University mistakenly identifies President Abraham Lincoln as a Democrat

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
People have asked Uno on several occasions in this thread if Southern Democrats were liberals and he has responded every time with proof that they were Democrats. Not sure where you have been.
He never said they were liberals...yet you act as if he did. I can undersdtand why you're not proud of your party's past history...I get that. But I don't get you trying to frame this as a liberal/conservative issue as if this somehow absolves the Democratic Party of their past sins in some twisted way....then again, on second thought, maybe I do.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,217
136
He never said they were liberals...yet you act as if he did. I can undersdtand why you're not proud of your party's past history...I get that. But I don't get you trying to frame this as a liberal/conservative issue as if this somehow absolves the Democratic Party of their past sins in some twisted way....then again, on second thought, maybe I do.
Their past sins? That is what is irrelevant. All that matters is what the parties are today. The person that takes into account what a party used to be when deciding who to support instead of what it actually is today is an idiot. You know this.

Classifying Democrats as my party is also retarded. There are plenty of things I would change about Democrat leaders, it just so happens that they all happen to be things that Republicans are guilty of as well. I wasn't even alive in the 60s. Southern Democrats in the 60s were just as idiotic as modern Republicans. Grats on proving a point that everyone already knows. Maybe uno can spend some time proving his theory that the Earth orbits the Sun, and then you can tell everyone replying with "cool story bro" that they are ignoring important information. Should be very interesting.

Also pretending that the Democrats need to be absolved of their past sins mostly commited by people who are now dead is hilarious, especially when the modern Democrats are fighting against all the things that those dead people stood for.

He never said they were liberals? Another no shit Sherlock moment. He was asked repeatedly if they were and ignored the question because answering it truthfully highlights how irrelevant his posts are.
 
Last edited:

MrColin

Platinum Member
May 21, 2003
2,403
3
81
To summarize this thread. Waggy posted link to news peice about a plaque at a university with an error.
Respondents pointed out the possible cause for the error being the assumption that Lincoln must have been a democrat because he opposed slavery.
then...
[warning - conservative logic at work]
Republican apologists glommed on to defend the GOP stating that the racist southern slaveholder vote shifted from D to R after the civil war as an argument that the GOP is not racist, nor would it support slavery.
lulz

Lets hear some inspirational words from noteable not-racist GOP members:
Jessie Helms said:
"The Negro cannot count forever on the kind of restraint that's thus far left him free to clog the streets, disrupt traffic, and interfere with other men's rights."

On the Duke University students upset by Martin Luther King's assassination: "They should ask their parents if it would be all right for their son or daughter to marry a Negro."

"I've been portrayed as a caveman by some. That's not true. I'm a conservative progressive, and that means I think all men are equal, be they slants, beaners, or ******s."
Strom Thurmond said:
“And I want to tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there’s not enough troops in the Army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the ****** race into our theatres, into our swimming pools, into our homes and into our churches.”
^Ironically he knocked up his parents' sixteen year old housekeeper who was black.
...and still not racist.
Ted Cruz said:
“The willingness to say all those crazy things is a rare, rare characteristic,” Cruz told the audience at a gathering held by the conservative Heritage Foundation. “And you know what? It’s every bit as true now as it was then. We need a hundred more like Jesse Helms in the U.S. Senate.”

But, yeah, no good reason to put party affiliation on that plaque, even corrected, that uni's reputation will never be the same.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,309
1,209
126
Holy epic ownage.... great stuff Dank and MrColin. I've never seen a more throrough demolotion of an opposing side's arguments....
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
To summarize this thread. Waggy posted link to news peice about a plaque at a university with an error.
Respondents pointed out the possible cause for the error being the assumption that Lincoln must have been a democrat because he opposed slavery.
then...
[warning - conservative logic at work]
Republican apologists glommed on to defend the GOP stating that the racist southern slaveholder vote shifted from D to R after the civil war as an argument that the GOP is not racist, nor would it support slavery.
lulz

Lets hear some inspirational words from noteable not-racist GOP members:

^Ironically he knocked up his parents' sixteen year old housekeeper who was black.
...and still not racist.


