This is completely misleading. Hugo Black, on the court, ruled against Japanese-American internment and was leading the charge against segregation in the Brown v. Board decision.
@visini14 The narrator in the video states that Black was appointed to the Supreme Court in the 1940s (1:10). That is factually incorrect. He was appointed in 1937.
And unlike FDR's Republican cousin Teddy, neither Hugo nor FDR believed in the Aryan myth later made famous by Hitler. Neither Hugo nor FDR were hardcore white supremacists like Teddy and his pals Henry Cabot Lodge and others. Those folks were generally in the Ivy League/Republican crowd at the time. Fact of the matter is, most politicians in American history have been racist. Bigoted white men ran this country for most of its first 200 years. Like you said, deal with it.
Yeah, Hugo was a KKK member and the stuff about him getting off the priest murderer are true. So are a lot of the salient points made by the video's critics in the comments. Black was hugely influential in the groundbreaking Warren court, which cemented the gains fo the civil rights movement in law... One factual error: Black was appointed to the court in the 1930s (1937 to be exact). Not the 1940s.
Tired of people saying that Republicans and Democrats "switched" parties. The Southern Democrats did leave the Democrat party and joined the Republican, but the same old Republicans were still there. Yes, the Republicans who fought for civil rights. That is the reason why the Republican Party was created. The Southern Democrats became Republican because of FDR. They thought the Democrat party was turning Socialist...they were correct.
Fuck party lines- politics shouldn't be based on names, but policies. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, whatever- they all have good policies and bad. This is a harmful video that furthers the fundamental problems in today's politics.
justice black joined the kkk because it was impossible to get anywhere in the south without it. it's the same reason a bunch of people from the ussr joined the communist party. of course, this is still a pretty messed up thing to do, but he didn't participate in any cross burnings, protests, etc. and he was one of the leading proponents of brown v. board.
When LBJ kicked the KKK out of the Democrat party, the Democrat party became the red headed step child of American politics. The Republicans are coming back again this fall, because white working people hate Obama and every other uppity spook in this country.
Well, I see that some of you are drinking the haterade. News flash everyone, America is a racist country. We are a "superpower" because we built our nation off the backs of free (slave) labor. I guarantee ALL those crazy-ass honkys from the early 1900s were racist. Let's take away Mr Black's record on the Sup.Court and I'll give you a wink & a smile whilst you pass me on your way to the back of the bus.
Justice Black was my Great Uncle. He spent 34 years on the Supreme Court fighting for the rights of idiots like you to express thoughts and ideas freely. He is proof that people can change for the better. Sounds like you want racists to remain bigoted so you have something to whine about.
@csw3604, Justice Black was one of the great ones. He is critiqued by cons and libs, which probably means he did something right. His dissent in the Griswold decision is inspired. His textualist approach to the C was far better than Scalia's "originalism."
This thing about Dems being the racists is silly. People, you do realize these old Dems later became Republicans, right? Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, etc. . . .
@itpduder Yes, and let's not forget Federal Power Comm. vs Tuscarora Tribe, Black was the lone dissent and wrote "Great nations, like great men, should keep their word". Absolute incredible Sup. Ct. case. Research it for some enlightenment everyone.
@csw3604, I took a year of conlaw but never read that case (that I remember; we read a LOT of case law). Some cases stick out. Griswold, Atlanta Motel, Brown, Casey, etc. That quote sounds like Black. I will check it out. Thanks for the ref!
BTW, I don't have the link, but Lexis has a series of interviews with Black. It's pretty insightful stuff.
Actually, I'm a liberterian. That means I probably disagree with you exactly 50% of the time. But I believe in people like Hugo Black who have the guts to write the Brown v. Board of Education opinion and later have to wear a bullet proof vest when returning home to Alabama. Was it to protect himself against people like you?...or was it to protect himself against people who hate you? Does Hugo Black still sound like a racist? Keep reading. There's more. The truth shall set you free...
@sluggoII Yes, he does. Like I said, just because he made amends doesn't negate his prior actions. Further, his ilk are still cross-burning card-carrying racist. The truth shall set you free. When the Dems own up to their lyin' thievin' ways, then I will cut them some slack. Until then, no quarter! Who next, FDR, LBJ, Kennedy, Carter...all racist pukes, who have gotten a pass!
Don't think all Libertarians think that way. I consider myself a pretty hardcore libertarian and totally agree with this video. Hugo Black was a piece of shit, no doubt about it.
Being libertarian myself, I find the idea that we "disagree with [him] 50% of the time" preposterous. Libertarians have share more with the modern Republicans than the Democrats. I grant 40% perhaps, but 50% seriously?
I haven't seen anything wrong from theblacksphere01. Hugo Black was a racist. His 1st amendment rulings could have been made by any person with a brain, it wasn't that hard to figure out. It's like complimenting someone for cooking a pop tart.
Every person who filibustered a civ rights bill was a Dem. Dems filibustered the CivR act o 1957, 1960, 1963 (rewritten in 1 night to "create" 1964 CivR bill)
When THEIR filibuster of THAT failed & THEIR poll tax strategies failed (youtube: LBJ N word), they were toast. What to do?
1964 (note the very year of THEIR CR LOSS) they created the WELFARE (plantation) STATE. Same year.
I'm a Liberal which means I will probably disagree with 50% of what you are saying,but I agree with you regarding Hugo Black. I'm an African American Female who has studied law and Justice Black was the topic of one of my Masters Thesis'. While Hugo Black Was a Klansman, he joined the Klan for reasons that had nothing to do with race. I suggest reading Steve Suitts Book "Hugo Black of Alabama" for those who want a fair and balanced view of Justice Black.
@Stirnatty :-) Touche. Glad to hear from you. I hope some of the others who read these comments can get past simplistic labels, and take a closer look at the very people who helped secure their civil rights...like Justice Hugo Black.
Hugo Black: "Why did they write the Bill of Rights? Practically all of them make it more difficult to convict people of crime. What about guaranteeing a man a right to a lawyer? Of course that makes it more difficult to convict him. What about saying he shall not be compelled to be a witness against himself? That makes it more difficult to convict him. What about no unreasonable search or seizure shall be made? That makes it more difficult. They were written to make it more difficult!"
How sad you don't realize that Hugo Black did more than any other Supreme Court Justice to advance 1st Amendment rights. Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Segregation in public schools is unconstitutional. Griffin vs. Prince Edward County (1964): Local schools must re-open and desegregate. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963): Indigent defendants have a right to a lawyer. Miranda v. Arizona (1966): No coerced confessions. Defendants must be advised of their constitutional rights. -- Study up pal.
@sluggoII I know exactly what that racist did in later life. Like most Democrats, they finally see the light, then try to correct all their wrongs. You should be asking yourself how many black people he killed, watched get killed or violated, before he decided to see black folks as human. I won't let you LibTURDs get away with deathbed confessions!
The remark I made was unfounded. If nothing else, what I have learned as a history major, is that information on various subject matters are opened up to interpretations, and discussions. And therefore, I honor your opinions. Have a good day.
@wgaines94115 Wow, NOW I'm impressed! Now your comments all make sense! Why didn't you say that in the FIRST place, because had I known you were from Harvard working on your PhD, I would have known that you were right and I was wrong. I mean, Harvard. I feel so stupid now. Silly me basing my analysis on study of history and observational logic. By the way, I have Harvard toilet paper in all my bathrooms.
As a future historian, if you are going to post the limitations about a man's character (Hugo Black), you may what to at least included the positive decisions he made regarding rights for minorities during his tenure on the Supreme Court. The information provided here only distorts. May I suggest that you read about Black's accomplishments on the Supreme Court, and perhaps you can subscribe to the fact that we all make mistakes, but we can also grown from them.
@wgaines94115 I'll do that, when you LibTURDs acknowledge your pathetic history of Civil Rights. Until then, expect nothing from me but kicks to the crotch and punches to the face! I further suggest that you change your continued evil ways, and stop meddling in the black community. If you are a black DemoRAT racist, then stop race baiting!
When Democrat Harry Truman integrated the military, racist southern democrats separated themselves from the Democratic party by calling themselves "Dixie-Crats". Then Democrat Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights, and Civil Rights act in the 1960s and that was the last straw. Racist democrats left the democratic party in droves to the Republican party, lured by the Republicans "Southern Strategy", basically telling racists that their brand of hate is OK in the GOP. GOP:The racist party.
@dLimboStick First of all LimpStick, LBJ was a racist! Next, NAME FIVE DIXIECRATS who moved in this mass migration! Do you research anything for yourself, or just use HuffPo for talking points?!
@theblacksphere01 Here's a little advice. Calling people names actually hurts your argument, it doesn't help it. OK 5 dixiecrats that jumped ship...and this is off the top of my head....Of course everyone knows Strom Thurmond, then there's Jesse Helms, David Duke, Trent Lott, Richard Shelby.
@dLimboStick So David Duke was part of the Dixiecrats of the 50s? Trent Lott has been a Republican from the beginning, something HuffPo didn't put in those talking points. So you still have two more to go. Guess what? You won't find them, and even if you did, your problem is convincing people that FIVE (you only have three) Republicans who switched could create party you claim the Republicans to be. How about all the Pedophile Democrats that are in office, are you blaming homosexuality on them?
This discussion is fruitless. You keep changing the conversation to fit your world view. That's fine. You have a lot of anger, brother...and that. to me, explains why you're attracted to the GOP. They thrive on it. It's Karl Rove's bread n butter. Rather than bringing Americans together to progress, they find wedge issues that make peoples blood boil, so they can divide them and build new coalitions of anger filled voters. Sorry you're angry. Have a nice day. :)
@dLimboStick I LOVE it when the FACTS chase you monkeys off! Blame it on my anger if that makes you feel better, but the people reading this thread know that you simply got your ass handed to you. Yet another racist poverty-pimp delusion Liberal running from the truth! Good riddance! LOL
Wanna see some modern day racists? Here they are. And they're in Arizona right now helping to push for anti-immigrant, anti-hispanic legislation. They are not democrats. They're the "real" socialists within our borders. Why isn't the tea party directing their anti-socialist rhetoric at these folks? I wonder....
