Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, February 04, 2008
Wynton Hall :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Unknown History of Civil Rights
by Wynton Hall
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Black History Month is about informing citizens of the hurdles and heroes of America’s climb toward civil rights and equality. How interesting, then, that so many race-related political myths continue to be perpetuated by Democrats who know better.

Consider the recent fracas over Senator Hillary Clinton’s contention that President Lyndon Johnson was the driving force behind the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As any fair examination of history reveals, a large share of the legislative credit for the bill’s passage must go to that other senator from Illinois—Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen.

Just look at the historical record. As Lyndon Johnson told Hubert Humphrey: "Now you know that bill can't pass unless you get Ev[erett] Dirksen.”

Indeed, LBJ biographer Robert Caro notes that prior to 1957, Johnson “had never supported civil rights legislation—any civil rights legislation,” including anti-lynching legislation. His private behavior toward blacks was appalling. Robert Parker, LBJ’s longtime black employee and limousine chauffeur, claims that Johsnon blasted him daily with a blizzard of bigoted slurs. And even as LBJ was being praised by liberals for his appointment of Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court, behind closed doors LBJ’s cynical brand of “identity politics” became clear. As presidential historian Robert Dallek recounts, LBJ explained his decision to a staff member by saying, “"Son, when I appoint a nig—r to the court, I want everyone to know he's a nig—r."

Still, despite his record and rhetoric, LBJ fought hard to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But those he had to fight against were Democrats, not Republicans. Democrats like former Klansman Senator Robert C. Byrd and others launched a filibuster to kill the Civil Rights bill. The chances of stopping them seemed bleak. Never in the history of the United States Senate had members mustered enough votes to stop a filibuster (a procedure known as “cloture” that requires 67 votes to invoke) on a civil rights bill.

So the Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen set out to get the votes necessary to defeat the filibuster. On June 9, 1964, the night before the historic cloture vote, the 68 year old Republican stayed up late into the night typing a speech on twelve sheets of Senate stationery that every American should know but that few do. The next day, Senator Everett Dirksen delivered his oration on the floor of the U.S. Senate just minutes before the final vote. The final tally: 71 to 29, with 27 of the 33 Republicans voting to defeat the Democrat-led filibuster.

Democratic Majority Leader Mike Mansfield said, “This is his [Dirksen] finest hour. The Senate, the whole country is in debt to the Senator from Illinois.” And two days after Dirksen’s speech, Roy Wilkins of the NAACP wrote Dirksen a contrite letter apologizing for their early attacks. “The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People sends its thanks to you for your vote for cloture and for your final speech before the vote,” Wilkins wrote. “Your leadership of the Republican Party in the Senate at this turning point will become a significant part of the history of this century.”

Odd, Hillary failed to mention that part.

Indeed, the closer one looks across the arc of black history, the more ironic it seems that voters would associate civil rights with the Democratic Party. Founded as the anti-slavery party, the Republican Party was responsible for winning passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, the Reconstruction Acts, and the 1866, 1875, 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts. In fact, had Democrats not overturned the 1875 Civil Rights Act, the strikingly similar 1964 Civil Rights Act might never have been necessary.

Myriad reasons are often cited for the rift between African American voters and the Republican Party. Some blame Richard Nixon’s so-called “Southern strategy.” Others cite the GOP’s presidential nomination of Barry Goldwater who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on philosophical grounds of federal overreach. And still others point to a radicalized professoriate as the source of some Americans’ historical amnesia.

Whatever the case, this Black History Month, voters would do well to reexamine the historical record. What they learn just might surprise them.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Wynton Hall is a Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and author of "The Right Words: Great Republican Speeches That Shaped History".

Be the first to read Wynton Hall’s column.
Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
Sign up today
'64 vote was S vs. N, not R vs. D
The vote on the 1964 Civil Rights Act was more an issue of South vs. North than Republican vs. Democrat. Only 1 of the 22 Southern Senators voted for the bill (21 of whom were Democrats), while only 6 of 88 "Northern" Senators (that's including the Southwest as "Northern") voted against it.

It's worth noting that since 1964 the Southeast has switched from being overwhelmingly Democratic to being strongly Republican. This has been at least partially due to the G.O.P. pandering to racist elements in the south, such as Ronald Reagan beginning his 1980 campaign with a speech in Philadelphia, Mississippi calling for "states' rights", with no mention of the atrocity that happened there fifteen years earlier.

Well, Fbear
that certainly explains why it was the Nothern Republican (the minority party), Dirksen who gathered all those votes for the bill and why Byrd is still a Democrat icon. It also explains the love that Bill and Hill have for Obama.

