If Anyone Owes Reparations It's Democrats

[Phokus]

Also dali, in that very same slate article, the author linked a response to the david brooks piece that gives you a greater significance of the event and the GOP's southern strategy. Go peddle your insipid bullshit somewhere else:

Did David Brooks Tell the Full Story About Reagan's Neshoba County Fair Visit?
By Joseph Crespino

Mr. Crespino is the author of In Search of Another Country: Mississippi and the Conservative Counterrevolution (Princeton, 2007). He teaches American history at Emory University.

In his November 9, 2007, column in the New York Times, David Brooks discussed Ronald Reagan?s appearance at the Neshoba County Fair in 1980 and his use of the term ?states? rights.? Brooks absolved Reagan of racism, but he ignored the broader significance of Reagan?s Neshoba County appearance.

A full account of the incident has to consider how the national GOP was trying to strengthen its southern state parties and win support from southern white Democrats. Consider a letter that Michael Retzer, the Mississippi national committeeman, wrote in December 1979 to the Republican national committee. Well before the Republicans had nominated Reagan, the national committee was polling state leaders to line up venues where the Republican nominee might speak. Retzer pointed to the Neshoba County Fair as ideal for winning what he called the ?George Wallace inclined voters.? [

This Republican leader knew that the segregationist Alabama governor was the symbol of southern white resentment against the civil rights struggle. Richard Nixon had angled to win these voters in 1968 and 1972. Mississippi Republicans knew that a successful Republican candidate in 1980 would have to continue the effort.

On July 31st, just days before Reagan went to Neshoba County, the New York Times reported that the Ku Klux Klan had endorsed Reagan. In its newspaper, the Klan said that the Republican platform ?reads as if it were written by a Klansman.? Reagan rejected the endorsement, but only after a Carter cabinet official brought it up in a campaign speech. The dubious connection did not stop Reagan from using segregationist language in Neshoba County. [

It was clear from other episodes in that campaign that Reagan was content to let southern Republicans link him to segregationist politics in the South?s recent past. Reagan?s states rights line was prepared beforehand and reporters covering the event could not recall him using the term before the Neshoba County appearance. John Bell Williams, an arch-segregationist former governor who had crossed party lines in 1964 to endorse Barry Goldwater, joined Reagan on stage at another campaign stop in Mississippi. Reagan?s campaign chair in the state, Trent Lott, praised Strom Thurmond, the former segregationist Dixiecrat candidate in 1948, at a Reagan rally, saying that if Thurmond had been elected president ?we wouldn?t be in the mess we are today.?

Brooks?s defense of Reagan seemed to be a response to his fellow Times columnist Paul Krugman, who in his book, The Conscience of a Liberal,mentions the Neshoba County visit several times. Krugman?s account of modern conservatism is not without problems. He reduces the success of modern conservatism to the fact that ?southern whites started voting Republican.? Such a formulation singles out white southerners alone as providing the racist element in conservative politics. It ignores the complex intersection of racial issues with cultural and religious concerns to which liberals have not always been sufficiently sensitive. And it obscures the fact that Democrats continued to win elections in the South after the 1960s by appealing to populist economic issues?a history that Democrats today should recall before they start ?whistling past Dixie.?

Brook?s column, however, is a good example of conservatives? discomfort with their racial history. Reagan is to modern conservatism what Franklin Roosevelt was to liberalism, so it?s not surprising that Brooks would feel the need to defend him. But Brooks?s throwaway remark that ?it?s obviously true that race played a role in the GOP ascent? understates what actually happened.

Throughout his career, Reagan benefited from subtly divisive appeals to whites who resented efforts in the 1960s and 70s to reverse historic patterns of racial discrimination. He did it in 1966 when he campaigned for the California governorship by denouncing open housing and civil rights laws. He did it in 1976 when he tried to beat out Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination by attacking welfare in subtly racist terms. And he did it in Neshoba County in 1980.

Reagan knew that southern Republicans were making racial appeals to win over conservative southern Democrats, and he was a willing participant. Despite what Brooks claims, it?s no slur to hold Reagan accountable for the choice that he made. Neither is it mere partisanship to try to think seriously about the complex ways that white racism has shaped modern conservative politics.

http://hnn.us/articles/44535.html

 

[Corn]

Why are you afraid to answer this Phokus?

