the 73 votes in favor of in the Senate.

In the House the Democrats represented 152 out of the 290 in favor of, so yes, more Democrats voted in favor of. And if you look at the percentages for or against, the Democrats had a combined higher percentage of in favor of votes.

Republicans conveniently ignore that Civil Rghts was a North/South issue to try to turn it into a Democrat/Republican issue

Regardless, MORE Democrats voted for Civil Rights and a HIGHER Percentage of Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans

wrong again.

If its wrong, feel free to post the "correct" numbers that prove otherwise.

 

[paperview]

You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed

In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,

You've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught before it's too late,

Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!




[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diYlHI8Ghkg"]You've Got to be Taught How to Hate - YouTube[/ame]

 

[P@triot]

Actually, scrote, I didn't say that Republicans were liberals. I never said that Democrats freed the slaves. I said THE NORTHERN UNION FREED THE SLAVES AND RACIST SOUTHERN CONSERVATIVE SLAVERS FOUGHT A TERRIBLE CIVIL WAR TO KEEP THEIR SLAVES.

I said that Abraham Lincoln would be entirely ashamed of what the Republican party has become. Also, the Southern Strategy wasn't magical. It was meticulous. It required a few years of appealing to the least brilliant Southern voters (racist **** rags) who hate black people.

It is "magical" because even if you're absurd and outrageous lie were true, it fails to explain how the maniacal scheme managed to convince the tolerant, self-reliant, small-government Republicans to suddenly jump ship and join the Dumbocrats.

Oops....!!!! Dumb-ass...

"Tolerant, self-reliant, small-government" racist Southern Confederate slaveowners. Good one. "Self-reliant", who fought for their "right" to own slaves to do all of their work. "Tolerant" racist Southern ***** who whipped, raped, burned and hung black slaves for being black. "Small-government" slaveowners.

Just type the term "Southern Strategy" into your search engine. Did I write every article in cyberspace that describes the switch from racist Southern Democrat to racist Southern Republican? No, I did not. So is the entire internet lying by saying that the GOP's Southern Strategy switched racist Southern Democrats to racist Southern Republicans?

Hey dumb-ass, you're defeating your own argument here. According to you, Dumbocrats are the "tolerant" one's and switched from the Republican Party under Abraham Lincoln in the 1860's and then again during the Civil Rights movement during the 1960's.

So I ask again, if the racist Dumbocrats have all moved to the Republican Party, how did you get the tolerant, self-reliant, small-government former Republican's to move over to the Dumbocrat Party and accept large, wasteful, unconstitutional government?

Ooops!

 

[paperview]

"The greatest leaders in fighting for an integrated America in the 20th century were in the Democratic Party.

The fact is it was the liberal wing of the Democratic Party that ended segregation.

The fact is that it was Franklin Delano Roosevelt who gave hope to a nation that was in despair and could have slid into dictatorship. And the fact is every Republican has much to learn from studying what the Democrats did right."

-Newt Gingrich.

 

[P@triot]

It is "magical" because even if you're absurd and outrageous lie were true, it fails to explain how the maniacal scheme managed to convince the tolerant, self-reliant, small-government Republicans to suddenly jump ship and join the Dumbocrats.

Oops....!!!! Dumb-ass...

"Tolerant, self-reliant, small-government" racist Southern Confederate slaveowners. Good one. "Self-reliant", who fought for their "right" to own slaves to do all of their work. "Tolerant" racist Southern ***** who whipped, raped, burned and hung black slaves for being black. "Small-government" slaveowners.

Just type the term "Southern Strategy" into your search engine. Did I write every article in cyberspace that describes the switch from racist Southern Democrat to racist Southern Republican? No, I did not. So is the entire internet lying by saying that the GOP's Southern Strategy switched racist Southern Democrats to racist Southern Republicans?

Hey dumb-ass, you're defeating your own argument here. According to you, Dumbocrats are the "tolerant" one's and switched from the Republican Party under Abraham Lincoln in the 1860's and then again during the Civil Rights movement during the 1960's.

So I ask again, if the racist Dumbocrats have all moved to the Republican Party, how did you get the tolerant, self-reliant, small-government former Republican's to move over to the Dumbocrat Party and accept large, wasteful, unconstitutional government?

Ooops!

If you have any question as to why KNB is a Dumbocrat, look no further than his post above. He's trying to explain why his party's ugly, racist history by claiming they have all moved from Dumbocrat to Republican (hilarious). But he's completely incapable of explaining how they managed to get all of the good, tolerant Republicans to switch over to the Dumbocrats. In fact, I suspect he doesn't even get the question....

Proof that junior here can't think for himself. He just knows to parrot the propaganda spoon-fed to him!

 

[P@triot]

You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed

In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,

You've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught before it's too late,

Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!


You've Got to be Taught How to Hate - YouTube

And nobody knows mind-control quite like progressives. Woodrow Wilson was the master of it. And of course, the deplorable mind-control project MK Ultra was launched under Dumbocrat Harry Truman.

Indeed, to hate and fear you have to be taught - and nobody teaches it quite like the racist Dumbocrats!

 

[paperview]

With a few exceptions - literally a handful -- in the last 80 years or so...

As compared to well over 100 Democrats.

Democrats hate Black Americans so much they elect to give them power.

 

[paperview]

You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed

In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,

You've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught before it's too late,

Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!


You've Got to be Taught How to Hate - YouTube

And nobody knows mind-control quite like progressives. Woodrow Wilson was the master of it. And of course, the deplorable mind-control project MK Ultra was launched under Dumbocrat Harry Truman.

Indeed, to hate and fear you have to be taught - and nobody teaches it quite like the racist Dumbocrats!

And you can share that with your buddies at Stormfront.


They love that stuff.

 

[rightwinger]

With a few exceptions - literally a handful -- in the last 80 years or so...

As compared to well over 100 Democrats.

Democrats hate Black Americans so much they elect to give them power.

Republicans have elected SIX blacks to the office of Congressman, Senator, Governor or President in the last 100 years

 

[chikenwing]

With a few exceptions - literally a handful -- in the last 80 years or so...

As compared to well over 100 Democrats.

Democrats hate Black Americans so much they elect to give them power.

Republicans have elected SIX blacks to the office of Congressman, Senator, Governor or President in the last 100 years

One must wonder then,what is the ratio between the number of blacks running as Dems compared to number of blacks running as repubs.

These numbers would make clear your attempt at what ever.