Lilly
Wow, you really nailed it. Two racist quotes by Republicans sure do alot to outweigh a legacy of 150 years of civil-rights legislation by the Republican party.


The GOP of 1860 is not the GOP of 2008
Yes, the GOP started as the party that opposed slavery, and it's also true that there's much for the Democratic Party to be ashamed of when it comes to race relations.

But for 40 years the GOP has been pandering to racists, from Reagan's speech in Philadelphia to Jesse Helms' ads hinting that blacks were taking jobs from the white folks who deserved them to the current demagoguery against Mexicans, the current "Party of Lincoln" is anything but a friend of those who want freedom for all.

Nonsense, Fbear
you speak in the same tired cliches that, while successful at 'keepin' em on the plantation', do nothing to elevate minorities. What have the sainted Dems done for minorities that has empowered them (no I am not speaking of transfer payments)?

Every time a self-made successful black leaves the reservation, he is marginalized or characterized as an uncle Tom, especially if they are Republicans. When have you seen Sowell, Steele, Thomas, Williams, Connerly, Rice or Elder et al praised in the black community for their successes?

If minorities want to be victims, they have a wonderful home in the Dem party...just as long as they do not deign to run the place.

I am so TIRED of cons
not looking at their own bigotry & racism & sexism & homophobia. Instead, they choose to spotlight the DEMOCRATS for continuing social injustice.

I have NEVER seen as many anti-gay columns as I do on Townhall. Mixed in with the subliminal gay-bashing posts are Phyliss Schlaflay's regular attacks on gays & "feminists".

What I see is an african-american & a woman running on the DEMOCRATIC ticket as presidential nominees (the hispanic candidate having dropped out). The republicans are running wall-to-wall white guys and then have the nerve to look at our party & give lectures on racism.

85 african-americans have been elected to Congress since 1900, running as democrats. 4 have been elected to Congress running as republicans. As the democrats continue to vote in african-americans & gays...the republicans continue to try to swift-boat honorable candidates like Harold Ford, Jr. & make fun of openly gay senators like Barney Frank (republicans have never voted in an openly gay candidate. Only closet cases. The Larry Craigs...& look what happens when you elect repressed married homosexuals into your party).

This website is positively horrified with feminists. With the Gloria Steinems & the Susan B. Anthonys.

Nice try,Will
but when do you pious libs take accountability for Bubba's racial disparagment or for Byrd's KKK leadership?

The whole point of this column was that the history of civil rights excludes (demonizes) Republicans. Stay on topic or go back to the KOS, where you will find no examination or condemnation of Dem racists.

Reality check
The Republican party as it existed in Congress in the mid1960s was not a fundamentall conservative party. Goldwater and several other conservatives were visible and active, and voted against the 1965 Civl Rights Act, but most Congressional Republicans were either "moderates" of one flavor or another, or even "liberal." Both sorts are called RINOs today. The Congressional Democrats were not the generally liberal group we now see. Southern, and thus, conservative Democrats had tremendous power, especially in the Senate. A growing number of Northern Democrats could be called "liberals," but liberalism was not the center of gravity of the Democratic Party in the 1960s.

Of course things change, a message conservatives never seem to get. The Republicans moved to the Right in the aftermath of Goldwater's defeat, becoming eventually the party they are now. The Democrats moved to the Left. The "Southern Strategy" did work, and most Southern whites moved to the Republican column where they've been now since the early 70s. Prior to all of this, blacks, in those locales where they were allowed to vote, often voted Republican--the legacy of Lincoln and emancipation. This changed and the black vote became a solidly Democratic vote. So the parties swapped parts of their voting base.

It really helps to understand all of this; if you do, you won't be taken in by idiots who misrepresent the political history of the past half century, whether the idiots are Hillary, who wouldn't dream of mentioning Everett Dirksen, or conservatives who can still call Barry Goldwater's negative vote in 1964 "principle" instead of just "wrong."

I'm still with Fred
VOTE FOR FRED

http://ImStillwithFred08.com

Dennis McIntire, “The Constituent”
http://www.dennisforlife.com

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
John Quincy Adams

Klansmen Robert Byrd
I love liberals who try to say the "parties switched." Nice try! If that's so, then how come Robert "Klansman" Byrd is the President Pro Tempore of the Senate for the Democrat Party???
And how come Al Gore Sr., another segregationist, never swapped parties? Better still, why can Democrats claim they want reparations for the slavery that THEIR PARTY CREATED, but then in the same breathe say "oh, the good things the GOP did were decades ago and irrelevant." Let's face: Hillary, Robert "KKK" Byrd, and the Dems have a "race problem."