@scbluesman13 Did you read the AZ law? No. It's 16 pgs & is easy to comprehend like Dr. Seuss. Go read it. It specifically goes AGAINST racial profiling and is NOT racist at all including against Hispanics.
Go read the AZ law and don't give me race-baiting garbage. All it does is state that a cop asks for proof of citizenship upon arrest for ANOTHER crime. CA & the fed gov have the same laws, but don't enforce them. This isn't about race, but protecting our borders. No more Left-wing lies.
Actually I did read the law. It reads very closely to the anti-immigration law they tried to pass here in California some years back. It opens the judicial door for cops to racially profile people. you may be defending it based on its literal wording, but anyone with half a brain knows that it invites police to essentially act as INS agents or one more reason to profile would be suspects. It's a racial profiling bill straight up. It serves no other political purpose.
@scbluesman13 No. It does NOT open the door for cops to racially profile people. IN fact it specifically FORBIDS racial profiling in the law, clearly and openly and prevents any loopholes as such. Anyone who can read Dr. Seuss can see that. You are reading into the law based upon your own prejudices. You are on an endless quest for racism and will seek out racism in ANYTHING possible. Here, let me help you: Pluto has been demoted from planet to Khyber Belt object. Racist.
I'm not on an endless quest for racism, and in fact I wish it weren't an issue. I'm on an endless quest to call out bad politics like AZs governor pushing this bill that is so bad in its design, it will cause more problems than it attempts to solve. It's fundamentally flawed in that it forces state law enforcement to act as though they were federal INS agents. It also adds layers of bureaucracy to an already tense trust relationship between law enforcement and hispanic residents.
@scbluesman13 The police won't act like INS agents, as they aren't proactively looking for illegal immigrants. They are only ask for proof of citizenship AFTER being stopped. Layers of bureaucracy? So new agencies are now set up? Sorry, but that isn't in the law either. The truth is the law doesn't do much except what I stated. A fuss is being made over little and that is further proof how & why you are on an endless quest for racism w/o any self-imposed limitations.
@scbluesman13 I can provide numerous examples of playing the race card and I'll give one to you. Here's 1: A relative worked as an administrator at a school. She was to assist kids in getting onto & off the bus. 1 day a Black woman parked her car at the bus stop. My relative asked her to move her car. Not only did she NOT move her car, but she asked my relative of racism for doing so. Caucasians put up w/ crap like that every day. Do you hear about that in media? No.
That sounds to me like a black woman that was being particularly ornary. Is she a racist? no. Is she being stupid? Yeah. We can trade anecdotal evidence back and forth all day. It won't contribute to the larger issue, which is that the democratic party of today does not subscribe to racism or bigotry as a philosphy or a practice.
You also seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be racist. Playing the race card is like throwing a bible up and saying "god made me do it". It's an ignorant thing to do, but it's not racist. Racism is a cultural and institutional systemic method of oppressing one race group by another because they believe that that group is inherently inferior due to the color of their skin or their ethnicity/background.
@scbluesman13 Racism is a belief that members of your racial group are superior to members of other racial groups. It is personal as a belief that may be implemented upon culture or institutions, but it also may not be. & Yes, you are on an endless quest for racism. That's why you accused the AZ law of engaging in racial profiling despite that it outright forbids it. Seriously what limits do you have? Regarding tensions between law enforcement & Latinos, I put them blame on Left-wing lies.
@scbluesman13 The AZ law is 16 pgs and easy to read and comprehend. Go read it. All that it does is that if a person is caught committing another crime, then the police have to ask that person for proof of legal citizenship. CA and the Fed gov have these laws on the books already. Racial profiling is specifically prohibited. READ THE LAW.
There is no racism here; only Left-wing race-baiting and lies.
@scbluesman13 Good. let them push real anti-ILLEGAL immigration legislation. That isn't racism. That is pushing for securing our borders. All that the law does is a cop may stop someone for another crime and then ask for proof of legal residence or citizenship. That's it.
@scbluesman13 SB 1070 does exactly what I have described: 1)If a person is committing a crime or seems to be, then the police have the right to stop that person and THEN & ONLY THEN ask for proof of citizenship. 2)Forbids racial profiling outright clearly and openly. No loopholes. 3)It hands illegals to federal authority. READ THE LAW. Yes, I'm dubious that you read it. I did. AZ state law can't secure the border as it is a federal responsibility, but its action pressures the fed gov to do so.
@scbluesman13 I saw the first 10 secs and decided that the video was a load of BS w/ a Left-wing bias. I don't care about the KKK or Neo-Nazis. They are pathetic jokes.
Historical perspective is required here: The modern democratic party is nothing like the democratic party pre & during WW2. Most of these KKK members and their affiliates who were democrats were commonly referred to as "dixiecrats". Their loathing of the republican party vestige primarily due to Abraham Lincoln being a republican who pushed to abolish slavery. The monikers democrat and republican are almost totally flipped today, but you still have some biblebelt dems who are conservative.
@scbluesman13 & your evidence that Repubs are now racist is? Oh yeah, NONE. The Dixiecrats mostly went into idiotic independent parties or stayed with the Democrats. It's another BS lie that they went to the Repubs.
You can't honestly believe that. Go to any biblebelt state or place where the confederate flag is promoted and ask them who they voted for in 08. I guarantee you they won't say "obama". Modern day racists are not democrats, or if they are, they are in name only, and will more likely support candidates and politics that support gun control, anti-abortion laws, anti-gay laws, and "traditional family values" laws which are typically the platform wedge issues push by republicans.
@scbluesman13 There are many reasons why someone won't vote for Obama and racism has nothing to do with gun control, anti-abortion, "traditional family values" laws or so-called anti-gay laws(DADT has nothing to do with race, nor does same-sex marriage.) You are making my point for me: injecting race into anything possible and making as much racial consciousness as possible and this is coming 100% from the Left. Thank you.
@scbluesman13 Always Dems/Libs/Lefties bring up race on EVERYTHING possible: health care, taxes, spending, military, anti-abortion, gun control, etc, when race isn't the issue at all here. Seriously, what is NOT about race for you? Demoting Pluto from planet to Khyber belt object maybe? You push race ubiquitously and create as much of a racial consciousness about everything possible and then project that onto your opponents. You are engaging in race-based thinking and racism.
-Health care is an economic issue, not a racial one. Improving care has always been about improving access while trying to lower cost. It's the teabagging idiots who made it about race when they held supposed 'health care rallies' waving bigoted and racially charged signs depicting obama.
Dems will call a racial attack a racial attack, then move on. Calling someone out for being a racist doesn't make you one. It just makes you aware of it. Your point makes no sense at all.
@scbluesman13 Wrong. Jimmy Carter, Keith Olbermann & other Libs/Lefties brought up race regarding health care. Bigoted and racial signs? BS race-baiting. Calling someone a racist for playing the race card does make sense as that race-baiter engages in race-based thinking ad nauseum and as that person is race-conscious, that person is the real racist.
Others who brought up race regarding health care: Jeneane Garafalo(s?) * Rachel Maddow. Health care has NOTHING to do with race, but race got injected by Lefties.
BTW, if you play the race card ad nauseum, then you are race-based in your consciousness and that makes you a racist. So yes, Keith Olbermann, Jimmy Carter and Jeneane Garafalo and other Libs/Lefties are the REAL RACISTS and not the TEA Party people, who invited them to their rallies & show the REAL DIVERSITY of their groups.
There is a HUGE difference between people talking about race relations, and being racist. HUGE. When incidents arise like the ones that occurred during these teabagger rallies they should be talked about, and the people that made racially denigrating remarks should be criticized. You're not a racist for calling people on their racist behavior. You've just got it backwards.
You're a racist when you think someone is inferior or subservient to you because they are a different race.
@scbluesman13 How about these incidents at TEA Party rallies: mC9X5moico4 hMdPTpOyUk4 jLSzbVfpOxg No racism and Black & Latino leaders at these rallies: Wayne Perryman, Henry Jackson among others.
If you engage in race-baiting ad nauseum, then yes, you are a racist(i.e Jeneane Garafalo, Olbermann). You have no proof of TEA Party people engaging in racism. They are all race-baiting LIES and Lefties injecting race into anything and everything possible. You are the one who has it backwards.
Wrong. The only groups that engaged in race baiting are the ones holding signs depicting obama as a monkey, or as an uncle tom, or as some primitive looking african tribesman. There's criticism, then there's racially charged criticism and racebaiting. That's race baiting. Criticizing openly about groups of people that are acting in a racially charged & inflammatory manner and calling for them to stop is not race baiting.
@scbluesman13 Where was Obama depicted as such? I NEVER saw it. Besides there are non-White TEA Party leaders and the official anthem was originally composed by a Black person. That gets ignored DELIBERATELY as you just now demonstrated, because I provided 3 LINKS of non-White TEA Party protesters. The TEA Party people aren't engaging in racism, but in protesting against lunatic policies and Lefties like you are bringing up race ad nauseum and being race-baiters in turn.
TEA Party people have invited Olbermann and others to visit them. Did they get a visit? No, because Lefties are on a deliberate quest to shut their opponents up with the lie that they are racists. They try to call ANYONE who disagree with them by one iota on anything as a racist to shut them up and have no respect for disagreement at all. They bring up racism in anything to shut people up and inject race into anything to do so. Truth doesn't matter to them. Race does.
teabaggers have invited all kinds of hosts to talk with them, either to ambush them if they don't agree with their politics or to softball them if they do, a la Rand Paul. It's just like any other political party inviting pundits to come speak. Based on the politics you either know it's going to be a red carpet or an ambush. Don't be stupid.
Lunatic policies: $1.6 trillion deficit, increase taxes amidst either a recession or a precarious recovery via Cap & Trade & other indirect taxation, doomed $800 billion Stimulus package that TEA Party people knew would fail(tried in Japan in 1990's and early 2000's 10X. All Failed. 1930's under FDR = failed.). Take-over of health care when Medicare and Medicaid are both going bankrupt and Medicare has $38 trillion in unpaid liabilities. What does any of this have to do with race? Nothing.
