SEIU Uses Death Of MLK To Push Pro Union Adgenda

[Matt1970]

So the Democrats switched to Republicans. Aren't people allowed to come to thier senses?

 

[ProfJohn]

If your revision of history makes you feel better, then keep at it. Facts are facts though.
Tom is dead right; the Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights Act were "Dixiecrats", almost all of whom later became Republicans during the Nixon years of the "Southern Strategy"
But hey... acknowledging these facts would make you look pretty stupid.

Please name which Democrats became Republicans please.

 

[fskimospy]

Please name which Democrats became Republicans please.

Strom Thurmond for one.

 

[ProfJohn]

Did you notice how those democrats became republicans after the passage of the Civil Rights Act? I know Rush Limbaugh has told you differently, but he is a liar, and his followers and simply too stupid to know better.

Please provide the names of those Democrats, thanks.

 

[ProfJohn]

Here are the vote results:

Interesting how you left out the vote totals by party which clearly show that Republicans supported the bill in greater numbers percentage wise than Democrats.

 

[ProfJohn]

Strom Thurmond for one.

And???

 

[fskimospy]

Interesting how you left out the vote totals by party which clearly show that Republicans supported the bill in greater numbers percentage wise than Democrats.

As we've been over already here, doing that requires you to ignore the context of those numbers, a child like way of looking at history.

 

[ProfJohn]

Man facts suck...
http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator participated in the filibuster against the bill. In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes.

 

[fskimospy]

Man facts suck...
http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

I know you aren't this dumb, is ideology really blinding you this badly? Did you read this thread?

 

[Throckmorton]

Are you talking about the people who were solidly Democrat since the party's founding? The ones who completely opposed the GOP, which was founded on the principals of freedom and ending slavery? The ones who JFK depended on to get elected? The ones that nobody in the Democrat party seemed to have a problem with until political pressure forced JFK to push civil rights (reluctantly)?

You act like they were Republicans under a different name, when in reality they were ALWAYS much more aligned with the principals of the Democratic party, with the issue of slavery being the principal difference.

To say "Well they were always Republicans" is about as ignorant a statement as you could make.

Let me make this simple. They were right wing conservatives.

Modern right wing conservatives are generally Republicans. Modern liberals are generally Democrats. See how that works? You all seem to be obsessed with the fact that Lincoln was a Republican (when you aren't bashing him for violating states' rights), yet you're ignoring the history of the parties switching right/left positions.


Right.

Left.

The right opposed civil rights.

The left supported civil rights.

Or do you think Strom Thurmond was a leftist and MLK was a rightist?

What don't you people get?

 

[werepossum]

Buzzzzzzznnnnnntttt 30 volts to the wrongo buzzer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.

In March 1968, Dr. King went to Memphis, Tennessee, in support of striking African American sanitation workers. The workers had staged a walkout on February 11, 1968, to protest unequal wages and working conditions. At the time, the city of Memphis paid black workers significantly lower wages than whites. In addition, unlike their white counterparts, blacks received no pay if they stayed home during bad weather; consequently, most blacks were compelled to work even in driving rain and snow storms

A quite justified complaint in no way similar to, say, the right to have one's children college educated at taxpers' expense or the right to not be fired even if incapable of doing one's job.

that's a complete misrepresentation of history. the most significant politician in passing the Civil Rights Act was LBJ.

A majority of Senate Democrats always supported passage. They had to weaken the Bill to get some Republicans to join them in breaking a filibuster by conservative racist Southern Democrats, that later became Southern racist Republicans.

So it wasn't "the Democrats" that almost stopped it. It was THE DEMOCRATS who got it passed.

That's not entirely true. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. Some of those filibustering Democrats, like Strom Thurmond, eventually became Republicans. But most, like the filibuster leader Richard Russell (LBJ's mentor), Robert "KKK" Byrd, Al Gore Sr, J. William Fulbright (Clinton's mentor), and San Ervin (who went on to play key roles in destroying Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixson), remained staunch lifelong Democrats, apparently happy as long as they could discriminate against someone. As to Republican opposition, it was largely limited to the expansion of government power into business's operations. It's one thing to end government-backed discrimination, quite another for government to tell a man how to run his own business. Hence the compromise bill. Remember, almost all civil rights bills until that time were Republican bills, and Kennedy's 1963 Civil Rights Act (which was re-filed without the earlier amendments as the 1964 Civil Rights Act, in yet another victory for the interstate commerce clause) was itself merely an updated and somewhat watered down version of Republican Senator Charles Sumner's 1875 Civil Rights Act after SCOTUS shot down that bill over 14th Amendment concerns. It was also substantially weaker than the 1963 civil rights bill introduced in the House by Republicans.

http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator participated in the filibuster against the bill. In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes.