Originally posted by: Corn

4) "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." (What racial problem? Oh i get it, MAYBE HE'S REFERRING TO THE VERY FIRST FUCKING SENTENCE, here let me refresh it for you: "You start out in 1954 by saying, "Ni**er, *****, *****." 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" Oh right, the racial problem of APPEARING RACIST, idiot). Lookup 'dogwhistle politics' you ignorant sloth.

You're a prime example of the impossibile task of changing what is in the heart. Outward expressions of racism *is very bad*. Bad for the racist, worse for the target of the racism. I've had to deal with racists personally many times as people make racist jokes about my wife's (Jewish) or my sister-in-law's (Chaldean) ancestry. Both accept the fact that people are going to be racist, but nothing ruins their day more than the "cheap jew" or "beloved patriot" comments they have to endure constantly because, you know, it's hard to tell without a yarmulke or accent.

Curbing outward expressions of racism is half the battle. Once the shame of racism takes hold of the unabashed racist, the chances he's able to poison other people is significantly reduced. To any reasoned person, it is clear that this is the context to which Mr. Atwater is referring to when he states "we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other" and even then still qualifies it with an "if it is getting that abstract".

Now I'm beginning to change my opinion of your dishonesty back into the realm of the intentional, because even after you've been corrected, you still repeat this misrepresentation of his comments.

You're as bigoted as any racist I've ever come across. Well done moron.

Yes, to the paranoid mind, everything a Republican says is code for racism, all Republicans are racist scum. You've said it a million times already, we get it, you see boogiemen everywhere.


BOO!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Yes, clearly when Reagan spoke at an infamous site where several civil rights workers were murdered and his use of 'states rights' and other dog whistle talking points, these 'facts' are clearly made up by the LIE-BERAL media washington post owned Slate.

You lie through your teeth again. Was his speech at "an infamous site where several civil rights workers were murdered", or was it instead merely at a county fair which was simply nearby? Question, was Michael Dukakis also a racist for campaigning at the same county fair?

There's code in your posts that even you can't comprehend.....well, to be fair, it's more like a joke instead of code....but I get the punchline. Beg me, maybe I'll clue you in.

 

[themusgrat]

Originally posted by: Phokus
OP doesn't know history, yesterday's democrats are today's republicans:
.......shiiiiite.....
It was the modern day GOP's decision to be the party of the racist white south after LBJ 'betrayed' the racist dixiecrats and they decided to jump ship onto your racist platform.

One day, Barry will wake up to reality, regret this post immensely, but in time come to the joyous realization that he just trolled you on such an epic scale that I'm inclined to congratulate him for this thread. You're absolutely retarded.

 

[BoomerD]

Gee Barry, since you're so insistent about assigning responsibility for reparations, then by all means, let's assign the costs to the states that benefitted from slavery. That would be all the southern states, few, if any, of the Northern states, and none of the western states. Just assess each resident of the former slave states an appropriate amount of "reparation tax" and take their property and posessions if they fail to pay in a timely manner.

THAT ought to go over well, dontcha think? :roll:


FUCK paying reparations. There's not a single "former slave" left alive today. While perhaps those people could be compensated for what was done to them, none of their decendents are entitled to a dime.

If anyone should have to pay reparations, how about the countries that actually SOLD the people into slavery?


AFAIC, slavery is a terrible dark stain on the history of the US, but reparations is just an attempted money grab by the decendents of the slaves...

Are we going to start paying the "Indians" for all the land that was taken from them over the past 400 years? Never mind the "$24 in baubbles for Manhattan" story...actually PAY the Indians for all their land? How about compensating them for all the thousands or hundreds of thousands who were massacred in the US's quest for new land?
It's bad enough that the BIA has so badly mismanaged the Indian trusts that it's estimated that the US Government owes the tribe somewhere around $9 Billion...
http://www.indiantrust.com/_pd...ndianTrustBrochure.pdf

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: ayabe
Yeah, we know the story the Dixiecrats jumped ship after LBJ pushed civil rights.

Reparations aren't happening, now or ever, get over it.

i wouldnt bet the farm on that. i am willing ot put money on the fact in the next 7-8 years its going to happen. NOT because we have a black pres. but because thats how its leading.

People in congress have been pushing it for years and its getting closer and closer.

Who?

Sorry but this is a wedge issue used to scare white people, namely to continue to vote Republican. We just had an election that basically revolved around this very fear, that white people are becoming a minority and that rural America is becoming less relevant every day due to changing demographics.

Any politician trying to push this can kiss their political career goodbye, you can guarantee that even though I'm a pussy lib, this is one thing that would have me reaching for my gun.

