So much for Republicans being at the forefront of civil rights in the 60

[Doc1]

Why can't you people come up with names?

Why do you want an answer to a question you already know the answer to?

Because I want one of you to actually post the name of Robert Byrd, a democrat that ended up being the longest serving Senator in our history, and was a democrat from the day he took office, til the day he was wheeled out for the last time.

And what was Lyndon Johnson?

A democrat.

So even a simpleton like you can understand that in the 60's there was a major split in the Democratic Party between the liberal wing,

the pro-civil rights wing,

and the conservative wing, the anti-civil rights wing.

Even a simpleton like you understands that life, society, race is ALWAYS "evolving". Fact is the 64 bill was Bi-Partisan. Even a racist black man like you must admit that fact. To pretend otherwise simply reveals your inability to accept that Racism as exemplified by our history is no more.
Is there still some tweaking that must be done?
Absolutely.
But the fact is this, MUCH of it must be done by people of color. You idiots keep screaming "racism" over the slightest perceived 'disrespect".
All that will get you is a "fuck you" and a cup of coffee. You've cried wolf to many times and nobody cares anymore.

 

[Pogo]

Lyndon Johnson LED the civil rights movement of the 60's. Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to it.

Who tried to filibuster it?

Southerners.

Let me give you a hint. Begins with D, ends in rats. Does that help you any?

Actually lemme give you a hint.

>> When we look at the party vote in both houses of Congress, it fits the historical pattern. Republicans are more in favor of the bill:

80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bill. Less than 70% of Democrats did. Indeed, Minority Leader Republican Everett Dirksen led the fight to end the filibuster. Meanwhile, Democrats such as Richard Russell of Georgia and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina tried as hard as they could to sustain a filibuster.

Of course, it was also Democrats who helped usher the bill through the House, Senate, and ultimately a Democratic president who signed it into law. The bill wouldn't have passed without the support of Majority Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana, a Democrat. Majority Whip Hubert Humphrey, who basically split the Democratic party in two with his 1948 Democratic National Convention speech calling for equal rights for all, kept tabs on individual members to ensure the bill had the numbers to overcome the filibuster.

Put another way, party affiliation seems to be somewhat predictive, but something seems to be missing. So, what factor did best predicting voting?

You don't need to know too much history to understand that the South from the civil war to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 tended to be opposed to minority rights. This factor was separate from party identification or ideology. We can easily control for this variable by breaking up the voting by those states that were part of the confederacy and those that were not.

You can see that geography was far more predictive of voting coalitions on the Civil Rights than party affiliation. What linked Dirksen and Mansfield was the fact that they weren't from the south. In fact, 90% of members of Congress from states (or territories) that were part of the Union voted in favor of the act, while less than 10% of members of Congress from the old Confederate states voted for it. This 80pt difference between regions is far greater than the 15pt difference between parties.

But what happens when we control for both party affiliation and region? As Sean Trende noted earlier this year, "sometimes relationships become apparent only after you control for other factors".

In this case, it becomes clear that Democrats in the north and the south were more likely to vote for the bill than Republicans in the north and south respectively. This difference in both houses is statistically significant with over 95% confidence. It just so happened southerners made up a larger percentage of the Democratic than Republican caucus, which created the initial impression than Republicans were more in favor of the act.

Nearly 100% of Union state Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act compared to 85% of Republicans. None of the southern Republicans voted for the bill, while a small percentage of southern Democrats did.

The same pattern holds true when looking at ideology instead of party affiliation. The folks over at Voteview.com, who created DW-nominate scores to measure the ideology of congressmen and senators, found that the more liberal a congressman or senator was the more likely he would vote for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, once one controlled for a factor closely linked to geography. <<
​

This ^^ is your brain on facts.

Any questions?

Yes, passing the civil rights act was bipartisan, I never said it wasn't, but I believe the question was "who fought against civil right". The answer is the majority of those that did were southern DEMOCRATS.

I neither suggested or inferred otherwise. You made assumptions that I did.

Perhaps the volume of info overwhelmed you. Read it again. Southerers. Southern Democrats in mass quantities, and Southern Republicans in unanimous ones.