But, yeah, no good reason to put party affiliation on that plaque, even corrected, that uni's reputation will never be the same.
Who said there weren't some members of the Republican Party who were racist as well? Nobody. Yet you respond as if someone had said this. WTF?
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,217
136
Who said there weren't some members of the Republican Party who were racist as well? Nobody. Yet you respond as if someone had said this. WTF?
You're all over the place. You called me out for doing exactly what you are doing here. WTF indeed.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
Who said there weren't some members of the Republican Party who were racist as well? Nobody. Yet you respond as if someone had said this. WTF?
The guy is too stupid to even know both those guys were Democrats when they did their racist antics. And notice how that's the only two he can cite- because there's only one other southern dixiecrat out of 30 that switched to the Republican side, all the others remained Democrats. Gee, where are the quotes? Let's hear some key Robert Byrd quotes, shall we? Did the Dems ever punish him for his segregationist/KKK past, or make him among their power elite? We all know the answer.

Notice how they also have no excuses to offer up when it's pointed out that Northern Democrats went right along with the racist southern Democrat platform. Where's the outrage over FDR's internment of Japanese during WWII? Or his bumbling court appointments, like KKK member Hugo Black, that stalled and held up Civil Rights legislation until Republicans put Earl Warren on the court, leading to landmarks like Brown vs. Board of Education. (See, liberal Dem doofuses know NOTHING about all of this.)

Has any lib even dared touch the fact that two of the Democrat party heroes, JFK and RFK abused their offices to spy on, wiretap and discredit MLK? Talk about Nixon was impeached for less. Did the Democrat Party punish RFK for his crimes, or did they put him up for nomination to the highest office in the land? What's the excuse? Some bullshit excuse about liberal or conservative?
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
The guy is too stupid to even know both those guys were Democrats when they did their racist antics. And notice how that's the only two he can cite- because there's only one other southern dixiecrat out of 30 that switched to the Republican side, all the others remained Democrats. Gee, where are the quotes? Let's hear some key Robert Byrd quotes, shall we? Did the Dems ever punish him for his segregationist/KKK past, or make him among their power elite? We all know the answer.

Notice how they also have no excuses to offer up when it's pointed out that Northern Democrats went right along with the racist southern Democrat platform. Where's the outrage over FDR's internment of Japanese during WWII? Or his bumbling court appointments, like KKK member Hugo Black, that stalled and held up Civil Rights legislation until Republicans put Earl Warren on the court, leading to landmarks like Brown vs. Board of Education. (See, liberal Dem doofuses know NOTHING about all of this.)

Has any lib even dared touch the fact that two of the Democrat party heroes, JFK and RFK abused their offices to spy on, wiretap and discredit MLK? Talk about Nixon was impeached for less. Did the Democrat Party punish RFK for his crimes, or did they put him up for nomination to the highest office in the land? What's the excuse? Some bullshit excuse about liberal or conservative?
I'm at the 'why bother' stage...regardless of MrColin's blunders, both Democrats and Republicans have some pretty damn ugly skeletons in their closet. And I don't have a problem with this per se is I expect as much from imperfect creatures such as ourselves...but it seems I do have a problem with revisionists who twist history with reckless impunity...be it out of ignorance or willful intellectual dishonesty. But then I step back, look and ask myself...is it worth it? At the end of the day...nothing has changed...and the next thread will be more of the same. Why bother?
 
Last edited:

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
-snip-

Lets hear some inspirational words from noteable not-racist GOP members:

The guy is too stupid to even know both those guys were Democrats when they did their racist antics.
-snip-

Holy shiz, now that's some ownage.

(I checked and it does appear those two made those comments while in the Democratic party)

Fern
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,217
136
Holy shiz, now that's some ownage.

(I checked and it does appear those two made those comments while in the Democratic party)

Fern

Yeah. Fantastic. Now you, Zaap and Doc can time travel back to when your party wasn't the repulsive one.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,581
472
126
But sure, for the following years of Republican landslides, you can pretend the population of the south that elected liberal Dem Carter magically morphed back into those evil racists of the 1950's and before, so you can get your tar and feathers back out, but of course, it's complete bullshit.(And then of course you can pull the opposite switch-a-roo to try and bullshit your way out of explaining Clinton's wins in those same states).