Let's see... under bush we saw a 4.5 trillion dollar increase in our deficit. Where was the outrage then? The congress was republican controlled from 2000 to 2006. Where was the tea party during all this drunken sailor spending?
The deficit spending that conservatives have criticized obama for so far (1.2 tril) has been primarily for economic relief. You didn't want his administration to bail out wall street, banks and GM? Fine... what do you think would have happened if he hadn't?
@scbluesman13 People complained about Bush & Repubs overspending. Under Obama it has gotten far worse. No I don't think that the gov should bail out Wall st, banks & GM. Gov bails them out & they become welfare dependents. Private investors should and they can hold them accountable directly instead. The stimulus package of Obama has been a failure and was doomed to fail. Keynesian policies failed under FDR, Nixon & in Japan in the 1990's & 2000's. Educate yourself & don't play the race card.
You never saw it, eh? you must have been holding your hands over your eyes the whole time. So what if the anthem was composed by a black person. What does that have to do with anything?
The Tea party needs to clean up their image if they don't want to be criticized for promoting racially slurring slogans or legislation (AZ SB 1070). If you TRULY believe that people of all colors and backgrounds are equal, then that should be part of your platform message... loudly.
@scbluesman13 "So what if the anthem was composed by a Black person". Exactly, you don't care that Blacks play a profound role in the TEA Party, so you turn away from the truth. This has nothing to do with racism and ultimately you know it, but won't acknowledge it. Wayne Perryman, Kevin Jackson, Lloyd Marcus are just a few of the Black leaders of the TEA Party. The AZ Law has nothing to do with race. It's 16 pgs & reads like Dr. Suess. Go read it.
The tea party wants to claim a return to the principles of the founding fathers. Perhaps you might want to re-educate yourself and your TP friends with exactly what those principles are, since the ones I hear TP people talking about in the media are not even close to correct. If you want some help figuring out what those are just go to your local community college and talk to some history majors there, I'm sure they could help enlighten you.
@racc1024 David Duke originally ran as a Democrat and when he ran as a Republican contemporary President Bush '41 and other Republicans urged people NOT to vote for him. No one stated that Democrats all oppose Civil Rights, but their track record is lacking as they also were aligned with the KKK tradiitonally and often opposed civil rights as in 1957, 1960 and indeed 4 former KKK Senators against the act of 1964 were all Democrats.
The next part of the story is important. Once Black was on the court, he became one of the strongest voices for civil rights in the history of this country.
It is a LOT less important than the first part. A racist trying to make amends for his vile past! The point of this video is that NOBODY knows about the FIRST part. Deathbed conversions don't impress this proud black man. I will get the truth out about these racist, because blacks need to know the entire truth. They can discern the rest for themselves.
I agree that the first part of the story is important and should be told. I also agree that "deathbed conversions" aren't enough.
But Black voted for desegregation, including following up by punishing states that went-slow on desegregation. He voted against discrimination in restaurants in hotels, extending the desegregation past the government to private establishments that discriminated. That's making a huge positive practical impact against structural racism.
The biggest voice against segregation--a Wilson "Progressive" agenda item--was Everett Dirksen. I would credit him much more than I would credit Black. Black spent geometrically more years being the bane of black existence, so a few years trying to "get right with God," will not get him credit with me. On balance, he was a cross-burning, KKK racist of the highest order, like FDR, LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and most of the Democrats I know.
Certainly! I feel that the Democrats have gotten a pass on racism, so I will set the record straight. People can decide for themselves. Consider what the lamestream media is doing, and think of me as correcting the record!
George Wallace apologized in a black church too.. anyone saying Wallace turned out to be a good guy?
We all have consciences, and most of us try to make amends when we get older. But Roosevelt picked Black BECAUSE he was a KLANSMAN!! BECAUSE!!!! FDR was not a nice guy, and was NOT on the side of black people. History teaches us what's happening NOW and it should not be revised the way they've made FDR out to be the friend of black people.
Not just history... the fundamental dynamics of a republic and a democracy.
Democracy allows a vote to decide whether to rob you, murder you, enslave you or malign you. (Jesus was murdered by a democratic process.)
Republicanism sets rules that forbid such atrocities.
Democracy is a scam like three card monty. You think you are going to get something, but you end up losing because the dealer controls the cards. (Majority rule)
Republicanism forbids playing the scam altogether. (Rule of Law)
They just want minorities to be dependent on Government. The same way they wanted slaves to be dependent on their masters. It is the democratic form of government that is necessary to hold the minority under subjection. The republican form of government guarantees equality.
President Obama called his grandmother a typical white person.
President Obama sat in the Church of a black supremecist for 30 years.
President Obama appointed a woman to the supreme court whom believes one race can interpret the law better than another.
Where were the liberals speaking against this vile language? They weren't! They believe in racism as long it is against white people & they launch assaults of racial attacks on conservative minorities & women.
Republicans DO NOT hate minorities. I'm a minority myself and what republicans want is economic freedom for minorities. Democrats haven't done a damn thing for minorities in a practical sense, they just spew race/ethnic/class victim rhetoric and ideological tirades, and never provide solutions for the real issues.
Liberal Democrats want to keep minorities slaves, just gov't subsided slaves instead of privately owned slaves
Democrats haven't done a damn thing for minorities??? Really???!!!
Would you like to go back to pre-civil rights times? From Wikipedia: The bill was introduced by President John F Kennedy in his civil rights speech of June 11, 1963,[1] in which he asked for legislation "giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public—hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments," as well as "greater protection for the right to vote."
The bill was sent to the House of Representatives, and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Emmanuel Celler, a DEMOCRAT from New York. After on the bill, Celler's committee greatly strengthened the act, adding provisions to ban racial discrimination in employment, providing greater protection to black voters, eliminating segregation in all publicly owned facilities (not just schools), and strengthening the anti-segregation clauses regarding public facilities like lunch counters
They also added authorization for the Attorney General to file lawsuits to protect individuals against the deprivation of any rights secured by the Constitution or U.S. law. In essence, this was the controversial "Title III" that had been removed from the 1957 and 1960 Acts. Civil rights organizations pressed hard for this provision because it could be used to protect peaceful protesters and black voters from police brutality and suppression of free speech rights. Democrats never did anything???
Kennedy asked King not to march in 1963, and didn't want to ask Congress for the CRA bill. It was forced on him by Bull Connor (democrat) firehoses and by the murder of Medgar Evers (by democrats). Kennedy voted NO on the Eisenhower civil rights bill in 1957. 80% of congressional repubs voted yes, only 60% of dems did. LBJ called Dr. King "that goddamned nigger preacher" in 1967.
And King never switched parties, NEVER. no record of it. If there was, we'd have seen it by now.
@theblacksphere01 you should learn to spell if you want to make an impacting viewpoint or comment. also, try to stray from ignorance you close minded fool.
@bajalocom It was racist Republicans and libertarians that hated Justice Thomas and didn't think he should be nominated in 1991, right? Sure . . . . Progressives think that Blacks and to stupid to get into college or get jobs by themselves.
@theblacksphere01: So, I'm guessing that you are completely ignorant of the fact that Democrats were the conservative party prior to, during, and for a number of years after the Civil War!??
@SpookeyR Don't try to mix Dem v Repub with Conser v Lib. The FACT is that the DEMS were and ARE racists, as are you. You voted for Obama because he was black, you racist swine! LOL
@theblacksphere01: Don't try to mix something that has already been mixed, hmm?! It really sounds like you are ignoring reality, and it also sounds like you are using a 2+2=5 defense....
The FACT is... Democrats today are much LESS racist, by and large, than Republicans! And Democrats of around 200 to around 70 years ago were much more racist than Republicans bc, Democrats of so long ago were the conservative party in the United States at the time!
@SpookeyR That logic of yours might work with you Libtards, but not here. The Dems are racist and I prove it daily. You close your eyes to the obvious, because you've been TRAINED to do so. You decry people like me who want black SUCCESSES, while you focus on enabling victims and ignoring the victimizers. You come back, when you grow a brain!
@theblacksphere01 there are more racist republicans than democrats. im a republican, but i can accept that. as soon as the south turned red, all the racism switched to the republicans.
@bajalocom & your proof that Repubs hate minorities is what? & your proof that they want every Latino & Black dead is what?
Michael Steele was ELECTED as party chairman.
'
The Democrats bring up race ad nauseum on EVERYTHING, not the Repubs. Seriously: spending, taxation, health care, tort reform, education, FannieMae, FreddieMac, etc. Is there something that you don't see as applicable to race? Pluto demoted as a Khyber Belt object from a planet maybe?
@Aegius: Micheal Steele was elected party chairman bc he is black! Barack Obama was elected President of the United States and the Grab Our Penises Party didn't want to appear racist & bigoted; that's why they gave him the job!!
Democrats were the conservative party way back prior to, during, and for a number of decades after the Civil War. This is a troll video! And you are a politically and historically ignorant twat, pining away on YT...
@SpookeyR I fully respect that Obama is my president. That is a fact. Period. End. Michael Steele has proven incompetent as a leader of the GOP with wasting large sums of money. The other candidate for GOP chairman was also Black, so race really didn't matter in that contest. Frankly you are the racist for making a fuss over Michael Steel's race and stating that his qualifications don't matter, but only his race.
@Aegius: Well, then you aren't a Rushtard; you aren't someone who gleefully bitches & moans that Obama will fail and that America will fail bc of Obama. Congratulations!
Micheal Steele has proven to be a horses ass when it comes to running the Republican Party, this is true & this was primarily evident when he played lapdog to Rush Limbaugh; he has also proven himself to be holding the party line! ...just as inept, immoral, and incompetent as every other....(I believe the term is..) RePIGlican!
I am not making a fuss over Micheal Steeles race! I am merely stating a fact that he only got the job bc the other RePIGlicans knew that in giving him the job that it would be impossible for the (politically, historically, socially, etc.) ignorant to break free from the chains that they revere, i.e. theblacksphere01!
