And like everything else that has actually helped spread freedom and equality, the Republicans are working hard to functionally undo what they previously supported.
Actually, the slavery support is understandable because the South, which is where all the slaves were, was solid Democrat. When the Democrats began the serious push for racial equality, and school integration, the Republicans suddenly changed sides and began to tout "states rights", which was code phrase for integration. As a result, the white South is still solid, however it is now solid Republican. Those who may have a point, by accusing the Democrats of buying votes though welfare entitlements, should also give the Republicans equal time for buying votes through racial pandering to the Southern white voters. Politics as usual.
The Stand in the Schoolhouse Door took place at Foster Auditorium at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963. George Wallace, the Governor of Alabama, in a symbolic attempt to keep his inaugural promise of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" and stop the desegregation of schools, stood at the door of the auditorium to try to block the entry of two black students, Vivian Malone and James Hood.[1] George Corley Wallace, Jr. was an American politician and the 45th Governor of Alabama, having served two nonconsecutive terms and two consecutive terms as a Democrat: 1963–1967, 1971–1979 and 1983–1987. wikipedia.org
In 1962, the state agency in charge of universities and colleges, the Institutions of Higher Learning, appointed Barnett the registrar in order to oppose James Meredith's efforts to desegregate Barnett's alma mater, the University of Mississippi. With the accreditation of the state's medical school and other universities in jeopardy due to the political interventions, the IHL board reversed their action after the riots on the campus.[6] Barnett was fined $10,000 and sentenced to jail for contempt but never paid the fine or served a day in jail.[4] This was because the charges were terminated (civil) and dismissed (criminal) by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals because of "substantial compliance with orders of the court," and "in view of changed circumstances and conditions." Only two Mississippi legislators opposed Barnett's efforts to defy the federal authorities, Joe Wroten and Karl Wiesenburg.
On the night before the Ole Miss riot of 1962 protesting Meredith's entry to the university, Barnett gave his famous sixteen-word "I Love Mississippi" speech at the University of Mississippi football game in Jackson. The Ole Miss Rebels were playing the Kentucky Wildcats. 41,000 fans cheered at the stadium waving thousands of Confederate flags. At halftime, a gigantic Confederate flag was unveiled on the field. The crowd shouted "We want Ross!". Barnett went to the field, grabbed the microphone at the 50-yard line and said to an enthusiastic crowd: "I love Mississippi! I love her people! Our customs. I love and I respect our heritage."[7] Until the 1960s, Mississippians had known no alternative to segregation, and many linked the separation to the Bible. Barnett, a Baptist Sunday school teacher, declared "The Good Lord was the original segregationist. He put the black man in Africa.... He made us white because he wanted us white, and He intended that we should stay that way."[8] Ross Robert Barnett (January 22, 1898 – November 6, 1987) was the governor of Mississippi from 1960 to 1964. He was a prominent member of the Dixiecrats, Southern Democrats who supported racial segregation.
Nice try mick, but they were Dixiecrat Democrats standing in those doorways.
On March 18, 1966, former United States Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, who frequently conversed by telephone with Barnett during the Meredith crisis in attempts to secure peacefully Meredith's enrollment at Ole Miss, visited the campus. In a speech before more than 6000 students and faculty, Kennedy discussed racial reconciliation and answered questions, including those about his role in Meredith's enrollment. To much laughter from the audience members, he told of a plan in which Barnett had asked that US marshals point their guns at him while Meredith attempted to enroll so that "a picture could be taken of the event."[14]
He also drew laughter by recounting another plan where Meredith would go to Jackson to enroll while Barnett remained in Oxford "and when Meredith was registered, he (Barnett) would feign surprise." Both plans were approved by Kennedy and failed only because of the development of events.[15] When Kennedy finished his speech and question-and-answer session, he was greeted by a standing ovation.[16]
The next day Barnett bitterly attacked Kennedy's version of events, saying in part:
"It ill becomes a man who never tried a lawsuit in his life, but who occupied the high position of United States attorney general and who was responsible for using 30,000 troops and spent approximately six million dollars to put one unqualified student in Ole Miss to return to the scene of this crime and discuss any phase of this infamous affair.... I say to you that Bobby Kennedy is a very sick and dangerous American. We have lots of sick Americans in this country but most of them have a long beard. Bobby Kennedy is a hypocritical, left-wing beatnik without a beard who carelessly and recklessly distorts the facts."[17]
As a young man, Mr. Byrd was an ‘exalted cyclops’ of the Ku Klux Klan. Although he apologized numerous times for what he considered a youthful indiscretion, his early votes in Congress--notably a filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act--reflected racially separatist views.