The Republican pro-civil rights forces were blessed with gifted leadership. Although Senate minority whip Thomas Kuchel initially managed the party's forces, it increasingly became clear to Democrats, Republicans, the press, civil rights groups, and the White House that Everett McKinley Dirksen was the key man in the entire civil rights legislative effort.

 

[ProfJohn]

I know you aren't this dumb, is ideology really blinding you this badly? Did you read this thread?

Yes I read it and I saw a bunch of Democrats trying to change history by pretending that Democrats had nothing to do with the Civil Rights filibuster.

The facts are that it was the Democrats who created jim crow laws and the separate but equal BS that divided the south between black and white.

It was Democrat governors who put the rebel flag onto their state flags to piss off civil right workers.

And it was Democrats who stood in doorways and blocked blacks from going into colleges and Democrats who turned the hoses on blacks and who turned their heads when blacks were murdered.

What is even worse is the lie that these people all switched parties which is complete BS. Strom Thurmond is the only one of the people who filibustered the 1964 act that switched parties. The rest of them died as Democrats.

The fact is that the Democrats have a lousy civil rights records and any attempt to shift blame to the Republicans is complete BS.

 

[werepossum]

Man facts suck...
http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

Ha, you trumped me.

I'd also like to know the names of the filibustering Democrats who later became Republicans, as Thurmond is the only one I recall.

EDIT: Hah, trumped me again. I thought three of the filibustering Democrats eventually became Pubbies.

 

[PeshakJang]

The right opposed civil rights.

The left supported civil rights.

Or do you think Strom Thurmond was a leftist and MLK was a rightist?

What don't you people get?

Do you realize that the GOP was founded on the principal of freedom for *everyone*, and was very anti-slavery?

Or are you saying that all of the Republicans that supported the civil rights legislation in the 60's (overwhelming majority, more of a majority than the Democrats), were really modern day Democrats?

It's not a simple... Left... Right... nothing else... issue like you're trying to paint it as. The Republican party was strongly anti-slavery since founding. The Democratic party was split between pro-slavery and anti-slavery, and JFK catered to the anti-civil rights south for a long time to avoid causing trouble... until political pressure FORCED him to act, which pissed off a good chunk of his party. Follow-on Democrats acted swiftly to create an entitlement, welfare state to try and maintain the black vote, which has worked pretty well for them... keep people stupid and begging for money, and they'll vote for you no matter what history says.

Fact234

 

[PeshakJang]

Or do you think Strom Thurmond was a leftist and MLK was a rightist?

If you insist on going by today's standards, MLK was a rightist, and JFK was a rightist as well.

You know... the whole, "every man is equal" and "ask not what your country can do for you" stuff... doesn't fly with modern day liberals.

 

[ProfJohn]

Let me make this simple. They were right wing conservatives.

So Al Gore Sr was a right wing conservative?

William Fulbright, Bill Clinton's mentor, was a right wing conservative?

Robert Byrd too?

 

[ProfJohn]

If you insist on going by today's standards, MLK was a rightist, and JFK was a rightist as well.

You know... the whole, "every man is equal" and "ask not what your country can do for you" stuff... doesn't fly with modern day liberals.

JFK cut taxes too!!!!!

Damn right wing supply sider.

 

[Throckmorton]

So Al Gore Sr was a right wing conservative?

William Fulbright, Bill Clinton's mentor, was a right wing conservative?

Robert Byrd too?

Were they anti civil rights, anti worker, and anti union?

 

[Throckmorton]

If you insist on going by today's standards, MLK was a rightist, and JFK was a rightist as well.

You know... the whole, "every man is equal" and "ask not what your country can do for you" stuff... doesn't fly with modern day liberals.

Did you miss the MLK "socialist" quotes? Wait.. "every man is equal" is now a conservative tenet?

 

[Tom]

I lived in the South then too (still do).

My recollection is that the Democrats in the South didn't switch to Repubs until the Reagan years. Throughout the 70's we didn't really have any Repubs in Northern FL. The winner of the Dem primary was the guaranteed winner of the gen election.

That didn't change until later during/after the Reagan era.