Talk about open rebellion, it's just insane to think this would ever happen.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: ayabe
Yeah, we know the story the Dixiecrats jumped ship after LBJ pushed civil rights.

Reparations aren't happening, now or ever, get over it.

i wouldnt bet the farm on that. i am willing ot put money on the fact in the next 7-8 years its going to happen. NOT because we have a black pres. but because thats how its leading.

People in congress have been pushing it for years and its getting closer and closer.

Who?

Sorry but this is a wedge issue used to scare white people, namely to continue to vote Republican. We just had an election that basically revolved around this very fear, that white people are becoming a minority and that rural America is becoming less relevant every day due to changing demographics.

Any politician trying to push this can kiss their political career goodbye, you can guarantee that even though I'm a pussy lib, this is one thing that would have me reaching for my gun.

Talk about open rebellion, it's just insane to think this would ever happen.

years ago they said the same about apologizing for slavery.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
hey what can I tell you - it's overwhelming historical fact the Dems were party of slavery and Jim Crow. If Dems are going to push for reparations it begins and ends with them. Republicans formed over slavery and made tremendous gains - then Dems buried them using Jin Crow - which was established to stop black republican voters and not just blacks per se. They jumped on bandwagon 100yrs after blocking same laws Republicans had already established. They hijacked the glory train and used teachers/media to cover the tracks

Tell you what.

You find ONE person who was a slave who's still alive. Then you find EVEN ONE person who owned slaves who's still alive. The two of them can settle it for themselves and you can stuff your BS right up your ass.

 

[BarrySotero]

Thanks for the bump Nik (rhymes with..?). I see you've been gored by the bull of truth and are a bit cranky today. So here's some more..


Here is an article by Martin Luther King's niece and a speaker listed on site ( http://www.errvideo.com/Speakers.html ) for group that made film "EMANCIPATION REVIVAL REVOLUTION" listed in first posts. She explains how blacks ended up on the Democratic plantation (where the black family was ruined and crime and illegitimacy were sent over the moon)





A Covenant With Life: Reclaiming MLK?s Legacy


By Dr. Alveda C. King ? Niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

In light of the emergence of a black man as a presidential contender this election season, we might do well to take note that it is not the political party or the man, but the message that is imperative.

A brief history lesson can reveal how we got to a place of looking to man instead of God for answers. In 1960, Senator John F. Kennedy defeated sitting Vice President Richard Nixon in the bid to become president. The black vote swung the tide!

My grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr., or ?Daddy King?, was a Republican and father of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who was a Republican.

Daddy King influenced a reported 100,000 black voters to cast previously Republican votes for Senator Kennedy even though Kennedy had voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Law. Mrs. King had appealed to Kennedy and Nixon to help her husband, and Nixon who had voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Law did not respond. At the urging of his advisors, Kennedy made a politically calculated phone call to Mrs. King, who was pregnant at the time, bringing the attention of the nation to Dr. King?s plight.

Moved by Mrs. King?s gratitude for Senator Kennedy?s intervention, Daddy King was very grateful to Senator Kennedy for his assistance in rescuing Dr. King, Jr. from a life threatening jail encounter. This experience led to a black exodus from the Republican Party. Thus, this one simple act of gratitude caused black America to quickly forget that the Republican Party was birthed in America as the antislavery party to end the scourge of slavery and combat the terror of racism and segregation. They quickly forgot that the Democratic Party was the party of the Ku Klux Klan.

Forgotten was the fact that it was the Republicans who started the HBCU?s and the NAACP to stop the Democrats from lynching blacks. Into the dust bin of history was tossed the fact that it was the Republicans led by Republican Senator Everett Dirksen who pushed to pass the civil rights laws in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968.

Removed from memory are the facts that it was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools, established the Civil rights commission in 1958, and appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation.

Meanwhile Democrats in Congress were still fighting to prevent the passage of new civil rights laws that would overturn those discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws that had been enacted by Democrats in the South.

No one batted an eye when President Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King. Hardly a ripple of protest was uttered when President Kennedy, through his brother Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated on suspicion of being a Communist.

Little attention was paid to the fact that it was a Democrat, Public Safety Commissioner Eugene ?Bull? Conner, who in 1963 turned dogs and fire hoses on Dr. King and other civil rights protestors. No one noted that it was a Democrat, Georgia Governor Lester Maddox, who waved ax handles to stop blacks from patronizing his restaurant. Nor was heed paid to the fact that it was a Democrat, Alabama Governor George Wallace, who stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963 and thundered: ?Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.? None of those racist Democrats became Republicans.