The point here is not that Byrd ended his life as a closeted racist--I never met the man--but that, because he was a Democrat, the people who make judgments about what is and what is not newsworthy chose to give him a pass, failing to subject him to a thorough discussion of his past each time he said or did something that might have alluded to it. This was obviously the case after he used the phrase “white niggers” in a television interview on the subject of race relations in the United States during the Bush presidency,,,
Recall that, at various points in his career, Byrd’s partisan colleagues elected him to the positions of senate majority whip, senate majority leader, senate minority leader, and senate president pro tempore, which placed him third in the line of presidential succession behind the vice president and speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Racial prejudice knows no political party. Both parties deny it, which is to their credit, but it was not always so. I remember when Strom Thurman ran for President on the Dixiecrat ticket, and later changed parties and became a Republican Senator. The Anderson Independent named him "Stand on Head Strom", which also referred to a photo which at the time which showed Strom doing a head stand in his Capitol Hill office. I was a student at Clemson in 1963 when Harvey Gantt entered as an Architecture graduate student. A friend and I were standing outside Tillman Hall when he arrived with his police escort, all the news media were there hoping for something dramatic to report. Nothing happened and he entered the building without incident. Gantt graduated from Clemson and became a successful politician.
I hope this develops into a debate rather than a Political slanging match. It has the potential to achieve much towards understanding. I would ask a question of my friends. With the benefit of hindsight do any of you now consider the intervention of Kennedy into the segregation crises an error of judgment or even a deliberate attempt to score political kudos?. Further do any of you approve of the actions of the State officials and conversely ,was the action of the Federal government justified in terms of morality or human rights ?
Mick, were you aware of the recent movement to rename Tillman Hall? From what I read the board of trustees handle things in a mature manor.
In the late 60's I matriculated with another early black student at Clemson Nate Spells. Nate was later involved in the building of many churches. Harvey Gantt became mayor of Charlotte and his architectural firm was involved in the design of UNC Charlotte a beautiful campus reminiscent of Clemson.
I recall a black basketball player during the late sixties but there were no back football players through my graduation year '72. There were only a couple hundred women on campus during my early years there also.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Was a republican and had the support of black conservative churches. The black republicans organized the first march on DC.
In 1959 only 9% of black children did not have married parents. Contrast that to today after 50 years of democrat progressivism. Black babies have no father in about 70% of black households.
Black babies have no father in about 70% of black households.........
William is this the Tea Party definition of Virgin Birth? This makes Jesus Christ the first member of the Democratic Party if we follow your argument. Cheers from Aussie
You're being to cute by half. This is a national tragedy. How would you explain the correlation between the rise of the welfare state and the expansion of one parent families? How would you explain the correlation between our Black prison population and fatherless households?
William> I am a republican here in Australia, I believe in less government, I believe in letting the populace start up and run businesses and I believe that the state has a responsibility to provide a safety net for those unable to either find a job or who are not well enough to work if a job is available. I believe that those of us who succeeded have a responsibility to submit to taxation so that those who do not succeed can be given a measure of support,
Having said that, what I can not or will not do is to blindly criticize the opposition to the Republican party(s) in your country and in mine who pursue their own policy because it is in direct opposition to the views we support. Membership of the Democrats does not automatically belong to people with an IQ of 60,or even worse those with a non white skin. Conversely, members of Mensa are not all members of the Republican, or God save us, the Tea Party Movement.
I ask you about two historical correlations and you bring the argument into denigrating the mental capacities of Tea Party supporters.
It is in plain sight here to see what progressive ideology has done to our inner cities. The safety nets for the less fortunate have turned into abandoned fishing nets on the bottom of our seabeds. Dragging in and strangling schools and schools of leftest followers, generation after generation.