LIAR
So a LIb lied and the MSM let her get away with it as usual. Queen HITLERY just made a speech on MLK day stating if not for LBJ not MLK the Civil Rights Act would not have been drafted.

Well,welll,well now white lilly comes out and blames REPS for all the failures of her Party.
Just another blame someone else but yourself for the LIBS failure to cope with the fact that if it wasnt for the REPS in Congress the blacks would still be going to the BACK OF THE BUS.

Thats one reason I left the DEM Party is becuase they dont have the guts to really tell black folk that they are just as much of the problem for Blacks being treated the way they were in those days and to present.

Al GOREs dad was one of those DEMS who vote against it also and he is top king dog to LIBS.



Rep-Tards, join us in the present
I guessed it; as soon as I saw that it was a civil rights column on TH, I knew it was going to focus solely on pre-1964 events and ignore everything that has happened in the past 40+ years. I so frequently hear today's Rep-tards call themselve Dirksenian Republicans, don't you?

Back to Basics for the Republican Party
Each day, the Grand Old Partisan blog -- http://grandoldpartisan.typepad.com -- celebrates 154 years of Republican civil rights achievements. See http://www.republicanbasics.com for more information.

Will
Nice try i was once a DEM and you cannot HOGWASH me into that crap you are spewing. When I was a DEM my party was for helping the needy but we didnt have to lie to get them to vote, the Party today could care less about BLACK FOLK and I for one know that. The blacks vote for LIBS becuase they promise them the PROMISE LAND and they never deliver. But then always blame the REPS

The reason you do not see Black People running for office in the REP party is as soon as they announce that they are running for REP elections the DEMs automatically label them as UNCLE TOMS and the WHITE MANS NI##ER. I am a independant now and wish that the Blacks could accept all black people as one but as long as you have a RACIST DEM PARTY that will never happen.

Gator
Al Gore's dad is "Top king dog" to all us libs? Right, buddy, we all talk about how much we admire Al Gore Sr. Whatever you say.

learned hand
You LIBS love the GORES and his GLOBULL WARMING FARCE and by the way all those Big OIl companys that you LIBS hate so much, I think there are allot of DEMS in Congress who have stocks in OIL, I DO.

I bet you can spell KKK BRYD(DEM) I once met him at a KKK rally with my Dad. I bet he wont tell any story about his KKK adventures in CONGRESS

LIARS LIARS ALL, we have seen the beckening on stage with the DEM Candidates. Dont try to blame anyone else but yourselves for electing KKK MENBERS into your party and blaming REPS for it.

SHAME ON YOU LIBS

Oh I get it Gator
You hold a son responsible for the sins of his father, right? Or are you just not smart enough to know they are different people? And what were you doing at a Klan rally? Wow, what a decent person you are: certainly not one who should be lecturing others.

Will - No Black Republican Candidates?
Umm, earth to moron, Michael Steele was the highest ranking elected African American in Maryland, a Republican. JC Watts? Alan Keyes? Bob Parker?

Gator is right, look at how they treat Black Republicans - Rice, Steele (throw oreos at him, steal his credit report), Justice Thomas. Please.

As for Gays. You're proud of electing Barney Frank, the guy who had relations with a congressional page and had a gay prostitution ring being run out of his house? Only in MA would morons relect such a guy.

Congrats JM
You just named all African American Repubtards elected to a major office recently (most of those aren't even in office right now) and it took you about half a sentence. You're right; it's a big tent party.

will --
I thought we already raked you over the coals about this meaningless trivia about how many blacks were elected as Democrats vs. Republicans?

Or was that someone else?

Gator
Are you the same faceless figure behind the poster "chuck"?

Learned hand
You are right about being at KKK rallys but the point I am trying to prove is that you LIBS think all those sorry KKK members migrated to the REPS and thats a typical LIB lie.

I have stated on here already that that was something I was not proud of. But dont tell me who the KKK was becuase I know who they where and still are today Southern DEMS. Why do you think the DEMS never do well in the South with the white votes. Poor white southerners never get what WHITE DEM Presidential Candidates promise them so either they dont vote or they vote REP. You LIBS have your own RACIST views to deal with now. Most white DEM voters are Northern migrants and usually vote DEM Party.

The DEM party is to blame for not getting more southern states in elections because you cater to the BLACKS not the whites

GO OBAMA

Ralph Ellison
No Im just another disgrunted EX-DEM voter like Chuck and have seen the lite. DEMS S#CK

Quit promising things to Blacks and white folks that you cannot deliver and Ill leave this site.