During this time of turmoil, completely forgotten was the fact that it was Democrat Arkansas Governor Orville Faubus who in 1954 had blocked desegregation of a Little Rock public school. To their eternal shame, the chief opponents of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act were Democrats Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd, a former Klansman. All of the racist Democrats that Dr. King was fighting remained Democrats until the day they died. How can anyone today think that Dr. King, my uncle, would have joined the party of the KKK?

There is a law of unexpected outcomes. Who could have predicted that the black exodus from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party in the 1960?s would have also ushered in decades of destruction which continue to plague our communities today?

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Reagan knew that southern Republicans were making racial appeals to win over conservative southern Democrats, and he was a willing participant. Despite what Brooks claims, it?s no slur to hold Reagan accountable for the choice that he made. Neither is it mere partisanship to try to think seriously about the complex ways that white racism has shaped modern conservative politics.[/b]

http://hnn.us/articles/44535.html[/quote]
So Reagan was making racial appeals to win over Democrat voters???

Wouldn't that imply that the Democrats themselves were racist then?

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Phokus
Reagan knew that southern Republicans were making racial appeals to win over conservative southern Democrats, and he was a willing participant. Despite what Brooks claims, it?s no slur to hold Reagan accountable for the choice that he made. Neither is it mere partisanship to try to think seriously about the complex ways that white racism has shaped modern conservative politics.[/b]

http://hnn.us/articles/44535.html

So Reagan was making racial appeals to win over Democrat voters???

Wouldn't that imply that the Democrats themselves were racist then?

Yes, Southern white conservative dixiecrats were racist as hell and later became republicans.

This is a surprising revelation.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Corn
Why are you afraid to answer this Phokus?

Originally posted by: Corn

4) "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." (What racial problem? Oh i get it, MAYBE HE'S REFERRING TO THE VERY FIRST FUCKING SENTENCE, here let me refresh it for you: "You start out in 1954 by saying, "Ni**er, *****, *****." 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" Oh right, the racial problem of APPEARING RACIST, idiot). Lookup 'dogwhistle politics' you ignorant sloth.

You're a prime example of the impossibile task of changing what is in the heart. Outward expressions of racism *is very bad*. Bad for the racist, worse for the target of the racism. I've had to deal with racists personally many times as people make racist jokes about my wife's (Jewish) or my sister-in-law's (Chaldean) ancestry. Both accept the fact that people are going to be racist, but nothing ruins their day more than the "cheap jew" or "beloved patriot" comments they have to endure constantly because, you know, it's hard to tell without a yarmulke or accent.

Curbing outward expressions of racism is half the battle. Once the shame of racism takes hold of the unabashed racist, the chances he's able to poison other people is significantly reduced. To any reasoned person, it is clear that this is the context to which Mr. Atwater is referring to when he states "we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other" and even then still qualifies it with an "if it is getting that abstract".

Now I'm beginning to change my opinion of your dishonesty back into the realm of the intentional, because even after you've been corrected, you still repeat this misrepresentation of his comments.

You're as bigoted as any racist I've ever come across. Well done moron.

Yes, to the paranoid mind, everything a Republican says is code for racism, all Republicans are racist scum. You've said it a million times already, we get it, you see boogiemen everywhere.


BOO!!!!!!!!!!

Afraid of answer? I already did, he's obviously saying it's getting rid of the racial problem (meaning appearing racist), you illiterate jackass.

You have to read the whole damn thing:

You start out in 1954 by saying, "great person, *****, *****." 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 then you actually have to acknowledge that there's a thing called 'dog whistle politics' where you try not to appear racist to the general population but you use coded language that only a certain targeted group of racists get.

Sorry you don't understand simple concepts or can't read, i really am.

 

[themusgrat]

I'd have to go back and read the rest of your shite to know what you're actually talking about (which would be an insult to my brain) but basically, there are no code words used by the modern Republican party to indicate racism. I will concede that in certain areas, there are times when politicians will cater to a certain demographic, say white males, because they think they will get a majority of votes that way. At the same time, there are other areas where politicians cater to blacks to get votes. Now your point about "economic things" is also retarded, as blacks in general are poorer than whites, so obviously an economic downturn, or something of that nature would hurt them more, and they'd care more about Social Security and the like of that. So does that make Democrats racist for getting votes telling people "We will keep our glorious SS forever!!!"? No.