Of course William only tells half the history of civil rights. When these amendments passed in 1864-1868-1870, they are known as the reconstruction amendments the political south was dominated by northern carpetbaggers that were in fact republicans in control of Democratic states. During this time we had the Wade-Davis act supported by 100% of the republicans in congress and 0% of the democrats, which was designed to impose harsh treatment of the south during reconstruction. Thankfully the one republican who opposed this plan was the only one who could prevent it Abraham Lincoln who vetoed the legislation. After Lincoln's death the republicans took military control of the south and imposed harsh rules on the confederates who also happened to be predominately democrat. Many blacks were given the right to vote and all past confederate leaders were prohibited from running for office. So yes these three amendments were passed by large republican margins for the simple fact that there were very few democrats in congress at the time. For example the Senate of 1864 consisted of 22 republicans 6 democrats and 4 Unionists. In 186 the senate was republican 57-9-6 the six being unoccupied seats belonging to states not yet re admitted to the union. by 1870 it was 62-12 republican, the republicans gaining all the southern seats through their reconstruction tactics. What we really need to look at is the civil rights act of 1964 which after 100 years gave legal teeth to the 13,14 and 15 amendments who's violation had previously went without punishment or with a few hand slaps and nothing more. This legislation was originally proposed by President John F Kennedy, and pushed to completion by Lyndon Johnson both democrats. The Civil Rights act of 1964 was passed bi-partisan in the north but in the south it was a different story. It was defeated by the south regardless of party, 95% of southern democrats said no in the senate the lone aye of southern democrats came from Texan Ralph Yarborough and the lone southern repub senator John Tower of Texas voted no so that's 100% isn't it William. Same scenario. In the house the measure was defeated by southern republicans 0 aye 10 no. 100%. In the north it was soundly a Democratic Idea with only 9 representatives and 1 senator voting no, from a party with a clear majority.
Begin a new age of politics in southern America. Although the bill passed in a bi partisan way with all southern democrats in the negative except 8 and all southern republicans 100% no the south put the blame as they saw it squarely on the democrats for the bills passing. Lyndon Johnson said that passage would lose the south to democrats for a generation, of course in todays world it has become somewhat permanent. So William quit acting like the republiccans are the saviors of the south it was the civil rights act of 1964 that really changed the way blacks were treated in this country and it was bipartisan.
I'm sure you realize that as an act it can be overturned by a large enough congressional majority or the supreme court. Parts of the act have out lasted their usefulness and are under attack.
And like everything else that has actually helped spread freedom and equality, the Republicans are working hard to functionally undo what they previously supported.
ReplyDeleteLooks like the GOP should go after Net neutrality next.
DeleteNet neutraity
DeleteCommon core
Obamacare
Amnesty
Restrictions on purchase of ammunition
Keystone Pipeline
It never ends with progressives
Of course you would be against net neutrality. Without it those are on top stay on top and fuck everyone else.
DeleteTo date Rick please relay how you have been negatively affected by an unregulated Internet?
DeleteActually, the slavery support is understandable because the South, which is where all the slaves were, was solid Democrat. When the Democrats began the serious push for racial equality, and school integration, the Republicans suddenly changed sides and began to tout "states rights", which was code phrase for integration. As a result, the white South is still solid, however it is now solid Republican. Those who may have a point, by accusing the Democrats of buying votes though welfare entitlements, should also give the Republicans equal time for buying votes through racial pandering to the Southern white voters. Politics as usual.
ReplyDeleteThe Stand in the Schoolhouse Door took place at Foster Auditorium at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963. George Wallace, the Governor of Alabama, in a symbolic attempt to keep his inaugural promise of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" and stop the desegregation of schools, stood at the door of the auditorium to try to block the entry of two black students, Vivian Malone and James Hood.[1]
ReplyDeleteGeorge Corley Wallace, Jr. was an American politician and the 45th Governor of Alabama, having served two nonconsecutive terms and two consecutive terms as a Democrat: 1963–1967, 1971–1979 and 1983–1987. wikipedia.org
In 1962, the state agency in charge of universities and colleges, the Institutions of Higher Learning, appointed Barnett the registrar in order to oppose James Meredith's efforts to desegregate Barnett's alma mater, the University of Mississippi. With the accreditation of the state's medical school and other universities in jeopardy due to the political interventions, the IHL board reversed their action after the riots on the campus.[6] Barnett was fined $10,000 and sentenced to jail for contempt but never paid the fine or served a day in jail.[4] This was because the charges were terminated (civil) and dismissed (criminal) by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals because of "substantial compliance with orders of the court," and "in view of changed circumstances and conditions." Only two Mississippi legislators opposed Barnett's efforts to defy the federal authorities, Joe Wroten and Karl Wiesenburg.
