Nazis and KKK get laughed at...

Nazies and KKK get laughed at...

I'm sure when you make trades you don't research prospective buys with such simplistic insight, do you?

Opposition to the CRA was not as much an indictment of democrats as it was about southern conservatives.

You are a klansman, are you a democrat?
 
Let's keep it real - in the reality sense of the term.............

The pretense that the Southern Strategy was not based in part - in large part - on an appeal to whites harboring racial antipathy is untenable. To call its very existence a myth, as some modern day Conservatives actually do, is laughable.

We have the testimony of some who were there and other insiders. Not anonymous people on the web or a politically partisan apologist like LtC Frances Rice, of the National Black Republican Association, who claims that the Southern Strategy was aimed at "fair minded people"!!!!

If it wasn't racial, then what was Ken Mehlman, RNC CHAIRMAN, apologizing for in 2005 when he spoke before the NAACP?!?!?
Quote
"Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization," Mehlman said at the annual convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."

Mehlman's apology to the NAACP at the group's convention in Milwaukee marked the first time a top Republican Party leader has denounced the so-called Southern Strategy employed by Richard Nixon and other Republicans to peel away white voters in what was then the heavily Democratic South. Beginning in the mid-1960s, Republicans encouraged disaffected Southern white voters to vote Republican by blaming pro-civil rights Democrats for racial unrest and other racial problems.
USA TODAY - search -GOP-racial-politics_x.htm

Another example is from Kevin Philips, sometimes credited with devising the Repub Southern Strategy under Nixon, but most say he “popularized” it in his writing:
Quote
From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.
Google that quote a see: Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Volume 24

Taking Philips comments along with Lee Atwater's explanation of the code words (refernced earlier in this thread) and Mehlman’s apology, we have THREE TOP Repub strategists (2 being Repub Natl Comte CHAIRMEN) acknowledging the existence in real terms “on the ground” of the Repub Southern Strategy.

In the Law, this is what is called “admission against interest”. Those are the kind of statements – not in the interest of the speaker - that garner, or should, additional credibility when there is controversy over the facts. Both Atwater (Karl Rove's mentor, I've read somewhere) and Philips later apologized for their role in such divisiveness - Atwater on his deathbed.

If you want to hear Atwater explain in his own voice, google: The Nation exclusive-lee-atwaters-infamous-1981-interview-southern-strategy

Even poor Romney attempted to employ some of Atwater's "evolved" tactics by raising the false "pants on fire" claim that the Obama administration was eliminating the work requirement for welfare. Pi-ti-ful. At least I give him credit for only pursuing the strategy half-heartedly.
:cool:
 
Good post but Romney has been doubling down on his "dems give gifts" rhetoric which is just more code. Ryan also uses code when blaming the Obama 'machine' for turning out the 'urban' vote...both are dog whistles. He used it at every opportunity.
 
Haiku,

Lots of truth there, but like McCain/Schmidt did in 2008, I think we will find in the surely-upcoming insider post-mortems, that Romney (don't know about Ryan) resisted more virulent versions of dog whistles during the campaign. Just IMO.
:cool:
 
LOL So now its all "code". Where's my decoder ring?

Sorry, but your beloved Democrat Party will forever be associated with slavery, segregation, and the KKK. You can't change history. :nono:
 
DamnYankee said:
LOL So now its all "code". Where's my decoder ring?

Sorry, but your beloved Democrat Party will forever be associated with slavery, segregation, and the KKK. You can't change history. :nono:
Click to expand...
David Ernest Duke is a former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan an American activist and writer, and former Republican Louisiana State Representative.
 
Can't Change History, but Change Occurs Historically

DamnYankee said:
LOL So now its all "code". Where's my decoder ring?

Sorry, but your beloved Democrat Party will forever be associated with slavery, segregation, and the KKK. You can't change history. :nono:
Click to expand...

The Dem party (not mine by the way; as I am a DINO) will forever be associated, to their shame, with all of that stuff, but a strange thing happened over several decades. Change happened.

Party labels are one thing, but ideology is another. It was States Rights, white so-called supremacist Conservative Dems who supported all of that horrendous anti-humanity ideology.

What many Conservatives, including Black ones, pretend not to know is that Conservative Dems and Conservative Repubs together opposed Civil Rights Laws, Voting Rights Acts, while it was moderate Dems and Repubs (with a few IMO "principled" Conservatives, like Dirksen) who supported Civil Rights legislation and federal efforts to end segregation, for example.

To use ONLY party labels in discussing these matters is simplistic, incomplete and usually driven by an agenda to obfuscate the dramatic shifts inside the two major parties.

Let us look beyond the Party labels at a specific example where Repubs like to claim that Repubs are responsible for Civil Rights. I'm new to this board, so forgive me if I repeat facts already "in evidence." Repubs correctly state that many Dems in Congress voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. True enough, but let us remember that in 1964 there were few Repubs in Congress from the South and it was the Solid South for the Dems. That Solid South was solidly Conservative, but not all of the Dem party was.

But what if I told you that a higher percentage (100%) of Southern Repubs in the Congress voted AGAINST the 1964 Civil Rights Act than did Southern Dems? OK, not by much, but still a higher %.

Here is a breakdown by Party AND REGION of the votes against the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:
FOR AGAINST
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)

The Senate version:
FOR AGAINST
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5%–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%–16%)

wikipedia Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

The chart above ALSO reveals that Northern Repubs voted FOR the Law at a LOWER PERCENTAGE than Northern Dems in the SENATE AND IN THE HOUSE.

And, yet, Repubs today beat their chests to say they are the Party which supported Civil Rights Laws in the 60's?????

