Friday, August 30, 2013

Democrats led the passage of civil rights legislation in 1963? Really?

If you want to see how a liberal can magically transform history into his own ideological image, check out this Los Angeles Times article on the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington by civil rights leaders in the 60s. Complaining about the fact that all the speakers were Democrats, the three writers of the story went on to state:
The absence of even a gesture of bipartisanship was a reminder of the enduring political legacy of the civil rights battles. Since Democrats led the passage of civil rights legislation that marchers pushed for in 1963, Republicans have struggled to recover with black voters, leaving a stark racial divide in American politics. [Emphasis added]
Huh? Democrats "led the passage of civil rights legislation in 1963"? Really?

Not that Republicans have a spotless record on racial issues, but, as I mentioned here, the percentage of Democrats in both the U. S. House and Senate on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was far lower than that of Republicans--and the same was true of the Civil Rights Act of 1963.

Oh, and then there is that whole messy thing about George Wallace and Strom Thurmond.

But that was all so long ago and not relevant now. I mean, Robert C. Byrd, former Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops of a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan--and who filibustered the 1963 Act, served as the Democrats leader in the U.S. Senate until ... uh ...

... 2010.

HT: Newsbusters

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not to forget that Bill Clinton's hero and mentor was Senator Fulbright..one of America's most virulent racists. Oh, and don't forget that great Democratic President Eisenhower who sent the National Guard to Little Rock. Liberal revisionists are a cancer.

Lee said...

> Liberal revisionists are a cancer.

But they have good intentions.

KyCobb said...

Martin,

You may be able to pretend to yourself that the GOP is the Party of Civil Rights, and you'll always have Robert Byrd's corpse to flog, never mind that Strom Thurmond became a Republican and Trent Lott said Thurmond should've been elected president on a segregationist platform, but you aren't fooling African-Americans.

Anonymous said...

No, KyCobb, fooling African-Americans is the job of Democrats, and they do it well.

KyCobb said...

Of course, the GOP can always use the racist excuse that African-Americans are just too stupid to realize its really the GOP that has their best interests in mind. Never mind that the GOP is working hard to keep them from voting, and wants to deny them any assistance in order to slash taxes for rich people, and has spent the last five years screaming abuse and racial epithets at the first African-American President. You aren't fooling anyone except yourself.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget the white Republican racists who destroyed Detroit, KyCobb.

Lee said...

> Of course, the GOP can always use the racist excuse that African-Americans are just too stupid to realize its really the GOP that has their best interests in mind.

Makes about as much sense as the Democratic racist assumption that African-Americans are too stupid to make it without preferential set-asides.

KyCobb said...

Lee,

Haven't you seen Martin's next post? Just after flogging Robert Byrd's corpse, he posts in favor of race discrimination. With Conservatives more and more coming out in favor of racism, it looks more than ever like a need for set-asides for minorities exists.