@SpookeyR Yes, you are making a fuss over Steel's race, by stating that he only got the job due to his race rather than to any qualifications. Frankly given your obsession with race, you are a RACIST. Yes, you are.
I have no comment on Rush Limbaugh. Steele is incompetent with his ridiculous and irresponsible spending. Repubs are sending money to candidates directly rather than to the GOP due to disgust with Steele.
The Democrats deny his manhood; deny, or dwarf to insignificance, the wrong of his bondage; so far as possible, crush all sympathy for him, and cultivate and excite hatred and disgust against him; compliment themselves as Union-savers for doing so; and call the indefinite outspreading of his bondage "a sacred right of self-government."
Abrahem Lincoln said: How differently the respective courses of the Democratic and Republican parties incidentally bear on the question of forming a will-a public sentiment-for colonization, is easy to see. The Republicans inculcate, with whatever of ability they can, that the negro is a man; that his bondage is cruelly wrong, and that the field of his oppression ought not to be enlarged.
I notice you are very conveniently leaving out Lincoln's racism. In his State of the Union addresses as president, he twice called for the deportation of blacks
Lincoln was a bigot who habitually used the N word and liked demeaning "darky" jokes.
They should be equal all right, but not here...Lincoln's segregationist views are simply ignored....
He did some great things, but you want to illuminate the shortcomings of one side without giving the same treatment to the other.
The point of this video was that Democrats were racist in 1870, in 1930, and even now. LBJ bragged to two dem senators on board air force one after the CRA passed that he would have 'them goddam niggers votin' democrat for the next 200 years'.
It was a cynical powergrab from a longtime pro segregationist, LBJ, who saw public sentiment moving and decided to move with it and make it benefit the Dem party.
cynical politics, not a real concern for black people. Democrats do this TODAY.
How disgusting it is to hear Democrats claim any civil rights history while they murder more than a million children every year and call it a right. Of course they were the same way about slavery. Exactly the same.
Republicans own every piece of civil rights legislation. Democrats usually opposed the amendments violently, and overturned the acts of Congress. There never was a movement of racists to the republican party. The principals of republicanism are intrinsically anti racist.
Not all Democrats are racist, but being democratic means having control over the minority. Democrats are corrupt because the democratic process is unfair to the minority. Democracy is only acceptable at the state level provided it does not violate the Bill of Rights and the amendments. Democrats didn't like the 13th, 14th or 15th amendments or the civil rights acts that enforced them. Dems overturned all 19 civil rights acts passed by republicans from 1866 to 1875.
MLK Sr was a Republican. If MLK Jr. ever was, he sure didn't talk like one. King and the SCLC called on the government to invest in rebuilding America's cities. He felt that Congress had shown "hostility to the poor" by spending "military funds with alacrity and generosity". He contrasted this with the situation faced by poor Americans, claiming that Congress had merely provided "poverty funds with miserliness. That's a Democrat or at least it is today.Now Republicans often try to smear MLK Jr.
It seems no one knows even the basics of US History here.
Yes, the Democratic Party WAS extremely racist in up until the 1960's. Almost all of the South were "Southern Dems". Then LBJ passed Civil Rights, and within four years the south had turned from blue to red, with almost all of the racists ditching the Democratic Party for the GOP.
Robert Byrd was one exception... and he renounced his former ways.
No that is the revisionist history of the Dems. And if you are so smart on this then name me 10 racist Dems who became Republicans.? Good luck with that! The DEMS are the RACISTS...then and now!
Correct. It is not that Democrats are racist. But racists are Democrats. A bigot of any type hates the form of government that follows law rather than public sentiment. Democracy follows public sentiment, even racist sentiment. That's why we call them 'Democrat'. It is pejorative.
The form of government that follows law is called a republic. That's why they call us republicans. Where there is no law, there is no liberty. Our republic is based on God's law. God's law makes everyone equal & safe.
One racist Democrat was segregationist senator Strom Thurmond. After he became a republican, he began to integrate. He was the first southern senator to hire black people to his cabinet. Dems hate him for that, they lie about his move from Dixiecrat to republican. He was Democrat until 1948. He started the Dixiecrats because Truman was going to put civil rights on the Dem platform. After the election, he went back to the democrat party for another 16 years. Thurmond became republican in 1964.
The main plank of the republican platform is civil rights. It always has been. Johnson didn't put civil rights or anything else on any platform. He had little to do with civil rights other than signing the 1964 bill. The bill was passed by republicans in Congress. Civil rights are not part of the Democrat platform to this day.
When President Johnson signed Civil Rights legislation, he commented that: "Well, there goes the South." He meant, of course, that now the South would become Republican as they now saw the Democrats as the party standing up for the blacks. Actually, as a percentage, the Dems opposed civil rights more so than the Republicans.
Following the Civil Rights legislation, the South temporarily lost some of its legislative power as its voters and politicians switched inexorably to the Republican party.
Right Wikipedia: (Civil Rights Act of 1964). The article said: The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964. The "Southern Bloc" of 18 southern Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. Said Russell: "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states."
why not quote Byrd, since he's the one who filibustered the CRA? Why quote the one repub out of a 'bloc' made up of Democrats?
Or why not quote Howard Smith, the senator who tried to sit on the bill in committee so no vote would take place? He was dem also, never became repub. Where are the evil repub racists who opposed this bill? WHO SWITCHED PARTIES AFTER THIS VOTE?
One guy. Thurmond. But all other racist dems who opposed this bill REMAINED DEMS.
This is a crap definition of conservatism. It isn't 'defend traditions no matter what they are'. It's 'defend values and don't discard them just because they're not new'. IMHO, conservatives are now what 'liberals' were in the 20th century, genuine reformers who want to keep what's good, get rid of what's bad and replace it with good. THAT is conservatism. modern day libs are 'progressives' who want to continue down the leftward road, diminishing 'men' in favor of 'man', removing rights.
This, of course, has made the Republican party even more conservative and racist than it had ever been following the death of Reconstruction. So the division between the two parties grew.
There is no such thing as republican racism. Bigots of all sorts hate a Republic. They rely on the mob rule mentality of those who are democratic to accommodate their exploitative schemes.
Exactly. It was Conservatives that tried to block civil rights. When they lost, they became bitter and flocked to the Republican party where the remain to this day. Johnson said it right.
This is completely misleading. Hugo Black, on the court, ruled against Japanese-American internment and was leading the charge against segregation in the Brown v. Board decision.
labour12312 1 month ago
speak the truth my man, ur not alone in the battle
dzheath 2 months ago
Silly racist democrats
ThePelicans44 6 months ago
So now all democrats are racist! Wait... that doesn't sound right, because that's a completely moronic conclusion to come to.
Goldleader727 6 months ago
"His K-K-Klient!"
Genious line!
hooplablahblahblah 6 months ago
@visini14 The narrator in the video states that Black was appointed to the Supreme Court in the 1940s (1:10). That is factually incorrect. He was appointed in 1937.
politicalpoopchute 6 months ago
And unlike FDR's Republican cousin Teddy, neither Hugo nor FDR believed in the Aryan myth later made famous by Hitler. Neither Hugo nor FDR were hardcore white supremacists like Teddy and his pals Henry Cabot Lodge and others. Those folks were generally in the Ivy League/Republican crowd at the time. Fact of the matter is, most politicians in American history have been racist. Bigoted white men ran this country for most of its first 200 years. Like you said, deal with it.
politicalpoopchute 7 months ago
Yeah, Hugo was a KKK member and the stuff about him getting off the priest murderer are true. So are a lot of the salient points made by the video's critics in the comments. Black was hugely influential in the groundbreaking Warren court, which cemented the gains fo the civil rights movement in law... One factual error: Black was appointed to the court in the 1930s (1937 to be exact). Not the 1940s.
politicalpoopchute 7 months ago
@politicalpoopchute FDR was president during the 1930s and 40s.
visini14 7 months ago
Tired of people saying that Republicans and Democrats "switched" parties. The Southern Democrats did leave the Democrat party and joined the Republican, but the same old Republicans were still there. Yes, the Republicans who fought for civil rights. That is the reason why the Republican Party was created. The Southern Democrats became Republican because of FDR. They thought the Democrat party was turning Socialist...they were correct.
thundersnake1 9 months ago
Fuck party lines- politics shouldn't be based on names, but policies. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, whatever- they all have good policies and bad. This is a harmful video that furthers the fundamental problems in today's politics.
lupischuckle 1 year ago
justice black joined the kkk because it was impossible to get anywhere in the south without it. it's the same reason a bunch of people from the ussr joined the communist party. of course, this is still a pretty messed up thing to do, but he didn't participate in any cross burnings, protests, etc. and he was one of the leading proponents of brown v. board.
Fleishman322 1 year ago
haha this clip is so biased ... i'll admit i would fall for it if i was an idiot but alas ive opened a book or two in my day sooo....I laugh :)
adormydero 1 year ago
Comment removed
adormydero 1 year ago
You obviously don't know anything about history.
69lukekelly69 1 year ago
When LBJ kicked the KKK out of the Democrat party, the Democrat party became the red headed step child of American politics. The Republicans are coming back again this fall, because white working people hate Obama and every other uppity spook in this country.
ebonics4everyone 1 year ago
Well, I see that some of you are drinking the haterade. News flash everyone, America is a racist country. We are a "superpower" because we built our nation off the backs of free (slave) labor. I guarantee ALL those crazy-ass honkys from the early 1900s were racist. Let's take away Mr Black's record on the Sup.Court and I'll give you a wink & a smile whilst you pass me on your way to the back of the bus.
csw3604 1 year ago
Justice Black was my Great Uncle. He spent 34 years on the Supreme Court fighting for the rights of idiots like you to express thoughts and ideas freely. He is proof that people can change for the better. Sounds like you want racists to remain bigoted so you have something to whine about.
csw3604 1 year ago
@csw3604, Justice Black was one of the great ones. He is critiqued by cons and libs, which probably means he did something right. His dissent in the Griswold decision is inspired. His textualist approach to the C was far better than Scalia's "originalism."
