Now, if I may point out that racists are welcome to join (or rejoin) the disgraceful Democrat Party, here is a précis of their heritage of hate:
During the antebellum period, the Democrat Party was associated with the expansion of slavery.
It was the party of slaveholders and opposed abolition, supporting states' rights to maintain slavery.
The party's first national platform in 1840 explicitly opposed any Congressional interference with slavery, arguing that such actions would lead to dangerous consequences for the country.
After the Democrat's armed insurrection against the United States failed, Democrats resisted Republican Reconstruction efforts, leading to their establishment of Black Codes and later, "Jim Crow" laws to disenfranchise African Americans and prevent them from electing Republicans. The party of the Jackass was also linked to the formation of the Ku Klux Klan, which terrorized black communities nationwide in an attempt to maintain the white supremacy craved by Democrats.
In the early 20th century, Democrat President Woodrow Wilson's administration re-segregated parts of the federal government, including the military. The party continued to enforce segregation and resist civil rights into the mid-20th century and beyond.
Current Democrat policies, like opposition to school choice and their stubborn denial of the justice of voter ID laws have had negative impacts on minority communities.
Anticipating the disingenuous Democrat denials that are sure to ensue whenever they are confronted with the facts about their Party's heritage of racism, I humbly submit the following verifiable facts:
Democrats dishonestly claim that In order to be competitive in the South Republicans started to pander to white racists in the 1960's.
Unfortunately for dissembling Democrats, only the uninformed and malevolently malicious still claim that.
You see, Republicans actually became competitive in the Democrat-dominated "solid south" as early as 1928 when Republican Herbert Hoover won over 47% of the south's popular vote against Al Smith - a dirty Democrat.
Then, in 1952. Republican President Dwight Eisenhower won the southern Democrat-dominated states of: Texas; Florida and Virginia.
In 1956, resident Dwight Eisenhower picked off Louisiana; Kentucky, and West Virginia too.
This was after he publicly supported the Supreme Court decision in "
BROWN vs BOARD of EDUCATION" that desegregated public schools.
It was also after he sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock Central High School to enforce racial segregation in the face of stubborn Democrat opposition - Billy Blow-job Clinton's political mentor James William Fulbright, was an Arkansan Senator at the time BTW.
I presume some prevaricating progressive will next dredge up the discredited "party switch" lie. The pernicious propagandists of the left claim that after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the racists in their ranks "switched parties".
Of the 21 Democrat racists who opposed the Civil Rights Act, just one became a Republican.
The other 20 continued to be elected as Democrats or were replaced by other Democrats.
On average, these 20 seats didn't go Republican for another 25 years.
Now that nonsensical old chestnut has been definitively dispensed with, the radical racist revisionists of the Party of the Jackass will probably puke up their predictable (and phony) parable of the so-called "Southern Strategy".
Richard Nixon, the man who is typically credited with creating "The Southern Strategy" lost the deep south in 1968.
In contrast, Democrat Jimmy "The Peanut" Carter nearly swept the region in 1976, nearly 12 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed over the obdurate objections of Democrats.
Then in 1992, over 28 years later, another deep-fried, Billy Blowjob Clinton, won Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, and West Virginia.
The truth is that Republicans didn't hold a majority of southern Congressional seats until 1994, 30 years after the Civil Rights Act.
In short, if the racist "rednecks" ditched the Democrats (as they calumniously claim) because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, then it's kinda strange that they waited until the late 1980's and early 1990's to do so...ain't it?
Here endeth the lesson.
news.yahoo.com