 

[WillowTree]

Go to sleep laughing!

 

[jknowgood]

Because I want one of you to actually post the name of Robert Byrd, a democrat that ended up being the longest serving Senator in our history, and was a democrat from the day he took office, til the day he was wheeled out for the last time.

And what was Lyndon Johnson?

A democrat.

So even a simpleton like you can understand that in the 60's there was a major split in the Democratic Party between the liberal wing,

the pro-civil rights wing,

and the conservative wing, the anti-civil rights wing.

So you deny your roots? How precious. Lol

My politics align with the liberal wing of the Democratic party. Yours align with the conservative segregationist wing of the Democratic party,

which no longer exists.

You stupid ass we want everyone to have a chance. Not only who agrees with our political beliefs. Example, liberals will hate and do what they can anyone that supports Trump. I mean all I did was call you Obama supporters, dumbasses. Your anti American.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Donald Trump, the new leader of the Republican Party, vilifying John Lewis, a black man who actually fought for civil rights in the 60's.

This:

View attachment 106878

When Trump gets beaten up fighting for civil rights, get back to us.

When Trump has a record of fighting for anyone let me know.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Donald Trump, the new leader of the Republican Party, vilifying John Lewis, a black man who actually fought for civil rights in the 60's.

This:

View attachment 106878

When Trump gets beaten up fighting for civil rights, get back to us.

If Trump is such a setback for civil rights, Where was John Lewis when Trump was writing checks to the Clintons in the form of campaign donations??

 

[JakeStarkey]

Is this your way of denying the fact it was Democrats that were the villains of the civil rights movement in the '60s?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lyndon Johnson LED the civil rights movement of the 60's. Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to it.

The text books clearly point out that the CRA movement of the 60s was led by the Dems and that the GOP has tried, unsuccessfully, to claim otherwise.

 

[Bush92]

3rd thread in 2 days. Nobody gives a shit about that racist wind bag Lewis

Then why are you all screaming and yelling?

Because liberals are annoying...like a zit on a persons ass.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Is this your way of denying the fact it was Democrats that were the villains of the civil rights movement in the '60s?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lyndon Johnson LED the civil rights movement of the 60's. Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to it.

Who tried to filibuster it?

The Conservatives in both parties voted against it. The northern and western Dems with the majority and the Pubs with the minority overwhelmingly passed the legislation.

 

[NightFox]

The guy fought for civil rights back in the 60's, however for nearly the last 30 years he's been a lying, scumbag Congress Critter, so he's fair game for criticism when he opens his mouth in public.

Apparently he can dish it out but he can't take it, fuck 'em.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Is this your way of denying the fact it was Democrats that were the villains of the civil rights movement in the '60s?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lyndon Johnson LED the civil rights movement of the 60's. Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to it.

"I'll have them ****** voting Democrat for the next 200 years"

"Son, when I appoint a ****** to the Supreme Court I want everyone to know he's a ******"

"When Caro asked segregationist Georgia Democrat Herman Talmadge how he felt when Johnson, signing the Civil Rights Act, said ”we shall overcome,” Talmadge said “sick.”"

Lyndon Johnson was a civil rights hero. But also a racist.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Is this your way of denying the fact it was Democrats that were the villains of the civil rights movement in the '60s?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lyndon Johnson LED the civil rights movement of the 60's. Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to it.

Goldwater opposed it because it was unnecessary once you get Democrats to act like humans

 

[NightFox]

Is this your way of denying the fact it was Democrats that were the villains of the civil rights movement in the '60s?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lyndon Johnson LED the civil rights movement of the 60's. Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to it.

Goldwater opposed it because it was unnecessary once you get Democrats to act like humans

Goldwater opposed the 1964 CRA because he believed that Title II and Title VII ("public accommodations" and hiring/firing practices) were an unconstitutional overreach into States Rights by the Federal Government, Goldwater supported the civil rights bills of 57 and 60 and was generally in favor of federal laws protecting civil rights AS LONG AS THEY WERE CONSTITUTIONALLY PERMISSABLE.

NYCarbineer is as usual displaying his non-existent understanding of history and his dishonesty with moronic statements like "Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to the civil rights movement of the 60's", which is complete nonsense.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why do you want an answer to a question you already know the answer to?