This thing about Dems being the racists is silly. People, you do realize these old Dems later became Republicans, right? Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, etc. . . .
itpduder 1 year ago
@itpduder Yes, and let's not forget Federal Power Comm. vs Tuscarora Tribe, Black was the lone dissent and wrote "Great nations, like great men, should keep their word". Absolute incredible Sup. Ct. case. Research it for some enlightenment everyone.
csw3604 1 year ago
@csw3604, I took a year of conlaw but never read that case (that I remember; we read a LOT of case law). Some cases stick out. Griswold, Atlanta Motel, Brown, Casey, etc. That quote sounds like Black. I will check it out. Thanks for the ref!
BTW, I don't have the link, but Lexis has a series of interviews with Black. It's pretty insightful stuff.
itpduder 1 year ago
Thanks for the rant, Brother Darkness, but this isn't even a fair fight. Tell me something interesting. Your future readers can judge for themselves
sluggoII 1 year ago
Actually, I'm a liberterian. That means I probably disagree with you exactly 50% of the time. But I believe in people like Hugo Black who have the guts to write the Brown v. Board of Education opinion and later have to wear a bullet proof vest when returning home to Alabama. Was it to protect himself against people like you?...or was it to protect himself against people who hate you? Does Hugo Black still sound like a racist? Keep reading. There's more. The truth shall set you free...
sluggoII 1 year ago
@sluggoII Yes, he does. Like I said, just because he made amends doesn't negate his prior actions. Further, his ilk are still cross-burning card-carrying racist. The truth shall set you free. When the Dems own up to their lyin' thievin' ways, then I will cut them some slack. Until then, no quarter! Who next, FDR, LBJ, Kennedy, Carter...all racist pukes, who have gotten a pass!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago 2
@theblacksphere01
Don't think all Libertarians think that way. I consider myself a pretty hardcore libertarian and totally agree with this video. Hugo Black was a piece of shit, no doubt about it.
AntonBatey 1 year ago
@Slugoll
Could not agree more. Surprised that people such as theblacksphere01 would take the time to travel back in it to call someone a racist.
You must be from the Chappelle's Show, Time Haters.
kennedy4uofa 1 year ago
@theblacksphere01
And I suppose that the Republicans are better?
arvidsky 1 year ago
@theblacksphere01 Fuck off! JFK, and FDR were great, you bastard, stop pulling these lies out of your ass, cocksucker!
catclaw357 1 year ago
@theblacksphere01 @sluggoll
Being libertarian myself, I find the idea that we "disagree with [him] 50% of the time" preposterous. Libertarians have share more with the modern Republicans than the Democrats. I grant 40% perhaps, but 50% seriously?
I haven't seen anything wrong from theblacksphere01. Hugo Black was a racist. His 1st amendment rulings could have been made by any person with a brain, it wasn't that hard to figure out. It's like complimenting someone for cooking a pop tart.
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
@theblacksphere01
Dems racist past? U mean racist present dont u?
Every person who filibustered a civ rights bill was a Dem. Dems filibustered the CivR act o 1957, 1960, 1963 (rewritten in 1 night to "create" 1964 CivR bill)
When THEIR filibuster of THAT failed & THEIR poll tax strategies failed (youtube: LBJ N word), they were toast. What to do?
1964 (note the very year of THEIR CR LOSS) they created the WELFARE (plantation) STATE. Same year.
Black illigitimacy went from 20% ('63) to 80%
mredstriumph 6 months ago
@theblacksphere01 Your videos deserve more recognition.
DoctorSargeMD 3 months ago
@sluggoII No libertarian would defend coercion. Black defended it in our courts. He defended Klansmen.
alphecca2539 1 year ago
@sluggoII
SluggoII,
I'm a Liberal which means I will probably disagree with 50% of what you are saying,but I agree with you regarding Hugo Black. I'm an African American Female who has studied law and Justice Black was the topic of one of my Masters Thesis'. While Hugo Black Was a Klansman, he joined the Klan for reasons that had nothing to do with race. I suggest reading Steve Suitts Book "Hugo Black of Alabama" for those who want a fair and balanced view of Justice Black.
Stirnatty 1 year ago
@Stirnatty :-) Touche. Glad to hear from you. I hope some of the others who read these comments can get past simplistic labels, and take a closer look at the very people who helped secure their civil rights...like Justice Hugo Black.
sluggoII 1 year ago
Hugo Black: "Why did they write the Bill of Rights? Practically all of them make it more difficult to convict people of crime. What about guaranteeing a man a right to a lawyer? Of course that makes it more difficult to convict him. What about saying he shall not be compelled to be a witness against himself? That makes it more difficult to convict him. What about no unreasonable search or seizure shall be made? That makes it more difficult. They were written to make it more difficult!"
sluggoII 1 year ago
How sad you don't realize that Hugo Black did more than any other Supreme Court Justice to advance 1st Amendment rights. Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Segregation in public schools is unconstitutional. Griffin vs. Prince Edward County (1964): Local schools must re-open and desegregate. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963): Indigent defendants have a right to a lawyer. Miranda v. Arizona (1966): No coerced confessions. Defendants must be advised of their constitutional rights. -- Study up pal.
sluggoII 1 year ago
@sluggoII I know exactly what that racist did in later life. Like most Democrats, they finally see the light, then try to correct all their wrongs. You should be asking yourself how many black people he killed, watched get killed or violated, before he decided to see black folks as human. I won't let you LibTURDs get away with deathbed confessions!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago 4
The remark I made was unfounded. If nothing else, what I have learned as a history major, is that information on various subject matters are opened up to interpretations, and discussions. And therefore, I honor your opinions. Have a good day.
wgaines94115 1 year ago
I AM BLACK and AT HARVARD earning my Ph.D. and a Virginia Man! My brother!
wgaines94115 1 year ago
@wgaines94115 Wow, NOW I'm impressed! Now your comments all make sense! Why didn't you say that in the FIRST place, because had I known you were from Harvard working on your PhD, I would have known that you were right and I was wrong. I mean, Harvard. I feel so stupid now. Silly me basing my analysis on study of history and observational logic. By the way, I have Harvard toilet paper in all my bathrooms.
theblacksphere01 1 year ago 5
As a future historian, if you are going to post the limitations about a man's character (Hugo Black), you may what to at least included the positive decisions he made regarding rights for minorities during his tenure on the Supreme Court. The information provided here only distorts. May I suggest that you read about Black's accomplishments on the Supreme Court, and perhaps you can subscribe to the fact that we all make mistakes, but we can also grown from them.
wgaines94115 1 year ago
@wgaines94115 I'll do that, when you LibTURDs acknowledge your pathetic history of Civil Rights. Until then, expect nothing from me but kicks to the crotch and punches to the face! I further suggest that you change your continued evil ways, and stop meddling in the black community. If you are a black DemoRAT racist, then stop race baiting!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
When Democrat Harry Truman integrated the military, racist southern democrats separated themselves from the Democratic party by calling themselves "Dixie-Crats". Then Democrat Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights, and Civil Rights act in the 1960s and that was the last straw. Racist democrats left the democratic party in droves to the Republican party, lured by the Republicans "Southern Strategy", basically telling racists that their brand of hate is OK in the GOP. GOP:The racist party.
dLimboStick 1 year ago
@dLimboStick First of all LimpStick, LBJ was a racist! Next, NAME FIVE DIXIECRATS who moved in this mass migration! Do you research anything for yourself, or just use HuffPo for talking points?!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
@theblacksphere01 Here's a little advice. Calling people names actually hurts your argument, it doesn't help it. OK 5 dixiecrats that jumped ship...and this is off the top of my head....Of course everyone knows Strom Thurmond, then there's Jesse Helms, David Duke, Trent Lott, Richard Shelby.
dLimboStick 1 year ago
@dLimboStick So David Duke was part of the Dixiecrats of the 50s? Trent Lott has been a Republican from the beginning, something HuffPo didn't put in those talking points. So you still have two more to go. Guess what? You won't find them, and even if you did, your problem is convincing people that FIVE (you only have three) Republicans who switched could create party you claim the Republicans to be. How about all the Pedophile Democrats that are in office, are you blaming homosexuality on them?
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
@theblacksphere01
This discussion is fruitless. You keep changing the conversation to fit your world view. That's fine. You have a lot of anger, brother...and that. to me, explains why you're attracted to the GOP. They thrive on it. It's Karl Rove's bread n butter. Rather than bringing Americans together to progress, they find wedge issues that make peoples blood boil, so they can divide them and build new coalitions of anger filled voters. Sorry you're angry. Have a nice day. :)
dLimboStick 1 year ago
@dLimboStick I LOVE it when the FACTS chase you monkeys off! Blame it on my anger if that makes you feel better, but the people reading this thread know that you simply got your ass handed to you. Yet another racist poverty-pimp delusion Liberal running from the truth! Good riddance! LOL
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
@kagerone I was referring to the inappropriate usage of the charge of racism. It is done way way way too often.
Aegius 1 year ago
good job on this vid!
BeantownJim 1 year ago
Wanna see some modern day racists? Here they are. And they're in Arizona right now helping to push for anti-immigrant, anti-hispanic legislation. They are not democrats. They're the "real" socialists within our borders. Why isn't the tea party directing their anti-socialist rhetoric at these folks? I wonder....
watch?v=ebnWnmOnWow
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 Did you read the AZ law? No. It's 16 pgs & is easy to comprehend like Dr. Seuss. Go read it. It specifically goes AGAINST racial profiling and is NOT racist at all including against Hispanics.