Most of this country has moved past the olden days when you'd try to polarize the people by bringing up racism at every chance. That's what you're doing. You need to grow up.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero


Thanks for the bump Nik (rhymes with..?). I see you've been gored by the bull of truth and are a bit cranky today. So here's some more..


Here is an article by Martin Luther King's niece and a speaker listed on site ( http://www.errvideo.com/Speakers.html ) for group that made film "EMANCIPATION REVIVAL REVOLUTION" listed in first posts. She explains how blacks ended up on the Democratic plantation (where the black family was ruined and crime and illegitimacy were sent over the moon)





A Covenant With Life: Reclaiming MLK?s Legacy


By Dr. Alveda C. King ? Niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

In light of the emergence of a black man as a presidential contender this election season, we might do well to take note that it is not the political party or the man, but the message that is imperative.

A brief history lesson can reveal how we got to a place of looking to man instead of God for answers. In 1960, Senator John F. Kennedy defeated sitting Vice President Richard Nixon in the bid to become president. The black vote swung the tide!

My grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr., or ?Daddy King?, was a Republican and father of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who was a Republican.

Daddy King influenced a reported 100,000 black voters to cast previously Republican votes for Senator Kennedy even though Kennedy had voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Law. Mrs. King had appealed to Kennedy and Nixon to help her husband, and Nixon who had voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Law did not respond. At the urging of his advisors, Kennedy made a politically calculated phone call to Mrs. King, who was pregnant at the time, bringing the attention of the nation to Dr. King?s plight.

Moved by Mrs. King?s gratitude for Senator Kennedy?s intervention, Daddy King was very grateful to Senator Kennedy for his assistance in rescuing Dr. King, Jr. from a life threatening jail encounter. This experience led to a black exodus from the Republican Party. Thus, this one simple act of gratitude caused black America to quickly forget that the Republican Party was birthed in America as the antislavery party to end the scourge of slavery and combat the terror of racism and segregation. They quickly forgot that the Democratic Party was the party of the Ku Klux Klan.

Forgotten was the fact that it was the Republicans who started the HBCU?s and the NAACP to stop the Democrats from lynching blacks. Into the dust bin of history was tossed the fact that it was the Republicans led by Republican Senator Everett Dirksen who pushed to pass the civil rights laws in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968.

Removed from memory are the facts that it was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools, established the Civil rights commission in 1958, and appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation.

Meanwhile Democrats in Congress were still fighting to prevent the passage of new civil rights laws that would overturn those discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws that had been enacted by Democrats in the South.

No one batted an eye when President Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King. Hardly a ripple of protest was uttered when President Kennedy, through his brother Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated on suspicion of being a Communist.

Little attention was paid to the fact that it was a Democrat, Public Safety Commissioner Eugene ?Bull? Conner, who in 1963 turned dogs and fire hoses on Dr. King and other civil rights protestors. No one noted that it was a Democrat, Georgia Governor Lester Maddox, who waved ax handles to stop blacks from patronizing his restaurant. Nor was heed paid to the fact that it was a Democrat, Alabama Governor George Wallace, who stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963 and thundered: ?Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.? None of those racist Democrats became Republicans.

During this time of turmoil, completely forgotten was the fact that it was Democrat Arkansas Governor Orville Faubus who in 1954 had blocked desegregation of a Little Rock public school. To their eternal shame, the chief opponents of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act were Democrats Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd, a former Klansman. All of the racist Democrats that Dr. King was fighting remained Democrats until the day they died. How can anyone today think that Dr. King, my uncle, would have joined the party of the KKK?

There is a law of unexpected outcomes. Who could have predicted that the black exodus from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party in the 1960?s would have also ushered in decades of destruction which continue to plague our communities today?

This has no relevance at all.....what a twisted person you are.....Sotero

 

[Robor]

Ban

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Phokus
Reagan knew that southern Republicans were making racial appeals to win over conservative southern Democrats, and he was a willing participant. Despite what Brooks claims, it?s no slur to hold Reagan accountable for the choice that he made. Neither is it mere partisanship to try to think seriously about the complex ways that white racism has shaped modern conservative politics.[/b]

http://hnn.us/articles/44535.html

So Reagan was making racial appeals to win over Democrat voters???

Wouldn't that imply that the Democrats themselves were racist then?

Yes, Southern white conservative dixiecrats were racist as hell and later became republicans.

This is a surprising revelation.

Links?