Because I want one of you to actually post the name of Robert Byrd, a democrat that ended up being the longest serving Senator in our history, and was a democrat from the day he took office, til the day he was wheeled out for the last time.

And what was Lyndon Johnson?

A democrat.

So even a simpleton like you can understand that in the 60's there was a major split in the Democratic Party between the liberal wing,

the pro-civil rights wing,

and the conservative wing, the anti-civil rights wing.

Even a simpleton like you understands that life, society, race is ALWAYS "evolving". Fact is the 64 bill was Bi-Partisan. Even a racist black man like you must admit that fact. To pretend otherwise simply reveals your inability to accept that Racism as exemplified by our history is no more.
.

Racism is no more?

It was only 6 months ago that the North Carolina voter ID law was struck down. Reason?

"A federal appeals court decisively struck down North Carolina’s voter identification law on Friday, saying its provisions deliberately “target African-Americans with almost surgical precision” in an effort to depress black turnout at the polls."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/...n-north-carolina-voter-id-provision.html?_r=0

 

[jknowgood]

Because I want one of you to actually post the name of Robert Byrd, a democrat that ended up being the longest serving Senator in our history, and was a democrat from the day he took office, til the day he was wheeled out for the last time.

And what was Lyndon Johnson?

A democrat.

So even a simpleton like you can understand that in the 60's there was a major split in the Democratic Party between the liberal wing,

the pro-civil rights wing,

and the conservative wing, the anti-civil rights wing.

Even a simpleton like you understands that life, society, race is ALWAYS "evolving". Fact is the 64 bill was Bi-Partisan. Even a racist black man like you must admit that fact. To pretend otherwise simply reveals your inability to accept that Racism as exemplified by our history is no more.
.

Racism is no more?

It was only 6 months ago that the North Carolina voter ID law was struck down. Reason?

"A federal appeals court decisively struck down North Carolina’s voter identification law on Friday, saying its provisions deliberately “target African-Americans with almost surgical precision” in an effort to depress black turnout at the polls."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/...n-north-carolina-voter-id-provision.html?_r=0

So you are saying blacks are too stupid to get an id?

 

[imawhosure]

Donald Trump, the new leader of the Republican Party, vilifying John Lewis, a black man who actually fought for civil rights in the 60's.

So you can't criticized him after his inane comments because he was part Civil Rights Movement? How did his big loudmouth ass get that immunity?

Trump believes Obama was not a legitimate president. Lewis believes Trump is not legitimate.

Go ahead. Say they're both full of shit.

Another phony narrative-------->Trump was NOT part of the government, he was a private citizen. Lewis IS part of the government, thus took the oath to uphold the constitution, which he is not!

 

[imawhosure]

Is this your way of denying the fact it was Democrats that were the villains of the civil rights movement in the '60s?

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lyndon Johnson LED the civil rights movement of the 60's. Barry Goldwater LED the opposition to it.

Another lie, NY is an astro turfer for sure.

LBJ despised African Americans. Goldwater stood against it because it was unconstitutional. Read a little History there NY!

 

[martybegan]

Donald Trump, the new leader of the Republican Party, vilifying John Lewis, a black man who actually fought for civil rights in the 60's.

This:

View attachment 106878

When Trump gets beaten up fighting for civil rights, get back to us.

When YOU get beaten up fighting for civil rights, get back to us.

 

[imawhosure]

Gee after about 50 threads over the last few years from RWnuts here claiming they were arm in arm with John Lewis in the civil rights movement of the 60's,

suddenly they're making a mass retraction and throwing him under the bus?

Is Rosa Parks on that bus they're throwing him under?

Another phony astro turfing comment meant to incite. Not working NY, you are losing your touch!

 

[Pogo]

Donald Trump, the new leader of the Republican Party, vilifying John Lewis, a black man who actually fought for civil rights in the 60's.

This:

View attachment 106878

When Trump gets beaten up fighting for civil rights, get back to us.

When YOU get beaten up fighting for civil rights, get back to us.

Tweet that to Rump and get back to us.