On the night before the Ole Miss riot of 1962 protesting Meredith's entry to the university, Barnett gave his famous sixteen-word "I Love Mississippi" speech at the University of Mississippi football game in Jackson. The Ole Miss Rebels were playing the Kentucky Wildcats. 41,000 fans cheered at the stadium waving thousands of Confederate flags. At halftime, a gigantic Confederate flag was unveiled on the field. The crowd shouted "We want Ross!". Barnett went to the field, grabbed the microphone at the 50-yard line and said to an enthusiastic crowd:
"I love Mississippi! I love her people! Our customs. I love and I respect our heritage."[7]
Until the 1960s, Mississippians had known no alternative to segregation, and many linked the separation to the Bible. Barnett, a Baptist Sunday school teacher, declared "The Good Lord was the original segregationist. He put the black man in Africa.... He made us white because he wanted us white, and He intended that we should stay that way."[8]
Ross Robert Barnett (January 22, 1898 – November 6, 1987) was the governor of Mississippi from 1960 to 1964. He was a prominent member of the Dixiecrats, Southern Democrats who supported racial segregation.
Nice try mick, but they were Dixiecrat Democrats standing in those doorways.
On March 18, 1966, former United States Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, who frequently conversed by telephone with Barnett during the Meredith crisis in attempts to secure peacefully Meredith's enrollment at Ole Miss, visited the campus. In a speech before more than 6000 students and faculty, Kennedy discussed racial reconciliation and answered questions, including those about his role in Meredith's enrollment. To much laughter from the audience members, he told of a plan in which Barnett had asked that US marshals point their guns at him while Meredith attempted to enroll so that "a picture could be taken of the event."[14]
DeleteHe also drew laughter by recounting another plan where Meredith would go to Jackson to enroll while Barnett remained in Oxford "and when Meredith was registered, he (Barnett) would feign surprise." Both plans were approved by Kennedy and failed only because of the development of events.[15] When Kennedy finished his speech and question-and-answer session, he was greeted by a standing ovation.[16]
The next day Barnett bitterly attacked Kennedy's version of events, saying in part:
"It ill becomes a man who never tried a lawsuit in his life, but who occupied the high position of United States attorney general and who was responsible for using 30,000 troops and spent approximately six million dollars to put one unqualified student in Ole Miss to return to the scene of this crime and discuss any phase of this infamous affair.... I say to you that Bobby Kennedy is a very sick and dangerous American. We have lots of sick Americans in this country but most of them have a long beard. Bobby Kennedy is a hypocritical, left-wing beatnik without a beard who carelessly and recklessly distorts the facts."[17]
These were all Democrats.
Robert KKK Byrd, Democrat
DeleteAs a young man, Mr. Byrd was an ‘exalted cyclops’ of the Ku Klux Klan. Although he apologized numerous times for what he considered a youthful indiscretion, his early votes in Congress--notably a filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act--reflected racially separatist views.
The point here is not that Byrd ended his life as a closeted racist--I never met the man--but that, because he was a Democrat, the people who make judgments about what is and what is not newsworthy chose to give him a pass, failing to subject him to a thorough discussion of his past each time he said or did something that might have alluded to it. This was obviously the case after he used the phrase “white niggers” in a television interview on the subject of race relations in the United States during the Bush presidency,,,
Recall that, at various points in his career, Byrd’s partisan colleagues elected him to the positions of senate majority whip, senate majority leader, senate minority leader, and senate president pro tempore, which placed him third in the line of presidential succession behind the vice president and speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/06/30/byrds-kkk-history-shows-partisan-double-standard
Racial prejudice knows no political party. Both parties deny it, which is to their credit, but it was not always so. I remember when Strom Thurman ran for President on the Dixiecrat ticket, and later changed parties and became a Republican Senator. The Anderson Independent named him "Stand on Head Strom", which also referred to a photo which at the time which showed Strom doing a head stand in his Capitol Hill office. I was a student at Clemson in 1963 when Harvey Gantt entered as an Architecture graduate student. A friend and I were standing outside Tillman Hall when he arrived with his police escort, all the news media were there hoping for something dramatic to report. Nothing happened and he entered the building without incident. Gantt graduated from Clemson and became a successful politician.
DeleteI hope this develops into a debate rather than a Political slanging match. It has the potential to achieve much towards understanding. I would ask a question of my friends. With the benefit of hindsight do any of you now consider the intervention of Kennedy into the segregation crises an error of judgment or even a deliberate attempt to score political kudos?. Further do any of you approve of the actions of the State officials and conversely ,was the action of the Federal government justified in terms of morality or human rights ?
DeleteCheers from Aussie
Mick, were you aware of the recent movement to rename Tillman Hall? From what I read the board of trustees handle things in a mature manor.
DeleteIn the late 60's I matriculated with another early black student at Clemson Nate Spells. Nate was later involved in the building of many churches. Harvey Gantt became mayor of Charlotte and his architectural firm was involved in the design of UNC Charlotte a beautiful campus reminiscent of Clemson.