Fern

Look at the election of Nixon, and the rise of Wallace. Both were influenced by Southern Democratic voters. They may not have called themselves Republicsans yet, you have to know how much they hated Lincoln, but many became so called independents.

 

[Tom]

If you insist on going by today's standards, MLK was a rightist, and JFK was a rightist as well.

You know... the whole, "every man is equal" and "ask not what your country can do for you" stuff... doesn't fly with modern day liberals.

Yes it does. The "liberals" that Limbaugh or Beck talk about are figments of someone's imagination.

What HAS changed, is the almost complete rejection of moderate Republicans by their party.
People like Lowell Weiker, Nelson Rockefeller, George HW Bush before he was 'reborn'.

 

[Tom]

Do you realize that the GOP was founded on the principal of freedom for *everyone*, and was very anti-slavery?

Or are you saying that all of the Republicans that supported the civil rights legislation in the 60's (overwhelming majority, more of a majority than the Democrats), were really modern day Democrats?

It's not a simple... Left... Right... nothing else... issue like you're trying to paint it as. The Republican party was strongly anti-slavery since founding. The Democratic party was split between pro-slavery and anti-slavery, and JFK catered to the anti-civil rights south for a long time to avoid causing trouble... until political pressure FORCED him to act, which pissed off a good chunk of his party. Follow-on Democrats acted swiftly to create an entitlement, welfare state to try and maintain the black vote, which has worked pretty well for them... keep people stupid and begging for money, and they'll vote for you no matter what history says.

Fact234

You're inaccurate bout the Republican's role in passing the Civil Rights Act. They went along with it and some played a role in defeating the filibuster. But they did not advocate for it, they did not fight for it, they were not the impetus for getting it done.

You could argue they didn't think it was necessary, that the 14th Amendment was enough, but you shouldn't try to rewrite history.

 

[Tom]

A quite justified complaint in no way similar to, say, the right to have one's children college educated at taxpers' expense or the right to not be fired even if incapable of doing one's job.


That's not entirely true. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. Some of those filibustering Democrats, like Strom Thurmond, eventually became Republicans. But most, like the filibuster leader Richard Russell (LBJ's mentor), Robert "KKK" Byrd, Al Gore Sr, J. William Fulbright (Clinton's mentor), and San Ervin (who went on to play key roles in destroying Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixson), remained staunch lifelong Democrats, apparently happy as long as they could discriminate against someone. As to Republican opposition, it was largely limited to the expansion of government power into business's operations. It's one thing to end government-backed discrimination, quite another for government to tell a man how to run his own business. Hence the compromise bill. Remember, almost all civil rights bills until that time were Republican bills, and Kennedy's 1963 Civil Rights Act (which was re-filed without the earlier amendments as the 1964 Civil Rights Act, in yet another victory for the interstate commerce clause) was itself merely an updated and somewhat watered down version of Republican Senator Charles Sumner's 1875 Civil Rights Act after SCOTUS shot down that bill over 14th Amendment concerns. It was also substantially weaker than the 1963 civil rights bill introduced in the House by Republicans.

http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

Get real. The votes in the House are irrelevant, the issue was getting it through the Senate. If you know how the Senate works, you know that the only party that could even bring it to a vote were the Democrats.

I guess you think it's ok for a restaurant to not serve blacks, or a hotel not let black guests get a room, because that's the compromise you think is reasonable.

 

[Tom]

Yes I read it and I saw a bunch of Democrats trying to change history by pretending that Democrats had nothing to do with the Civil Rights filibuster.

The facts are that it was the Democrats who created jim crow laws and the separate but equal BS that divided the south between black and white.

It was Democrat governors who put the rebel flag onto their state flags to piss off civil right workers.

And it was Democrats who stood in doorways and blocked blacks from going into colleges and Democrats who turned the hoses on blacks and who turned their heads when blacks were murdered.

What is even worse is the lie that these people all switched parties which is complete BS. Strom Thurmond is the only one of the people who filibustered the 1964 act that switched parties. The rest of them died as Democrats.

The fact is that the Democrats have a lousy civil rights records and any attempt to shift blame to the Republicans is complete BS.

I haven't see anyone say that Democrats had nothing to do with the filibuster.

What I have argued about is the ludicrous position that Democrats had nothing to do with it's passage.

The other things you list, no Democrat I've seen denies them.

 

[Tom]

Man facts suck...
http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

How many of those civil rights measures passed ?