GO OBAMA

Wynton Hall rocks our socks off
Liberals like to smuggle conveniently popular issues from conservative innovators. Hall knows his history. If those like Hall don't wipe the dust off civil rights history, it will be rewritten in children's textbooks by liberal lies.

Chuck
If you are still on line you better get on here and take care of these Scumbags or they will be at you forever.

GO OBAMA

Ralph E
I live in fl just like chuck and i see allot of what he is talking about daily. Why do you think during the 00 elections everyone was calling our state Floridaaaah because we get allot of northerners that migrate down here that cant even punch a hole in a ballot correctly and blame someone else for their mistake and cause allot of problems we dont need. I think chuck is a Rep by what i have read he just gets to angry to express himself on here but he will survive. He is a Vet like me and we both did our Nam time and more. I respect anyone who does that reguardless of what party he is from. Im a independant voter and dont care to much for Reps or DEMs they both lie to much but the Dems have the lead on that one.

Conservatives Opposed Civil Rights
Yes, opposition to the Civil Rights movement in the south came largely from members of the Democratic Party, something for which most modern Democrats are ashamed. But those people were CONSERVATIVES.

The people who worked for civil rights, and in far too many cases gave their lives for civil rights, were NOT conservatives. Name one leading conservative of the time who worked for civil rights.

No, the people who put their lives on the line for civil rights were liberals, leftists, anarchists, socialists, and communists.

deluded about your own past
Democrats have been married to the anti-American communists since they began their infiltration a century ago. If they ever worked for any noteworthy cause, I am sure it was merely a matter of political convenience.

The only tenet of "civil rights" that real conservatives opposed was granting the government power over freedom of association, to tell employers whom to hire, and saying that discrimination is okay if it is against white people instead of black.

grassroots
Do you even try to be honest or does it just not matter? Leaders of the civil rights movement were constantly accused of being communists and some, like Bayard Rustin (I bet you don't even know who that is) openly associated with communists. Conservatives did all they could to oppose civil rights, whether they were Dems or Repubs, and no amount of historical revisionism can change that.

Hillary Caught Again
Clinton’s ‘35 years of change’ omits most of her career

McClatchy: To hear Hillary Clinton talk, she’s spent her entire career putting her Yale Law School degree to work for the common good. She routinely tells voters that she’s “been working to bring positive change to people’s lives for 35 years.” She told a voter in New Hampshire: “I’ve spent so much of my life in the nonprofit sector.” Speaking in South Carolina, Bill Clinton said his wife “could have taken a job with a firm … Instead she went to work with Marian Wright Edelman at the Children’s Defense Fund.”

The overall portrait is of a lifelong, selfless do-gooder. The whole story is more complicated — and less flattering.

Clinton worked at the Children’s Defense Fund for less than a year, and that’s the only full-time job in the nonprofit sector she’s ever had. She also worked briefly as a law professor.

Clinton spent the bulk of her career — 15 of those 35 years — at one of Arkansas’ most prestigious corporate law firms, where she represented big companies and served on corporate boards.

READ MORE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/clintons-35-years- of-change-omits-most-of-her-career

Geniuses, All of Them!
Um, you'll notice that it's called Black HISTORY Month, ergo the discussion is, indeed, about the past. Generally "history" and "past" go hand in hand.

Second, the genius "That was then, This is Now" logic is a canard in the extreme. Liberals' entire rationale for Affirmative Action, slave reparations, and Welfare is based on--are you ready for this?--THE PAST!

So to claim that "oh, who cares what the GOP did in the past" is laughable, because liberals sure as heck care about what happened in the past when it comes to rationalizing policies design to trap minority voters into cycles of dependency that will yield HUGE electoral dividends.

Oh yeah, but I forgot...liberals are the "compassionate" ones. What a crock.

Politics of Racism - a historical view
Limiting the understanding of racism in politics to the civil rights act of the 1960's minimized the desperate but successful struggle of equality in the political arena.
Ohg
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/01/04/politics-of-racism-19 03-1968-1988-2008/

Question???
If Republicans and conservatives are the party of civil rights, then why is the Democratic party the party of minorities? Why do blacks most often vote democratic and in large numbers?

All the past good Republicans may have done to help bring in civil rights has been washed away over the last 40 years.

Racists Southern Democrates switched to the Republican party. White southern male has become the Republican party's base. You pander to these folks. The Republican party today is not the party of the past.

It started with Reagan. His talk of the "Welfare Queen in Detroit driving a cadillac", His stance against Fair housing and his statement that the civil rights act was an insult to southerners.