Go read the AZ law and don't give me race-baiting garbage. All it does is state that a cop asks for proof of citizenship upon arrest for ANOTHER crime. CA & the fed gov have the same laws, but don't enforce them. This isn't about race, but protecting our borders. No more Left-wing lies.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
Actually I did read the law. It reads very closely to the anti-immigration law they tried to pass here in California some years back. It opens the judicial door for cops to racially profile people. you may be defending it based on its literal wording, but anyone with half a brain knows that it invites police to essentially act as INS agents or one more reason to profile would be suspects. It's a racial profiling bill straight up. It serves no other political purpose.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 No. It does NOT open the door for cops to racially profile people. IN fact it specifically FORBIDS racial profiling in the law, clearly and openly and prevents any loopholes as such. Anyone who can read Dr. Seuss can see that. You are reading into the law based upon your own prejudices. You are on an endless quest for racism and will seek out racism in ANYTHING possible. Here, let me help you: Pluto has been demoted from planet to Khyber Belt object. Racist.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
I'm not on an endless quest for racism, and in fact I wish it weren't an issue. I'm on an endless quest to call out bad politics like AZs governor pushing this bill that is so bad in its design, it will cause more problems than it attempts to solve. It's fundamentally flawed in that it forces state law enforcement to act as though they were federal INS agents. It also adds layers of bureaucracy to an already tense trust relationship between law enforcement and hispanic residents.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 The police won't act like INS agents, as they aren't proactively looking for illegal immigrants. They are only ask for proof of citizenship AFTER being stopped. Layers of bureaucracy? So new agencies are now set up? Sorry, but that isn't in the law either. The truth is the law doesn't do much except what I stated. A fuss is being made over little and that is further proof how & why you are on an endless quest for racism w/o any self-imposed limitations.
Aegius 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 I can provide numerous examples of playing the race card and I'll give one to you. Here's 1: A relative worked as an administrator at a school. She was to assist kids in getting onto & off the bus. 1 day a Black woman parked her car at the bus stop. My relative asked her to move her car. Not only did she NOT move her car, but she asked my relative of racism for doing so. Caucasians put up w/ crap like that every day. Do you hear about that in media? No.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
That sounds to me like a black woman that was being particularly ornary. Is she a racist? no. Is she being stupid? Yeah. We can trade anecdotal evidence back and forth all day. It won't contribute to the larger issue, which is that the democratic party of today does not subscribe to racism or bigotry as a philosphy or a practice.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@Aegius
You also seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be racist. Playing the race card is like throwing a bible up and saying "god made me do it". It's an ignorant thing to do, but it's not racist. Racism is a cultural and institutional systemic method of oppressing one race group by another because they believe that that group is inherently inferior due to the color of their skin or their ethnicity/background.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 Racism is a belief that members of your racial group are superior to members of other racial groups. It is personal as a belief that may be implemented upon culture or institutions, but it also may not be. & Yes, you are on an endless quest for racism. That's why you accused the AZ law of engaging in racial profiling despite that it outright forbids it. Seriously what limits do you have? Regarding tensions between law enforcement & Latinos, I put them blame on Left-wing lies.
Aegius 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 The AZ law is 16 pgs and easy to read and comprehend. Go read it. All that it does is that if a person is caught committing another crime, then the police have to ask that person for proof of legal citizenship. CA and the Fed gov have these laws on the books already. Racial profiling is specifically prohibited. READ THE LAW.
There is no racism here; only Left-wing race-baiting and lies.
Aegius 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 Good. let them push real anti-ILLEGAL immigration legislation. That isn't racism. That is pushing for securing our borders. All that the law does is a cop may stop someone for another crime and then ask for proof of legal residence or citizenship. That's it.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
SB 1070 does absolutely nothing to secure the border. Nothing.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 SB 1070 does exactly what I have described: 1)If a person is committing a crime or seems to be, then the police have the right to stop that person and THEN & ONLY THEN ask for proof of citizenship. 2)Forbids racial profiling outright clearly and openly. No loopholes. 3)It hands illegals to federal authority. READ THE LAW. Yes, I'm dubious that you read it. I did. AZ state law can't secure the border as it is a federal responsibility, but its action pressures the fed gov to do so.
Aegius 1 year ago 2
@scbluesman13 I saw the first 10 secs and decided that the video was a load of BS w/ a Left-wing bias. I don't care about the KKK or Neo-Nazis. They are pathetic jokes.
Aegius 1 year ago
Historical perspective is required here: The modern democratic party is nothing like the democratic party pre & during WW2. Most of these KKK members and their affiliates who were democrats were commonly referred to as "dixiecrats". Their loathing of the republican party vestige primarily due to Abraham Lincoln being a republican who pushed to abolish slavery. The monikers democrat and republican are almost totally flipped today, but you still have some biblebelt dems who are conservative.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 LOL! You are delusional! The modern Dem Party is WORSE! You're just too stupid to see it!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 & your evidence that Repubs are now racist is? Oh yeah, NONE. The Dixiecrats mostly went into idiotic independent parties or stayed with the Democrats. It's another BS lie that they went to the Repubs.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
You can't honestly believe that. Go to any biblebelt state or place where the confederate flag is promoted and ask them who they voted for in 08. I guarantee you they won't say "obama". Modern day racists are not democrats, or if they are, they are in name only, and will more likely support candidates and politics that support gun control, anti-abortion laws, anti-gay laws, and "traditional family values" laws which are typically the platform wedge issues push by republicans.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 There are many reasons why someone won't vote for Obama and racism has nothing to do with gun control, anti-abortion, "traditional family values" laws or so-called anti-gay laws(DADT has nothing to do with race, nor does same-sex marriage.) You are making my point for me: injecting race into anything possible and making as much racial consciousness as possible and this is coming 100% from the Left. Thank you.
Aegius 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 Always Dems/Libs/Lefties bring up race on EVERYTHING possible: health care, taxes, spending, military, anti-abortion, gun control, etc, when race isn't the issue at all here. Seriously, what is NOT about race for you? Demoting Pluto from planet to Khyber belt object maybe? You push race ubiquitously and create as much of a racial consciousness about everything possible and then project that onto your opponents. You are engaging in race-based thinking and racism.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
-Health care is an economic issue, not a racial one. Improving care has always been about improving access while trying to lower cost. It's the teabagging idiots who made it about race when they held supposed 'health care rallies' waving bigoted and racially charged signs depicting obama.
Dems will call a racial attack a racial attack, then move on. Calling someone out for being a racist doesn't make you one. It just makes you aware of it. Your point makes no sense at all.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 Wrong. Jimmy Carter, Keith Olbermann & other Libs/Lefties brought up race regarding health care. Bigoted and racial signs? BS race-baiting. Calling someone a racist for playing the race card does make sense as that race-baiter engages in race-based thinking ad nauseum and as that person is race-conscious, that person is the real racist.
Aegius 1 year ago
Others who brought up race regarding health care: Jeneane Garafalo(s?) * Rachel Maddow. Health care has NOTHING to do with race, but race got injected by Lefties.
BTW, if you play the race card ad nauseum, then you are race-based in your consciousness and that makes you a racist. So yes, Keith Olbermann, Jimmy Carter and Jeneane Garafalo and other Libs/Lefties are the REAL RACISTS and not the TEA Party people, who invited them to their rallies & show the REAL DIVERSITY of their groups.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
There is a HUGE difference between people talking about race relations, and being racist. HUGE. When incidents arise like the ones that occurred during these teabagger rallies they should be talked about, and the people that made racially denigrating remarks should be criticized. You're not a racist for calling people on their racist behavior. You've just got it backwards.
You're a racist when you think someone is inferior or subservient to you because they are a different race.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 How about these incidents at TEA Party rallies: mC9X5moico4 hMdPTpOyUk4 jLSzbVfpOxg No racism and Black & Latino leaders at these rallies: Wayne Perryman, Henry Jackson among others.
If you engage in race-baiting ad nauseum, then yes, you are a racist(i.e Jeneane Garafalo, Olbermann). You have no proof of TEA Party people engaging in racism. They are all race-baiting LIES and Lefties injecting race into anything and everything possible. You are the one who has it backwards.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
Wrong. The only groups that engaged in race baiting are the ones holding signs depicting obama as a monkey, or as an uncle tom, or as some primitive looking african tribesman. There's criticism, then there's racially charged criticism and racebaiting. That's race baiting. Criticizing openly about groups of people that are acting in a racially charged & inflammatory manner and calling for them to stop is not race baiting.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 Where was Obama depicted as such? I NEVER saw it. Besides there are non-White TEA Party leaders and the official anthem was originally composed by a Black person. That gets ignored DELIBERATELY as you just now demonstrated, because I provided 3 LINKS of non-White TEA Party protesters. The TEA Party people aren't engaging in racism, but in protesting against lunatic policies and Lefties like you are bringing up race ad nauseum and being race-baiters in turn.
Aegius 1 year ago
TEA Party people have invited Olbermann and others to visit them. Did they get a visit? No, because Lefties are on a deliberate quest to shut their opponents up with the lie that they are racists. They try to call ANYONE who disagree with them by one iota on anything as a racist to shut them up and have no respect for disagreement at all. They bring up racism in anything to shut people up and inject race into anything to do so. Truth doesn't matter to them. Race does.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
teabaggers have invited all kinds of hosts to talk with them, either to ambush them if they don't agree with their politics or to softball them if they do, a la Rand Paul. It's just like any other political party inviting pundits to come speak. Based on the politics you either know it's going to be a red carpet or an ambush. Don't be stupid.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
Lunatic policies: $1.6 trillion deficit, increase taxes amidst either a recession or a precarious recovery via Cap & Trade & other indirect taxation, doomed $800 billion Stimulus package that TEA Party people knew would fail(tried in Japan in 1990's and early 2000's 10X. All Failed. 1930's under FDR = failed.). Take-over of health care when Medicare and Medicaid are both going bankrupt and Medicare has $38 trillion in unpaid liabilities. What does any of this have to do with race? Nothing.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
Let's see... under bush we saw a 4.5 trillion dollar increase in our deficit. Where was the outrage then? The congress was republican controlled from 2000 to 2006. Where was the tea party during all this drunken sailor spending?
The deficit spending that conservatives have criticized obama for so far (1.2 tril) has been primarily for economic relief. You didn't want his administration to bail out wall street, banks and GM? Fine... what do you think would have happened if he hadn't?