I recall a black basketball player during the late sixties but there were no back football players through my graduation year '72. There were only a couple hundred women on campus during my early years there also.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Was a republican and had the support of black conservative churches. The black republicans organized the first march on DC.
DeleteIn 1959 only 9% of black children did not have married parents. Contrast that to today after 50 years of democrat progressivism. Black babies have no father in about 70% of black households.
Black babies have no father in about 70% of black households.........
DeleteWilliam is this the Tea Party definition of Virgin Birth? This makes Jesus Christ the first member of the Democratic Party if we follow your argument.
Cheers from Aussie
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYou're being to cute by half. This is a national tragedy. How would you explain the correlation between the rise of the welfare state and the expansion of one parent families? How would you explain the correlation between our Black prison population and fatherless households?
DeleteWilliam> I am a republican here in Australia, I believe in less government, I believe in letting the populace start up and run businesses and I believe that the state has a responsibility to provide a safety net for those unable to either find a job or who are not well enough to work if a job is available. I believe that those of us who succeeded have a responsibility to submit to taxation so that those who do not succeed can be given a measure of support,
DeleteHaving said that, what I can not or will not do is to blindly criticize the opposition to the Republican party(s) in your country and in mine who pursue their own policy because it is in direct opposition to the views we support. Membership of the Democrats does not automatically belong to people with an IQ of 60,or even worse those with a non white skin. Conversely, members of Mensa are not all members of the Republican, or God save us, the Tea Party Movement.
Cheers from Aussie
I ask you about two historical correlations and you bring the argument into denigrating the mental capacities of Tea Party supporters.
DeleteIt is in plain sight here to see what progressive ideology has done to our inner cities. The safety nets for the less fortunate have turned into abandoned fishing nets on the bottom of our seabeds. Dragging in and strangling schools and schools of leftest followers, generation after generation.
I misspelled Strom Thurmond, who served 49 years in the Senate from South Carolina.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOf course William only tells half the history of civil rights. When these amendments passed in 1864-1868-1870, they are known as the reconstruction amendments the political south was dominated by northern carpetbaggers that were in fact republicans in control of Democratic states. During this time we had the Wade-Davis act supported by 100% of the republicans in congress and 0% of the democrats, which was designed to impose harsh treatment of the south during reconstruction. Thankfully the one republican who opposed this plan was the only one who could prevent it Abraham Lincoln who vetoed the legislation. After Lincoln's death the republicans took military control of the south and imposed harsh rules on the confederates who also happened to be predominately democrat. Many blacks were given the right to vote and all past confederate leaders were prohibited from running for office. So yes these three amendments were passed by large republican margins for the simple fact that there were very few democrats in congress at the time. For example the Senate of 1864 consisted of 22 republicans 6 democrats and 4 Unionists. In 186 the senate was republican 57-9-6 the six being unoccupied seats belonging to states not yet re admitted to the union. by 1870 it was 62-12 republican, the republicans gaining all the southern seats through their reconstruction tactics.
ReplyDeleteWhat we really need to look at is the civil rights act of 1964 which after 100 years gave legal teeth to the 13,14 and 15 amendments who's violation had previously went without punishment or with a few hand slaps and nothing more.
This legislation was originally proposed by President John F Kennedy, and pushed to completion by Lyndon Johnson both democrats. The Civil Rights act of 1964 was passed bi-partisan in the north but in the south it was a different story. It was defeated by the south regardless of party, 95% of southern democrats said no in the senate the lone aye of southern democrats came from Texan Ralph Yarborough and the lone southern repub senator John Tower of Texas voted no so that's 100% isn't it William. Same scenario.
In the house the measure was defeated by southern republicans 0 aye 10 no. 100%. In the north it was soundly a Democratic Idea with only 9 representatives and 1 senator voting no, from a party with a clear majority.
Begin a new age of politics in southern America. Although the bill passed in a bi partisan way with all southern democrats in the negative except 8 and all southern republicans 100% no the south put the blame as they saw it squarely on the democrats for the bills passing. Lyndon Johnson said that passage would lose the south to democrats for a generation, of course in todays world it has become somewhat permanent. So William quit acting like the republiccans are the saviors of the south it was the civil rights act of 1964 that really changed the way blacks were treated in this country and it was bipartisan.
Spin. Pure spin.
Deleteyou have a big problem with facts don't you William.
DeleteI'm sure you realize that as an act it can be overturned by a large enough congressional majority or the supreme court. Parts of the act have out lasted their usefulness and are under attack.
Deleteact/law splitting hairs aren't we. William you are just plain wrong on this.
Delete