Mike Dukakis and Willie Horton

There are many allegations and charges of Republicans supressing black voters

Positions against affirmative action and cut backs in entitlements.

The party that supports free markets and wealth when the majority of blacks ar elow income.

The party that supports the death penality when it is disportional against minorities.

What party right now has two minorities running for President. Which party still has thw white male image?

If you were black which party would you go to? If you were a racists and a homo-phobe, which party would you go to?






Will's idea of "tolerance"
Here's an example of Will's "tolerance":

"Maybe YOU like hearing about such psuedo-science as "intelligent design" & "Creationism", but I say good riddance to an evangelical minority trying to foist their will on the american populace VIA THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM."

Like most liberals, he wishes to tolerate only those who agree with him.

Incidentally, how do you feel about a minority of homosexuals trying to foist their will on the American populace?

Remember James Meredith?
Do any of you liberals remember a man named James Meredith? He was the first black student to enroll at the University of Mississippi. His action caused such a riot that President Kennedy had to send in troops to bring it under control, and Meredith had to attend classes escorted by federal marshals.

Interestingly enough, Meredith later went to work for a Republican senator by the name of Jesse Helms. When asked why he chose to work for that particular senator, Meredith said none of the others would hire him.

Ross Barnett, the Mississippi governor who tried to stop Meredith from enrolling at Ole Miss, was a Democrat. Perhaps that's why James Meredith continues to vote Republican.

stedes
"Mike Dukakis and Willie Horton"

When I first heard about the Horton case, I didn't know whether Horton was white or black, and I didn't care. The Democrats were the ones who turned it into a racial issue. It was an obvious red herring to divert public attention from Dukakis' miserable record as governor.

Ken=Deluded
Trying to ignore the flood of history will get you nowhere.

You can point to any individual, single case that makes your heart go pitty-pat, but that won't change the broad reality. The CONSERVATIVE movement has been opposed much of the porgress the country has made on civil rights.

The reality has been described for you in political terms as well. In the 50's and 60's those conservatives who opposed civil rights migrated to the current Republican party. As of this date, the few remaining racial bigots left find their spiritual and political honme on the right.

You betray you self delusion completely by pretending eh Wilie Horton ad did not have a racist thrust from the start.


Jack
"Trying to ignore the flood of history will get you nowhere."

I agree. So why do you ignore it?

"You betray you self delusion completely by pretending eh Wilie Horton ad did not have a racist thrust from the start."

Such a statement only vindicates my argument that the racial angle was nothing but a red herring.

Only In Your Mind
It must be nice to be so historically and intellectually isolated from the rest of the world.

If I am ignoring the flow of history, explain how. I claim that the conservatives who opposed civil rights legislation migrated to the Republicna Party. You say different? SHow me something?


Jack
Is Robert Byrd a Republican?

hangin judge writes
a couple things...to the extent that the southern strategy was about race the racist did not vote for Nixon in 1968 they voted for Wallace a Democrat. Wallace by the way remained a democrat until his death and was re-elected governor of alabama with a majority of the black vote.

The dems also rejected creation of the civil rights commission in 1972 so it seems a bit simplistic to announce that "all those racist moved to the republican party." not to mention simply and demonstrably untrue.

I am also interested in the rather bigotted notion that the voting behavior of a majority of Blacks is somehow evidence of the veracity of those decisions. In other words if anyone were to suggest that traditional black two parent families were some cultural abberation because most black children are born out of wedlock they would be dragged over the coals and rightfully so. Isn't this the very kind of identiy politics that dems claim they oppose? Yet it is okay to suggest that because a majority of black people vote a certain way that suggests some larger truth as opposed to lots of individual choices?

finally, it is true that both political parties have changed over the many years of our two party system. neither party is what it used to be. That being said it is also true that the Republican party is not the same as it was 40 years ago and clearly is not the party it was 20 years ago. So why must it be trapped in a time warp -- held in permenant 1965 limbo -- while the other party gets to claim exemption from the past while also taking credit for all the good that was done in our nation? C'mon!

Jack
Yes, Thurmond and Helms opposed civil rights legislation - back when they were Democrats. By the way, Thurmond voted to confirm Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court. Most Democrats did not.

Isn't a bit racist for you to call me "boy"?


Kenny Guy
No, it's not. It's a reference to GW Bush's pal, Kenny Boy Lay.

And as I said, individual positions don't matter...what matters is hte broad sweep of Hisotry, And that is pretty clear.

And for Justus. The Civil Rights Commission was formed in 1957.

Jack
"what matters is hte broad sweep of Hisotry, And that is pretty clear."

It seems to me you're pretty selective in your understanding of "the broad sweep of history."

Ken
Actually, I read history as a hobby, and I have a very good grasp of larger trends. But, if you can tell me what the larger trend is in your view, I'd be glad to listen. Thus far, all you have done is point to a few individual examples and ignore the issue of why and how the solidly sdemocratic south because the solidly Republican South.

You might want to think about why the Republcians became the party of "States Rights" as well.

Jack
History was my major in college, and you're being selective in your interpretation of history. That is, you cite examples to support your argument, and ignore those that contradict it.

"Thus far, all you have done is point to a few individual examples"

That's all you've done, too.

"and ignore the issue of why and how the solidly sdemocratic south because the solidly Republican South."

Actually, much of the South voted Democrat in 1968. George Wallace, a Democrat, carried a few southern states. Nixon won largely because the Democrats were divided between Humphrey and Wallace.

You seem to forget that the nation was divided over a number of issues in those days, such as the Vietnam War. Many people were put off by George McGovern and his "cut and run" talk, and that's why Nixon won by such a landslide. Nixon was hardly a conservative on domestic issues.


Ken
Then you needed a better program. Your history is on a par with my typing.

George Wallace was not a Democrat in 1968: he ran as the candidate of the American Independent Party.

The migration of racial/social conservatives from teh Democrats to teh Republicans began with characters like Wallace, was exacerbated by the Southern Strategy, which you have yet to address, and was completed with the rise of the so called Reagan Democrats.

I don't know why you are bothering to argue this. The issue is not what individuals did in 1964 but rather who represents what attitudes and beliefs today. Republicans have a very hard time getting votews from any minority because Republicans are perceived as opposing the policies and practices that have benefitted those minorities.

Afrtican Americans identify as Democrats 65% of the time and as Republicans 7%. Hispanic identification is 36-22 in favor of Democrats. This split is there for a reason.





jnik
nailed it.

And how fortuitous that JD provides a perfect example of what we are saying about contemporary conservatives.

Just be sure to keep those learned hands
to yourself. No telling where they've been.

Times change. Parties evolve, constantly. The truth is both sides of the argument regarding civil rights and the role of republicans, conservatives, democrats, liberals, etc. have merit. Wynton makes some good points, and so do those on your side of the argument.

But there are some other truths I suspect you won't like very much.

Whenever a conservative speaks out against affirmative action policies, which give institutionalized preference to one race over others (racism), he is called racist.

Whenever a conservative speaks out against special categories of rights only for certain citizens (i.e. homosexuals), because he believes all citizens should have the exact same rights under the law, he is called a homophobe, and a hater.

No group panders better than socialist demagogues. Apparently, socialism is all your side has in the battle of ideas. And in case you didn't hear, that philosophy didn't work out so well for a lot of folks.

Freedom and liberty are the only ideals worth fighting and dying for. Most conservatives in 2008 want freedom and liberty for all Americans - period. But every time one of you genius liberals has an idea to "fix" some societal problem, we all lose more and more. Why can't you get that? Government power is coercive, and inherently corrupt: anathema to freedom.

Here's an idea. Why don't you pay your own doctor bills, and I'll pay mine. Live and let live is a tried and true conservative philosophy.

Love Them Truths
"Whenever a conservative speaks out against affirmative action policies, which give institutionalized preference to one race over others (racism), he is called racist."

This depends on whether the Conservative in question is honest about what AA is and what effects it has had. You don't appear to meet that criterion.

"Whenever a conservative speaks out against special categories of rights only for certain citizens (i.e. homosexuals), because he believes all citizens should have the exact same rights under the law, he is called a homophobe, and a hater"

That depends on whether he is speaking out from a dishonest, homophobic place. I don't know of any special rights being demanded by any gay folk.

"Live and let live is a tried and true conservative philosophy"

Really? Terri Schiavo ring a bell? War on drugs? 160,000 dead Iraqi's?

It's all like the old Russian joke. "Capitalism is a system where man exploits man. Under Communism it's just the opposite" Conservatives are just as controlling as anyone else: its just thet they think their kind of control is better.

JDelinquent
Is this supposed to pass for...what...intellect?

I am not supposed to be smarter than you; it just worked out that way.

Got anything besides talk radio talking points?

Leftist delusions
All of the post above just shows how deranged leftist are. They can not accept facts that disprove their distorted view of reality. Historical facts reveal that the Leftist (i.e. Democrats) are no friends of minorities. Democratic policies do nothing but continue to suppress minorities through destroying the communities. I'll take historical facts over deranged hate-filled leftist Democratic rants every time. Go cry to KKK Byrd, Al "segragation" Gore Sr, Gary "Come here boy" Stubbs etc. etc. etc.

Dvangoofy
You wouldn't know a historical fact if one bit you in your left eye.

Missing the Point
All of this talk about how the parties have changed over the years and which one can now lay claim to the title of "the civil rights party" is really beside the point. Hillary claimed that LBJ "passed" the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It simply isn't true.

Would she similarly claim that her husband passed welfare reform? I think not.


What we don' know
Well----I did not know that about Mr. Dirksen. Makes you wonder about the old saying that "No good deed goes un-punished".

Civil Rights
When did the American Civil Rights movement start? The Kansas-Nebraska Act or the Three-Fifths Proclamation are my answers. They were the first legal enactment of Civil Rights, sort of like the Missouri Compromise.
The Kansas-Nebraska Act gave the right to vote if each state would be a slave state or a free state.
A bunch of 3/5 voters and abolitionists showed up and got shot for wanting to settle a homestead. It became known as "Bloody Kansas" when the fanatic John Brown beat them back. Both states voted for freedom and it started a war.
It was about all things Civil.
Essentially this article ignores a large part of the beginnings of American Civil Rights. This is...after all... The Land of the Free.

Would you help your Uncle Jack...
off his high horse, if he was stuck?

Truth is truth, friend. No qualifying necessary. Affirmative Action is racism. You can attempt to justify it (most racists do) as a means to right past wrongs, but it is what it is.

And how many of your liberal democrat leaders voted to authorize Bush to make war with Iraq? What spineless demagogues. Whenever anything is popular, they roll right over as if on rounded heels. But as soon as the winds change, and men are getting killed because of their lack of will and fortitude, they want to tuck in their tails and run like the little cowards they are.

And by the way, many conservative republicans despise the war on drugs - especially me. Just another opportunity for leadership where your side falls woefully short. At least we have our libertarian wing that speaks out forcefully against that particular brand of mindless government oppression.

Have some guts, and embrace true freedom and liberty.

You might be a socialist/liberal if . .
- the concept of judging a man by the content of his character rather than color of his skin has lost all meaning to you.

- you believe "Social Security" was the greatest thing to happen to the working class.

- you say you should pay more taxes because you make way too much money.

- you don't realize how niggardly the word "niggardly" is used in common language.

- you frequently use the phrase "our people."

- you think inciting a murderous mob is a protected civil right, but using certain terms popular in hip-hop culture is not.

- you think all/only black people are descendants of slaves.

- you credit "whitie" for perpetuating slavery but not for ending it.

- you think "equal opportunity" has anything to do with equality.

- you think women are a minority.

- you think raising the minimum wage will end poverty.

- you go to work for a hedge fund to understand how the poor live.

- you perpetually depend on government grants, subsidies, or "transfer payments" as your primary subsistence.

- you think hate is a crime.

- you think profits are "obscene."

- you think the best way to improve the economy is to raise taxes on businesses.

- you like to treat certain types of people like endangered wildlife.

- you don't think it hypocritical to discriminate against certain races in order to get "the right racial mix."

- you think opposition to "affirmative action" is racism.

- you think one person gets poorer when another person gets richer.

You might be a socialist/liberal if . .
- you would easily pick Carter over W.

- you think Bill Clinton was the first black president.

- you never met a dictator you didn't like.

- you think "Uncle Joe" was misunderstood.

- you can't go five minutes without saying that Bush is the worst/biggest/most ____ in history.

- you think the 43rd president is a right-wing conservative.

You might be a socialist/liberal if . .
you think the government is the most capable entity to offset market inefficiencies.

you think everyone should be government employees.

you think the Constitution is out of date.

you think curtailing one person's freedom enhances another's.

you think Cuba's healthcare system is the ideal model.

the word Republic is taboo.

your higher power is "Government."

you worry that the states might actually govern themselves.

- you like to be considered "progressive."

- you think government should control all the money and you should control the government.

- your definition of a right wing nut, a bigot, a hawk, or an antigovernment extremist would include Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy, Teddy Roosevelt, or Abraham Lincoln.

- you believe in "the failure of capitalism as a system, and that socialism in the Soviet Union was not proven a failure, but was overtaken by 'American Capitalist Imperialism.'"

- you think 35 hours is an ample work-week.

You might be a socialist/liberal if . .
- you think Rush Limbaugh is a shock jock.

- you agree that Walter Duranty deserved a Pulitzer.

- you think the right is full of mindless zealots but you can't make a logical or coherent argument to show why.

- your opinion won't fetch a plugged nickel on the AM dial.

- the only way to get your message heard on the radio is to confiscate airtime under guise of law.

You might be a socialist/liberal if . .
- you view the United States as a rogue nation.

- you believe it's our own fault that our enemies hate us.

- you think fighting for your country is unpatriotic.

- you actually believe violence never solved anything.

- you think wars are best ended by treaties rather than victory.

- you have ever uttered with sincerity the phrase, "Give peace a chance."

- you are afraid of guns.

- you believe that anyone who owns or carries a gun will inevitably kill someone.

- you think banning guns from honest citizens enhances public safety.

- you think a citizen defending self and family with deadly force should be criminalized.

- you allege that the second amendment has anything to do with hunting.

- you still think we lost the Tet offensive militarily.

- the only similarity you don't see between the Vietnam and Iraq conflicts is that certain groups are "invested in defeat."

68 election, Affirmative Action
"Actually, much of the South voted Democrat in 1968. George Wallace, a Democrat, carried a few southern states. Nixon won largely because the Democrats were divided between Humphrey and Wallace."

Only one of the former Confederacy states voted for Humphrey--that would be Texas. Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia all voted for Wallace. Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia all went for Nixon. Furthermore, Kentucky and Missouri, two states that had divided governments during the Civil War, also voted for Nixon.

As for affirmative action, part of the problem is that most people don't understand it very well. Key parts of most affirmative action programs include outreach to let minorities know that job openings exist--this is a recognition that whites have long had advantages in terms of connections to people who are hiring.

Also, the inflammatory rhetoric used by conservatives has made rational discussion about affirmative action nearly impossible. I can understand why people are uncomfortable with quotas, but there also has to be an acknowledgment that for most of this country's history quotas have existed that help white men and hurt women and minorities.

On top of that, there often exist tacit quotas--how, as a society, do we counter discrimination that is often subtle, and may even be done unconsciously?

Jack (or is it Jerk?)
"George Wallace was not a Democrat in 1968: he ran as the candidate of the American Independent Party."

That's a red herring. George Wallace was a lifelong Democrat and you know it.

"The migration of racial/social conservatives from teh Democrats to teh Republicans began with characters like Wallace, was exacerbated by the Southern Strategy, which you have yet to address, and was completed with the rise of the so called Reagan Democrats."

Again, that is terribly simplistic and superficial. Democrats voted for Reagan in '80 because they were fed up with Jimmy Carter's incompetence. Carter cured quite a few people from voting Democrat (Walter Mondale cured me).

"Republicans have a very hard time getting votews from any minority because Republicans are perceived as opposing the policies and practices that have benefitted those minorities."

Republicans have a hard time getting support from African-Americans because they're constantly being slandered by liberals such as yourself. African-Americans who do vote Republican are labeled as traitors. Talk about racism!

"I don't know why you are bothering to argue this."

I admit it's often a futile task trying to talk sense to a closed-minded liberal like you, but hope springs eternal.

It was C vs. L, not D vs. R
The civil rights fight was a fight between conservatives and liberals, not Republican vs. Democrat.

Believe me, Everett Dirkson was not a hero of conservative Republicans (I grew up with conservative Republican parents). And George Wallace was not a hero of liberal Democrats.

Furthermore, liberal Democrats have the guts to admit that their party has had some major failings in the past, especially on this issue. Show me a modern conservative Republican willing to criticize the race-baiting engaged in by their party. Even one.

You might be a redneck if.....
You have to be reminded that you might be a redneck before every joke.

fbear
"Show me a modern conservative Republican willing to criticize the race-baiting engaged in by their party."

I don't think a Democrat has any room to talk about "race-baiting." Have you kept up with the campaign between Hillary and Obama?

P.
"Furthermore, liberal Democrats have the guts to admit that their party has had some major failings in the past, especially on this issue."

Is that so? I've yet to hear one Democrat admit their party's past failures on civil rights. They usually blame their failures on Republicans, or they just lie. Remember how Al Gore said his father was voted out of the Senate in 1970 because of his support for civil rights? In fact, Gore's father voted AGAINST the Civil Rights Act.

P.S. to fbear
"Furthermore, liberal Democrats have the guts to admit that their party has had some major failings in the past, especially on this issue."

Is that so? I've yet to hear one Democrat admit their party's past failures on civil rights. They usually blame their failures on Republicans, or they just lie. Remember how Al Gore said his father was voted out of the Senate in 1970 because of his support for civil rights? In fact, Gore's father voted AGAINST the Civil Rights Act.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.