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 People complained about Bush & Repubs overspending. Under Obama it has gotten far worse. No I don't think that the gov should bail out Wall st, banks & GM. Gov bails them out & they become welfare dependents. Private investors should and they can hold them accountable directly instead. The stimulus package of Obama has been a failure and was doomed to fail. Keynesian policies failed under FDR, Nixon & in Japan in the 1990's & 2000's. Educate yourself & don't play the race card.
Aegius 1 year ago
More non-White TEA Party people:
PcsnWLLdl70
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
You never saw it, eh? you must have been holding your hands over your eyes the whole time. So what if the anthem was composed by a black person. What does that have to do with anything?
The Tea party needs to clean up their image if they don't want to be criticized for promoting racially slurring slogans or legislation (AZ SB 1070). If you TRULY believe that people of all colors and backgrounds are equal, then that should be part of your platform message... loudly.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
@scbluesman13 "So what if the anthem was composed by a Black person". Exactly, you don't care that Blacks play a profound role in the TEA Party, so you turn away from the truth. This has nothing to do with racism and ultimately you know it, but won't acknowledge it. Wayne Perryman, Kevin Jackson, Lloyd Marcus are just a few of the Black leaders of the TEA Party. The AZ Law has nothing to do with race. It's 16 pgs & reads like Dr. Suess. Go read it.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius
The tea party wants to claim a return to the principles of the founding fathers. Perhaps you might want to re-educate yourself and your TP friends with exactly what those principles are, since the ones I hear TP people talking about in the media are not even close to correct. If you want some help figuring out what those are just go to your local community college and talk to some history majors there, I'm sure they could help enlighten you.
scbluesman13 1 year ago
Who does the voice-over? He is an excellent speaker.
Aegius 1 year ago
You must be a republikkkant traitor....
bajalocom 1 year ago
@bajalocom That might be true, if the kkk were not a DEMOCRAT organization, Dweeb! LOL
conservativesphere 1 year ago
in an interview, Black adressed his envolvment with the klan simply as a political strategy.
mfbonczyk 1 year ago
@mfbonczyk Wow, I wonder how THAT would play today and for a Republican! HUH?! Try again, NeanderthalusPedophilus!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
first of all blacksphere, i don't think you need to worry about people taking you seriously, because they won't
second, are you familiar with david duke?
sure, he started out as a democrat (very unsuccessful in all his elections, i might add)
but when did he get elected to office?
when he ran as a republican! and then ran for the presidency!
its just absurd to say that democrats as a party oppose any form of civil rights or liberties
racc1024 1 year ago
@racc1024 David Duke originally ran as a Democrat and when he ran as a Republican contemporary President Bush '41 and other Republicans urged people NOT to vote for him. No one stated that Democrats all oppose Civil Rights, but their track record is lacking as they also were aligned with the KKK tradiitonally and often opposed civil rights as in 1957, 1960 and indeed 4 former KKK Senators against the act of 1964 were all Democrats.
Aegius 1 year ago
@racc1024 LOL! How many poster children for racism do you DEMwits have? FDR, LBJ, Woodrow Wilson, all your f'ing ICONS!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
The next part of the story is important. Once Black was on the court, he became one of the strongest voices for civil rights in the history of this country.
camipco 2 years ago
It is a LOT less important than the first part. A racist trying to make amends for his vile past! The point of this video is that NOBODY knows about the FIRST part. Deathbed conversions don't impress this proud black man. I will get the truth out about these racist, because blacks need to know the entire truth. They can discern the rest for themselves.
theblacksphere01 2 years ago
I agree that the first part of the story is important and should be told. I also agree that "deathbed conversions" aren't enough.
But Black voted for desegregation, including following up by punishing states that went-slow on desegregation. He voted against discrimination in restaurants in hotels, extending the desegregation past the government to private establishments that discriminated. That's making a huge positive practical impact against structural racism.
camipco 2 years ago
The biggest voice against segregation--a Wilson "Progressive" agenda item--was Everett Dirksen. I would credit him much more than I would credit Black. Black spent geometrically more years being the bane of black existence, so a few years trying to "get right with God," will not get him credit with me. On balance, he was a cross-burning, KKK racist of the highest order, like FDR, LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and most of the Democrats I know.
theblacksphere01 2 years ago
Ah... ok, it seems you have a partisan agenda to push here.
camipco 2 years ago
Certainly! I feel that the Democrats have gotten a pass on racism, so I will set the record straight. People can decide for themselves. Consider what the lamestream media is doing, and think of me as correcting the record!
theblacksphere01 2 years ago
George Wallace apologized in a black church too.. anyone saying Wallace turned out to be a good guy?
We all have consciences, and most of us try to make amends when we get older. But Roosevelt picked Black BECAUSE he was a KLANSMAN!! BECAUSE!!!! FDR was not a nice guy, and was NOT on the side of black people. History teaches us what's happening NOW and it should not be revised the way they've made FDR out to be the friend of black people.
daveperk 1 year ago
Not just history... the fundamental dynamics of a republic and a democracy.
Democracy allows a vote to decide whether to rob you, murder you, enslave you or malign you. (Jesus was murdered by a democratic process.)
Republicanism sets rules that forbid such atrocities.
Democracy is a scam like three card monty. You think you are going to get something, but you end up losing because the dealer controls the cards. (Majority rule)
Republicanism forbids playing the scam altogether. (Rule of Law)
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
They just want minorities to be dependent on Government. The same way they wanted slaves to be dependent on their masters. It is the democratic form of government that is necessary to hold the minority under subjection. The republican form of government guarantees equality.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
President Obama called his grandmother a typical white person.
President Obama sat in the Church of a black supremecist for 30 years.
President Obama appointed a woman to the supreme court whom believes one race can interpret the law better than another.
Where were the liberals speaking against this vile language? They weren't! They believe in racism as long it is against white people & they launch assaults of racial attacks on conservative minorities & women.
danmol78 2 years ago
True but that was then. THIS IS NOW... REPUKKKES HATE MINORITIES and if they get their way they will kill every latino or Black in this country.
bajalocom 2 years ago
Republicans DO NOT hate minorities. I'm a minority myself and what republicans want is economic freedom for minorities. Democrats haven't done a damn thing for minorities in a practical sense, they just spew race/ethnic/class victim rhetoric and ideological tirades, and never provide solutions for the real issues.
Liberal Democrats want to keep minorities slaves, just gov't subsided slaves instead of privately owned slaves
edthewave 2 years ago
Democrats haven't done a damn thing for minorities??? Really???!!!
Would you like to go back to pre-civil rights times? From Wikipedia: The bill was introduced by President John F Kennedy in his civil rights speech of June 11, 1963,[1] in which he asked for legislation "giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public—hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments," as well as "greater protection for the right to vote."
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago
The bill was sent to the House of Representatives, and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Emmanuel Celler, a DEMOCRAT from New York. After on the bill, Celler's committee greatly strengthened the act, adding provisions to ban racial discrimination in employment, providing greater protection to black voters, eliminating segregation in all publicly owned facilities (not just schools), and strengthening the anti-segregation clauses regarding public facilities like lunch counters
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago
They also added authorization for the Attorney General to file lawsuits to protect individuals against the deprivation of any rights secured by the Constitution or U.S. law. In essence, this was the controversial "Title III" that had been removed from the 1957 and 1960 Acts. Civil rights organizations pressed hard for this provision because it could be used to protect peaceful protesters and black voters from police brutality and suppression of free speech rights. Democrats never did anything???
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago
Kennedy asked King not to march in 1963, and didn't want to ask Congress for the CRA bill. It was forced on him by Bull Connor (democrat) firehoses and by the murder of Medgar Evers (by democrats). Kennedy voted NO on the Eisenhower civil rights bill in 1957. 80% of congressional repubs voted yes, only 60% of dems did. LBJ called Dr. King "that goddamned nigger preacher" in 1967.
And King never switched parties, NEVER. no record of it. If there was, we'd have seen it by now.
daveperk 2 years ago
Thurgood Marshall called King a "Rabble Rouser".
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
REPUKKKES HATE MINORITIES ?
Stupid comment. The only thing standing between minorities and exploitation is the republican party.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
You misguided Neanderthal. It's the Dems who hate you, and they have made you stupid enough to believe they don't. Do some esearch!!!
theblacksphere01 2 years ago
@theblacksphere01 you should learn to spell if you want to make an impacting viewpoint or comment. also, try to stray from ignorance you close minded fool.
mfbonczyk 1 year ago
@mfbonczyk O-Tay, tanks por teling me da=t! LOL
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
@bajalocom It was racist Republicans and libertarians that hated Justice Thomas and didn't think he should be nominated in 1991, right? Sure . . . . Progressives think that Blacks and to stupid to get into college or get jobs by themselves.
ZDWmiamicane 1 year ago
@bajalocom How insightful, baffooncom!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago
@theblacksphere01: So, I'm guessing that you are completely ignorant of the fact that Democrats were the conservative party prior to, during, and for a number of years after the Civil War!??
Do you know what the term "Dixiecrat" means??
SpookeyR 1 year ago
@SpookeyR Don't try to mix Dem v Repub with Conser v Lib. The FACT is that the DEMS were and ARE racists, as are you. You voted for Obama because he was black, you racist swine! LOL
theblacksphere01 1 year ago 5
@theblacksphere01: Don't try to mix something that has already been mixed, hmm?! It really sounds like you are ignoring reality, and it also sounds like you are using a 2+2=5 defense....
The FACT is... Democrats today are much LESS racist, by and large, than Republicans! And Democrats of around 200 to around 70 years ago were much more racist than Republicans bc, Democrats of so long ago were the conservative party in the United States at the time!
This is FACT!!
SpookeyR 1 year ago
@SpookeyR That logic of yours might work with you Libtards, but not here. The Dems are racist and I prove it daily. You close your eyes to the obvious, because you've been TRAINED to do so. You decry people like me who want black SUCCESSES, while you focus on enabling victims and ignoring the victimizers. You come back, when you grow a brain!
theblacksphere01 1 year ago 8
@theblacksphere01 BOOM-SHAKA-LAKA!! WORD!
jimistreets 1 year ago
@SpookeyR Your brain washed!