The truth is always a lot more varied than the bullshit that political hack history revisionists come up with... the south was and is equally courted by BOTH parties. There's virtually nothing about any 'southern strategy' that blasts Republicans while excusing Democrats doing the exact same thing. Either party is clearly more than happy to win the votes of any of the southern states, and the states flip back and forth from D to R depending on a lot more factors than all the mindless "it's racism!" bullshit used selectively against Republicans.

Yeah, I was waiting for some comment on the Republican Political strategist's comments... I'm not surprised that there were none forthcoming in your counter-post.

As far as Kennedy goes with his civil rights record he was assassinated before the Civil Rights Act was signed into law by his former Vice President Lyndon Johnson, who is attributed with saying that the passage of the Bill would lose the south for the democrats.

We can argue whether that is the cause but the South is no longer firmly democratic and in recent years has went even more solidly to the South despite the greater than 50% percent popular vote results for the democratic nominee in recent elections.



It's not surprising that Carter won considering that his opponent was the person who pardoned President Nixon and President Carter was from GA.

His election also occurred before Mr. Atwater was active in republican politics so the Southern Strategy as he noted it isn't known to have been implemented as we can surmise that it has been in the 80's based on his quote
ATWATER: You start out in 1954 by saying, “N*****, n*****, n*****.”

By 1968 you can’t say “n*****” — 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 “N*****, n*****.”
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2011/08...tealth-racism/

Now regarding this strategy that Mr. Atwater outlines it's interesting to note that President Reagan announced his first presidential run near the town where civil rights activists were murdered and he talked about "states's rights" which has been cited by at least one politician as a reason that they opposed the civil rights act.

Sure, one can argue that it's a coincidence but when one considers that the Voter ID laws that were recently a point of contention would (according to at least one study) affect minorities more than non-minorities...
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57511312/
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/study-finds-voter-id-laws-hurt-young-minorities-88773.html

it makes one wonder.


President Clinton was from Arkansa (like President Carter a southern native) and even he did not win all of the southern states and some of those that he did win may have been because there was a 3rd party candidate during the year of his initial election. As for his re-election the economy was booming and the states that voted for him and against him shifted.

We just disagree, considering the not well know documentation that is available I do think that one can argue that some racist democrats from before the civil rights movement went to the republicans.

Consider two known politicians Sen. Strom Thurmond and Sen. Robert Byrd. Both were in the democratic party and they both opposed the Civil Rights Act.

One left the democratic party and joined the republicans he never fully renounced his earlier views on race.

One who was a member of the KKK stayed in the democratic party and later renounced his earlier views on race.


Was racism the only factor in the shift of the Southern states from all blue to mostly red in recent years I don't recall arguing that in my initial posts to this thread I was referring to the southern democrats "dragged kicking in screaming to the end of slavery" as termed by another poster who imo shifted their votes based on race.

While racism isn't the only factor, denying that it was a one while characterizing any mention of it in the shift as character assassination of a political party is in my opinion disingenuous.
 
Last edited:

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
I'm at the 'why bother' stage...regardless of MrColin's blunders, both Democrats and Republicans have some pretty damn ugly skeletons in their closet. And I don't have a problem with this per se is I expect as much from imperfect creatures such as ourselves...but it seems I do have a problem with revisionists who twist history with reckless impunity...be it out of ignorance or willful intellectual dishonesty. But then I step back, look and ask myself...is it worth it? At the end of the day...nothing has changed...and the next thread will be more of the same. Why bother?
It's only worth bringing up to point out the total hypocrisy and ignorance that permeates much of the modern political landscape, especially on the liberal/Democrat side. Notice how they constantly try to have it both ways. It's basically:

"Let's cite (false) history to show that Republicans are responsible for the sins of the Democrat party!!!"

Then when its pointed out that actually Democrats are responsible for the sins of the Democrat party, and that actually Republican history is far better on matters of Civil Rights than the Democrats, it becomes:

"Oh stop bringing up history!!! No fair!! Wahh!"

Typical ignorant leftist spew trying to have everything both ways.

You can see that same bullshit go back and forth several times in this thread, and any other that brings up the same subjects.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,581
472
126
Well, some people have posted links in support of their arguments in their posts and others haven't

Things change and that includes political parties.

For instance many democratic politicians have become as bought and sold out to corporations as many of the republican politicians. While it was probably always true it's become much more pronounced. Just look at what the Trans Pacific Partnership will do. If you don't know about it you've not been paying attention.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
Yeah, I was waiting for some comment on the Republican Political strategist's comments... I'm not surprised that there were none forthcoming in your counter-post.