One could argue that this was only one bill, but it is regarded as the benchmark civil rights law by the US Senate Judiciary Committee and considered a "landmark" by most others. It outlawed:
discrimination in hiring,
segregation in public accommodations,
racial segregation in public schools,
and it extended voting rights.​

By percentage, DamnYankee, your beloved Repubs voted AGAINST these provisions at a higher rate than Dems - both South and North. Are you a RINO or a "rock rib" (I'm old school :)) Repub?
:cool:
 
Socrtease said:
David Ernest Duke is a former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan an American activist and writer, and former Republican Louisiana State Representative.
Click to expand...

Who lost miserably when it was revealed and garnered even less support when he tried to put his name in the hat for President... The republicans appear to be unwilling to accept, "Whoops I didn't really mean it back then" as a good excuse.
 
Barracuda said:
The Dem party (not mine by the way; as I am a DINO) will forever be associated, to their shame, with all of that stuff, but a strange thing happened over several decades. Change happened.

Party labels are one thing, but ideology is another. It was States Rights, white so-called supremacist Conservative Dems who supported all of that horrendous anti-humanity ideology.

What many Conservatives, including Black ones, pretend not to know is that Conservative Dems and Conservative Repubs together opposed Civil Rights Laws, Voting Rights Acts, while it was moderate Dems and Repubs (with a few IMO "principled" Conservatives, like Dirksen) who supported Civil Rights legislation and federal efforts to end segregation, for example.

To use ONLY party labels in discussing these matters is simplistic, incomplete and usually driven by an agenda to obfuscate the dramatic shifts inside the two major parties.

Let us look beyond the Party labels at a specific example where Repubs like to claim that Repubs are responsible for Civil Rights. I'm new to this board, so forgive me if I repeat facts already "in evidence." Repubs correctly state that many Dems in Congress voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. True enough, but let us remember that in 1964 there were few Repubs in Congress from the South and it was the Solid South for the Dems. That Solid South was solidly Conservative, but not all of the Dem party was.

But what if I told you that a higher percentage (100%) of Southern Repubs in the Congress voted AGAINST the 1964 Civil Rights Act than did Southern Dems? OK, not by much, but still a higher %.

Here is a breakdown by Party AND REGION of the votes against the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:
FOR AGAINST
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)

The Senate version:
FOR AGAINST
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5%–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%–16%)

wikipedia Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

The chart above ALSO reveals that Northern Repubs voted FOR the Law at a LOWER PERCENTAGE than Northern Dems in the SENATE AND IN THE HOUSE.

And, yet, Repubs today beat their chests to say they are the Party which supported Civil Rights Laws in the 60's?????

One could argue that this was only one bill, but it is regarded as the benchmark civil rights law by the US Senate Judiciary Committee and considered a "landmark" by most others. It outlawed:
discrimination in hiring,
segregation in public accommodations,
racial segregation in public schools,
and it extended voting rights.​

By percentage, DamnYankee, your beloved Repubs voted AGAINST these provisions at a higher rate than Dems - both South and North. Are you a RINO or a "rock rib" (I'm old school :)) Repub?
:cool:
Click to expand...

Excellent post, Damn Yankee has been peddling the same old tired crap for years on here. In one post you have totally destroyed his arguments!!
 
Good to see this strategy used against the racist morons.

The idea that these misguided idiots can be put in completely at the feet of either party is bogus. Both parties did what was expedient to win.

The KKK and the Nazis that were in this rally are idiots. Laughing at them is the best answer.
 
WinterBorn said:
Good to see this strategy used against the racist morons.

The idea that these misguided idiots can be put in completely at the feet of either party is bogus. Both parties did what was expedient to win.

The KKK and the Nazis that were in this rally are idiots. Laughing at them is the best answer.
Click to expand...

It's what our friend has been attempting to do for years, he appears to be totally impervious to argument and reason.
 
Damocles said:
Who lost miserably when it was revealed and garnered even less support when he tried to put his name in the hat for President... The republicans appear to be unwilling to accept, "Whoops I didn't really mean it back then" as a good excuse.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that voters in Louisiana did NOT know he was a Klansman or Nazi when he ran for Congress?

Also,....
Something else that shows how the Parties have shifted:

Robert Byrd is just one guy, but you'd think he was the Dem Party Chairman, Presidential Candidate and the Boss Hogg of the Dem Party the way that Repubs like to use him as a counterweight against charges of racism in the Repub Party.

There are two big differences, at least, between the two men. Byrd was an active member of the Klan about 65 years ago and Duke is still on the scene. Secondly, Byrd has apologized for his racist past and Duke........?

Duke endorses the Tea Party movement, too. Hmmmm....

Byrd has apologized and apologized and apologized for what he did 65 or so years ago. I will wait right here for someone to post a real apology (not BS like, "my choice of words" or "sorry if others took offense") by David Duke for his racist "past"*.......Meanwhile, if you Google "David Duke KKK", his own website tag line touts him as former leader of the Klan. His own website!!

And VERY importantly PLEASE NOTE that when Duke ran for Congress as a Democrat he did NOT that well, BUT WHEN HE RAN AS A REPUBLICAN, HE WON THE PRIMARY IN LOUISIANA for State Representative and then WON the election AS A REPUBLICAN.
wikipedia - David Duke

However, the real point is that the Conservative and partially anti-Black (certainly, not all) electorate that once supported Dems in the South AND elsewhere has, over time, migrated to the Repub party. That's pretty obvious to me.
:cool:

*Such an "apology" would need to take account of such reports as this:
In a 2006 editorial, Gideon Rachman (The Economist, the Financial Times) recalled interviewing Duke's campaign manager (from his 1990 campaign) who said, "The Jews just aren't a big issue in Louisiana. We keep telling David, stick to attacking the blacks. There's no point in going after the Jews, you just piss them off and nobody here cares about them anyway."
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top