SilverFox466 1 year ago
@theblacksphere01 there are more racist republicans than democrats. im a republican, but i can accept that. as soon as the south turned red, all the racism switched to the republicans.
Fleishman322 1 year ago
@Fleishman322
Ahh so you admit that Democrats switched to Republican? That does not mean the Republican ideology switched
thundersnake1 9 months ago
@bajalocom & your proof that Repubs hate minorities is what? & your proof that they want every Latino & Black dead is what?
Michael Steele was ELECTED as party chairman.
'
The Democrats bring up race ad nauseum on EVERYTHING, not the Repubs. Seriously: spending, taxation, health care, tort reform, education, FannieMae, FreddieMac, etc. Is there something that you don't see as applicable to race? Pluto demoted as a Khyber Belt object from a planet maybe?
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius: Micheal Steele was elected party chairman bc he is black! Barack Obama was elected President of the United States and the Grab Our Penises Party didn't want to appear racist & bigoted; that's why they gave him the job!!
Democrats were the conservative party way back prior to, during, and for a number of decades after the Civil War. This is a troll video! And you are a politically and historically ignorant twat, pining away on YT...
SpookeyR 1 year ago
@SpookeyR I fully respect that Obama is my president. That is a fact. Period. End. Michael Steele has proven incompetent as a leader of the GOP with wasting large sums of money. The other candidate for GOP chairman was also Black, so race really didn't matter in that contest. Frankly you are the racist for making a fuss over Michael Steel's race and stating that his qualifications don't matter, but only his race.
Aegius 1 year ago
@Aegius: Well, then you aren't a Rushtard; you aren't someone who gleefully bitches & moans that Obama will fail and that America will fail bc of Obama. Congratulations!
Micheal Steele has proven to be a horses ass when it comes to running the Republican Party, this is true & this was primarily evident when he played lapdog to Rush Limbaugh; he has also proven himself to be holding the party line! ...just as inept, immoral, and incompetent as every other....(I believe the term is..) RePIGlican!
SpookeyR 1 year ago
@Aegius:
I am not making a fuss over Micheal Steeles race! I am merely stating a fact that he only got the job bc the other RePIGlicans knew that in giving him the job that it would be impossible for the (politically, historically, socially, etc.) ignorant to break free from the chains that they revere, i.e. theblacksphere01!
SpookeyR 1 year ago
@SpookeyR Yes, you are making a fuss over Steel's race, by stating that he only got the job due to his race rather than to any qualifications. Frankly given your obsession with race, you are a RACIST. Yes, you are.
I have no comment on Rush Limbaugh. Steele is incompetent with his ridiculous and irresponsible spending. Repubs are sending money to candidates directly rather than to the GOP due to disgust with Steele.
Aegius 1 year ago
Of course the negro slave was a taxpayer. His rate was 100% and his representation was zero.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
Just exchange the word negro with the word taxpayer, and you have the modern democrats in a nutshell.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
The Democrats deny his manhood; deny, or dwarf to insignificance, the wrong of his bondage; so far as possible, crush all sympathy for him, and cultivate and excite hatred and disgust against him; compliment themselves as Union-savers for doing so; and call the indefinite outspreading of his bondage "a sacred right of self-government."
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
Abrahem Lincoln said: How differently the respective courses of the Democratic and Republican parties incidentally bear on the question of forming a will-a public sentiment-for colonization, is easy to see. The Republicans inculcate, with whatever of ability they can, that the negro is a man; that his bondage is cruelly wrong, and that the field of his oppression ought not to be enlarged.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
I notice you are very conveniently leaving out Lincoln's racism. In his State of the Union addresses as president, he twice called for the deportation of blacks
Lincoln was a bigot who habitually used the N word and liked demeaning "darky" jokes.
They should be equal all right, but not here...Lincoln's segregationist views are simply ignored....
He did some great things, but you want to illuminate the shortcomings of one side without giving the same treatment to the other.
.
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago
The point of this video was that Democrats were racist in 1870, in 1930, and even now. LBJ bragged to two dem senators on board air force one after the CRA passed that he would have 'them goddam niggers votin' democrat for the next 200 years'.
It was a cynical powergrab from a longtime pro segregationist, LBJ, who saw public sentiment moving and decided to move with it and make it benefit the Dem party.
cynical politics, not a real concern for black people. Democrats do this TODAY.
daveperk 2 years ago
Yes, Democrats are always and have always been the party of murder, theft, oppression, perversion and any other atrocities that they can profit from.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
How disgusting it is to hear Democrats claim any civil rights history while they murder more than a million children every year and call it a right. Of course they were the same way about slavery. Exactly the same.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
Republicans own every piece of civil rights legislation. Democrats usually opposed the amendments violently, and overturned the acts of Congress. There never was a movement of racists to the republican party. The principals of republicanism are intrinsically anti racist.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
They are the ignorant ones.
Not all Democrats are racist, but being democratic means having control over the minority. Democrats are corrupt because the democratic process is unfair to the minority. Democracy is only acceptable at the state level provided it does not violate the Bill of Rights and the amendments. Democrats didn't like the 13th, 14th or 15th amendments or the civil rights acts that enforced them. Dems overturned all 19 civil rights acts passed by republicans from 1866 to 1875.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
MLK Jr., his father and his brother were all republicans.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
MLK Sr was a Republican. If MLK Jr. ever was, he sure didn't talk like one. King and the SCLC called on the government to invest in rebuilding America's cities. He felt that Congress had shown "hostility to the poor" by spending "military funds with alacrity and generosity". He contrasted this with the situation faced by poor Americans, claiming that Congress had merely provided "poverty funds with miserliness. That's a Democrat or at least it is today.Now Republicans often try to smear MLK Jr.
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago
It seems no one knows even the basics of US History here.
Yes, the Democratic Party WAS extremely racist in up until the 1960's. Almost all of the South were "Southern Dems". Then LBJ passed Civil Rights, and within four years the south had turned from blue to red, with almost all of the racists ditching the Democratic Party for the GOP.
Robert Byrd was one exception... and he renounced his former ways.
Read any book on US History.
This isn't conjecture. It's fact.
jimmypopz23 2 years ago
No that is the revisionist history of the Dems. And if you are so smart on this then name me 10 racist Dems who became Republicans.? Good luck with that! The DEMS are the RACISTS...then and now!
theblacksphere01 2 years ago
Correct. It is not that Democrats are racist. But racists are Democrats. A bigot of any type hates the form of government that follows law rather than public sentiment. Democracy follows public sentiment, even racist sentiment. That's why we call them 'Democrat'. It is pejorative.
The form of government that follows law is called a republic. That's why they call us republicans. Where there is no law, there is no liberty. Our republic is based on God's law. God's law makes everyone equal & safe.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
One racist Democrat was segregationist senator Strom Thurmond. After he became a republican, he began to integrate. He was the first southern senator to hire black people to his cabinet. Dems hate him for that, they lie about his move from Dixiecrat to republican. He was Democrat until 1948. He started the Dixiecrats because Truman was going to put civil rights on the Dem platform. After the election, he went back to the democrat party for another 16 years. Thurmond became republican in 1964.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
Thurmond became a Republican in 1964 because Johnson DID put Civil Rights on the Dem platform!!
jimmypopz23 2 years ago 2
The main plank of the republican platform is civil rights. It always has been. Johnson didn't put civil rights or anything else on any platform. He had little to do with civil rights other than signing the 1964 bill. The bill was passed by republicans in Congress. Civil rights are not part of the Democrat platform to this day.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
When President Johnson signed Civil Rights legislation, he commented that: "Well, there goes the South." He meant, of course, that now the South would become Republican as they now saw the Democrats as the party standing up for the blacks. Actually, as a percentage, the Dems opposed civil rights more so than the Republicans.
* Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
* Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
paulgrim96 2 years ago
The breakdown by region however, shows that conservative Southern Democrats were the big reason.
* 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 Republicans do actually have a better civil rights record. BUT CONSERVATIVES DON'T.
paulgrim96 2 years ago
Following the Civil Rights legislation, the South temporarily lost some of its legislative power as its voters and politicians switched inexorably to the Republican party.
paulgrim96 2 years ago 2
Conservative Democrats don't.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
Right Wikipedia: (Civil Rights Act of 1964). The article said: The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964. The "Southern Bloc" of 18 southern Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. Said Russell: "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states."
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago
why not quote Byrd, since he's the one who filibustered the CRA? Why quote the one repub out of a 'bloc' made up of Democrats?
Or why not quote Howard Smith, the senator who tried to sit on the bill in committee so no vote would take place? He was dem also, never became repub. Where are the evil repub racists who opposed this bill? WHO SWITCHED PARTIES AFTER THIS VOTE?
One guy. Thurmond. But all other racist dems who opposed this bill REMAINED DEMS.
daveperk 2 years ago
This is a crap definition of conservatism. It isn't 'defend traditions no matter what they are'. It's 'defend values and don't discard them just because they're not new'. IMHO, conservatives are now what 'liberals' were in the 20th century, genuine reformers who want to keep what's good, get rid of what's bad and replace it with good. THAT is conservatism. modern day libs are 'progressives' who want to continue down the leftward road, diminishing 'men' in favor of 'man', removing rights.
daveperk 2 years ago
This, of course, has made the Republican party even more conservative and racist than it had ever been following the death of Reconstruction. So the division between the two parties grew.
paulgrim96 2 years ago
There is no such thing as republican racism. Bigots of all sorts hate a Republic. They rely on the mob rule mentality of those who are democratic to accommodate their exploitative schemes.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
No such thing as Republican racism???!!! You should tag along with me at my job. BIGTIME racists and they are staunch Republicans.
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago
They are not racist for insisting on equality. I know someone who claims to hate black people, but it is because they do not get equal treatment.
ReppaBlicken 2 years ago
Exactly. It was Conservatives that tried to block civil rights. When they lost, they became bitter and flocked to the Republican party where the remain to this day. Johnson said it right.
TheSuciocabrone 2 years ago