As far as Kennedy goes with his civil rights record he was assassinated before the Civil Rights Act was signed into law by his former Vice President Lyndon Johnson, who is attributed with saying that the passage of the Bill would lose the south for the democrats.
I've pointed out before that there isn't just a singular Civil Rights Act of 1964, there were several Civil Rights Acts before it, all written and pushed by Republicans. (Several in the 1870's, and two in 1957 and 1960. Kennedy either voted against, or was a no-show for the two during the Eisenhower administration. He dragged his feet in 1961, 1962 and 1963. (A typical Democrat Party pattern of stalling, delaying, outright opposing Civil Rights legislation). And again, his illegal actions along with brother RFK against MLK are outright impeachable. But because there's a D next to both names, they're considered Civil-Rights champions by ignorant liberal Democrats.

Also: It's always been funny to me that people again quote LBJ lamenting doing the right thing and "losing the south" as yet another thing that's somehow supposed to slam Republicans. He's basically lamenting that he could no longer keep doing what had always been Democrat policy- stall Civil Rights legislation and let blacks twist in the wind, in order to pander to racist southerners. It's the reason that LBJ fought to de-teeth the '57 and '60 bills.

LBJ also thanked the Republican Party for the passage of the '64 act, not his own party.


"Oh stop bringing up all this ancient history! wahh! wahh!"

(Just anticipating the typical response by lefties when all this is pointed out.)

It's not surprising that Carter won considering that his opponent was the person who pardoned President Nixon and President Carter was from GA.
So in other words, Democrats get a pass for having a "southern strategy" but Republicans should be tarred and feathered for having one. As I've pointed out before, it's not that Carter shouldn't have won, it just proves that winning the south has nothing to do with "it's racist!!" because either party wants to win a huge chunk of the United States in order to win nationally.

President Reagan announced his first presidential run near the town where civil rights activists were murdered and he talked about "states's rights" which has been cited by at least one politician as a reason that they opposed the civil rights act.
Another funny Democrat applecart that's long been overturned. Try this bit of triva on for size:

In 1980, one of the major party presidential nominees opened his general election by delivering a speech in a small town in the Deep South that just by coincidence happened to be the national headquarters of the Ku Klux Klan. That same candidate had previously complained about federal housing policies which attempted “to inject black families into a white neighborhood just to create some sort of integration.” He argued that there was “nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained.” That candidate was President Jimmy Carter, the Democratic nominee.
http://www.volokh.com/2011/08/16/reagans-infamous-speech-in-philadelphia-mississippi/

Reagan gave his first campaign speech in New Jersey, not at the Neshoba County fair.

And the Neshoba County fair was prior to and after then a key place where major political candidates (either party) often spoke, there's simply nothing nefarious about Reagan having spoken there. People love to make things into consipriacies- why, Reagan mentioned something about states rights (as he did in New Jersey and every other state as well) in a place just a hop skip and jump away from KKK violence. Let's of course forget that just about *any* place anyone could give a speech in the south is just a hop skip and jump away from the scene of KKK and civil rights violence. (Notice how the same thing can be done to Carter, above, by taking a few points out of context and juxtaposing with the location of the speech). In other words: it's all just more horseshit.

Consider two known politicians Sen. Strom Thurmond and Sen. Robert Byrd. Both were in the democratic party and they both opposed the Civil Rights Act.

One left the democratic party and joined the republicans he never fully renounced his earlier views on race.

One who was a member of the KKK stayed in the democratic party and later renounced his earlier views on race.
Whatever. Both were assclowns, and neither one is more/less virtuous that the other based on R vs. D bullshit. Byrd used the N-word on national TV as recently as 1994. Both did all of their racist antics as members of the Democrat Party, Thurmond never as a Republican, and his record after joining the Republican Party isn't in any way racist.

Also, as I've pointed out, Democrats constantly want to ignore the OTHER 27 Dixiecrats (as well as Byrd) that stayed members of the Democrat party, as well as segregationist governors like George McGovern. It's another of those:
"Let's try and tar and feather the Republican Party with these guys!"
"But they mostly remained Democrats."
"STOP bringing up past history! Unfair! WAHHH!"
 
Last edited: