OPINION

The Pyscho History That Democrats Hide

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Today’s term is psycho-political projection |siko'p?'litiko'pr?'jekSH?n|.  This contraction of words labels the political application of the word projection in the Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, “…in a psychoanalytic context, it describes the unconscious process in which the individual attributes to others his or her own emotions and impulses.  Sigmund Freud regarded it as a common defence mechanism, used by the ego to control unacceptable feelings, thereby helping to reduce anxiety.”

This is the syndrome that I hereby assign to those of the LEFT who so freely launch accusations for which they themselves harbor a secret sense of guilt.  The pattern for this condition is openly on display at the Democratic Party website: www.democrats.org/about/our_history.  This webpage, proudly labeled Our Party, Our History, opens with the statement, “For more than 200 years, our party has led the fight for civil rights, health care, Social Security, workers' rights, and women's rights.”

I will quickly skip past the ripe opportunities to blast the Democratic Party on diminishing the quality of health care, reducing employment opportunities, and dooming Social Security to go belly up in 2035.  But I am compelled to take a swipe at their claim for leading the fight for women’s rights before I move on to the party’s most egregious departure from the facts.

The Democratic Party coined the incriminating slogan War on Women, reserved for Republicans who found a higher priority for the right to life than they did for the right to abort.  The label was effectively applied to boorish Republican candidates in 2012.  The National Organization for Women locks arms with the Democratic Party in pointing out the personal failings of Republican men when the evidence shows that Democratic men set for themselves a much lower standard for chivalry.  Let me just conclude this thought with the loaded words, Bob Filner, Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner.  Oh, and Bill Clinton.

But by far the most preposterous assertion in the Democratic Party’s statement is that they have led the fight for civil rights for 200 years.  If they had any sense of candor, their website would show their history of leading a War on Black Americans.

In 1856, the Democratic Party ruled everything; the White House and nearly two-thirds of both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives.  The opposition party, the Whigs, was utterly ineffective in trying to overcome the Democratic Party’s stronghold on laws that kept slavery legal and acceptable.

Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner, a Whig, delivered a fiery speech in May of 1856 that railed against the Democrats for their pushing slavery onto the new state of Kansas.  Two days later, while quietly writing at his desk on the Senate floor, Democratic Congressman Preston Brooks of South Carolina delivered a cruel blow to the back of Sumner’s head with the weighty metal end of his cane.  Many of Brooks’ fellow Democrats gifted him with more canes as an expression of their approval for his violent assault.

Even though the injury put Senator Sumner in a wheel chair for three years, he worked with his closest friend, Abraham Lincoln, in forming the Republican Party.  While the new Republican Party led the actual fight for civil rights, the Democratic Party fought against freedom for black Americans in every way, ultimately collapsing into civil war.

In 1789, the Republican controlled Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance that prohibited slavery in a federal territory. In 1820, the Democratic Congress passed the Missouri Compromise and reversed that earlier policy, permitting slavery in almost half of the federal territories.

In 1850, Democrats in Congress passed the “Fugitive Slave Law” requiring Northerners to return escaped slaves back into slavery or pay huge fines.

1856, the Democratic platform took a position strongly defending slavery and warned that, “All efforts of the abolitionists… are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences and all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people”.

In 1857, a Democratically controlled Supreme Court delivered the Dred Scott decision, declaring that blacks were not persons or citizens but instead were property and therefore had no rights.

The 13th Amendment to abolish slavery was voted for by 100% of the Republicans in Congress and by 23% of the Democrats in Congress.

Not a single one of the 56 Democrats in Congress voted for the 15th amendment that granted explicit voting rights to black Americans.

In 1866 Democrats formed the Ku Klux Klan to pave the way for Democrats to regain control in the elections.  The Colored Citizens of Frankfort, Kentucky wrote a letter to Congress appealing that, “our services to the government and our race have become the special object of hatred and persecution at the hands of the Democratic Party.”

In the 19th century, Democrats prevented Black Americans from going to public school.  In the 20th and 21st century Democrats prevented Black Americans trapped in failing schools from choosing a better school. In fact Democrats voted against the bill by 99%.

On June 1, 1865, Senator Charles Sumner remarked on what is now considered the most famous speech by President Abraham Lincoln. In his eulogy for the slain president, Sumner called the Gettysburg Address a "monumental act." He stated that Lincoln had been mistaken that "the world will little note, nor long remember what we say here." Rather, the Bostonian remarked, "The world noted at once what he said, and will never cease to remember it. The battle itself was less important than the speech."

IT IS NOT the Republicans NOR IS IT the conservatives who own a recorded history of oppressing Americans of color.  Far the opposite is the case.  The Democratic Party has unfairly and untruthfully dealt with their guilty conscience by projecting the tendencies of their world view onto the opposition; psycho-political projection.