Al Sharpton Gets Civil Rights History Wrong

Townhall.com ^ | October 9, 2011 | Katie Pavlich

[Kaslin]

Turns out Herman Cain may have been onto something when he said blacks have been brainwashed into voting for democrats. MSNBC host Rev. Al Sharpton has made it clear he is one of those people Cain was talking about. Sharpton claimed on his show Friday night that democrats supported the Civil Rights act of 1964, problem is, more republicans supported the bill than democrats. The Klu Klux Klan was also founded by democrats and democrats threw Martin Luther King Jr. in jail.

Media Research Center's Noel Sheppard explains:

The House version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by only 61 percent of that Chamber's Democrats versus 80 percent of the Republicans.

More importantly, it was Republicans that ended a Democrat filibuster preventing a vote on this bill in the Senate. 82 percent of Republicans voted for cloture versus 66 percent of Democrats.

In the final Senate vote on the Act, 82 percent of Republicans voted "Aye" versus 69 percent of Democrats.

The same is true for the Voting Rights Act of 1965 when 94 percent of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill versus 73 percent of Democrats. The final vote on the House's version was even more stark as only one Senate Republican voted against it compared to seventeen Democrats.

In the House, 82 percent of Republicans supported the bill versus 78 percent of Democrats.

Sharpton Doesn't Know Higher Percentage of Republicans Than Democrats Voted for Civil Rights Act

Also, Sharpton recently debated Herman Cain's "blackness," with Professor Karen Hunter on his radio show, saying Cain isn't trying to get black votes but trying to impress the Right.

UNREAL: Sharpton, Professor Debate Herman Cain's 'Blackness'

And now, I give you Alfonzo Rachel, who wonders why blacks are so loyal to democrats.

The Democrat party has been the pro-slavery party, the pro-segregation party, the anti-civil rights party, but the majority of the black community votes democrat.

Examining Black Loyalty to Democrats

[Texas Eagle]

Where to begin, where to begin.

Pardon me but I actually agree with Rush on about anything but when I hear him make the claim about how great the GOP was over CRA and VRA I cringe.

I'm not sure I've ever heard Rus gush over how great The CRA and VRA was (were?), he simply points out that RATS evoke those Acts as basis for their virtual unanimous support of RAT candidates since. That's all.

Nearly all so called conservative pundits do this dance because they think it helps them with black people.

Ah. I see your point. I suggest a new strategy. Republican candidates should try to win the hearts of black voters by espousing the view that they should never had the right to vote offered to them. Damn, if only I possessed such brilliance, I could be somebody!

Savage is Jewish you say? Shucks..so is Levin. Who cares? Would that more Jews followed their lead.

The voices in your head misled you. I never mentioned Wiener's or Levin's religious affiliations. I simply pointed out Savage's real name was Wiener. YOU made the Jewish connection.

I could care less what Hannity did for a living? Why bring that up...that makes as much difference as you bringing up Savage's Jewishness.

A) You mean you COULDN'T care less. No need to thank me for sparing you future embarrassment.

B)Savage regularly mocks Hannity's past career as if it matters somehow.

C)I didn't bring up Savage's....oh, wait....we've already been through this.

Snerdly is black...I doubt even I in these heated times over anything not white would go on and on how excessive or unnecessary that the 60s race legislation was given he is right in front of him..and Rush having been bit by the black bug so many times is perhaps wary anyhow...

No response necessary other than if Savage ever goes back to the psychological industry, you could keep him in opulence for the rest of his or your natural life.

[Pelham]

” If memory serves it was a Conservative (by your logic) Southerner named Lyndon Baines Johnson.”

That’s not my logic. In fact that’s not logic at all, you’re using the common fallacy of petitio principii, “begging the question”. A good book on logical fallacies would benefit you, although the downside is that it would make your posts less entertaining.

Lyndon Johnson was a protege of FDR and as liberal as he could be. This set him far apart from the majority of Democrats in the south. Just as Barry Goldwater’s western conservatism set him far apart from the eastern establishment that ran the GOP in the 1960s.

And to inject a bit of history into your cartoonish rendering of Johnson’s Presidency, it was only with the cooperation of GOP liberals that Johnson’s Great Society programs passed.

Even the moderate Everett Dirksen was guilty of assisting Johnson in the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, something Goldwater voted against. That’s the same Goldwater that Reagan supported with The Speech that started his political career.

“Further, if the Eastern Establishment Republicans dominated the GOP, how did he (Goldwater) become the Republican nominee for President? Your argument simply makes no sense.”

You mean you don’t know? Well the same William Rusher you were pretending to know up the thread wrote a book on how he, Rusher, and a small dedicated group of conservatives formed the Draft Goldwater Committee and won Barry the nomination against the fierce opposition of the Republican establishment.

It’s titled “The Rise of the Right”. Get that and a copy of “Copi’s Logic”. Make sure you read them instead of using them as doorstops.

[Texas Eagle]

” If memory serves it was a Conservative (by your logic) Southerner named Lyndon Baines Johnson.” That’s not my logic. In fact that’s not logic at all, you’re using the common fallacy of petitio principii, “begging the question”. A good book on logical fallacies would benefit you, although the downside is that it would make your posts less entertaining. Lyndon Johnson was a protege of FDR and as liberal as he could be. This set him far apart from the majority of Democrats in the south.

And yet, those same Conservative DemocRATS that "dominated" the RAT Party at the time, STILL chose him to be their nominee even though he was a Liberal from a Conservative Southern state. No. Wait. DemocRATS from Southern states were Conservatives back then. No. Wait. If DemocRATS from Southern states back then were Conservative then how did a Liberal like Johnson....

I'm sorry. I guess I just don't understand fellatio principii ad nauseum semper virens or whatever you called it.

Just as Barry Goldwater’s western conservatism set him far apart from the eastern establishment that ran the GOP in the 1960s.

Eastern Establishmet Republicans who "dominated" the GOP and STILL chose him to be their nominee. Maybe I shoulda gone to college. Perhaps you could tell me how the word "dominated" is defined in colleges and universties. Maybe then an uneducated hick such as myself will be able to understand what you're saying. Excuse me while I stuff another pinch of chaw between my cheek and gum.

And to inject a bit of history into your cartoonish rendering of Johnson’s Presidency,

Cartoonish? Hey, I didn't draw those ears. Those were real.

it was only with the cooperation of GOP liberals that Johnson’s Great Society programs passed.

OHHHHHHH! So you are willing to grant The GOP of the day credit for passing Johnson's cartoonish Great Society and War On Poverty programs but NOT for helping him pass Civil Rights legislation.

Am I getting closer?

Even the moderate Everett Dirksen was guilty of assisting Johnson in the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, something Goldwater voted against. That’s the same Goldwater that Reagan supported with The Speech that started his political career.

Everett Dirksen? Okay, now you're just making names up.

“Further, if the Eastern Establishment Republicans dominated the GOP, how did he (Goldwater) become the Republican nominee for President? Your argument simply makes no sense.” You mean you don’t know? Well the same William Rusher you were pretending to know up the thread wrote a book on how he, Rusher, and a small dedicated group of conservatives formed the Draft Goldwater Committee and won Barry the nomination against the fierce opposition of the Republican establishment.

The "fierce" opposition that helped pass The Great Society but didn't help pass The Civil Rights Act. Got it.

It’s titled “The Rise of the Right”. Get that and a copy of “Copi’s Logic”. Make sure you read them instead of using them as doorstops.

Then how will I hold my door open?

To recap: Today's Republicans should refrain from suggesting that they helped pass The Civil Rights Act in order to gain favor with black voters even though a larger percentage of them voted for it than DemocRATS of the time BECAUSE today's Republicans are yesterday's DemocRATS, but, at the same time, they should not deny that they helped pass The Great Society and other cartoonish Johnson programs in order to gain favor with black voters because yesterday's Republicans were.....wait....I lost myself there somewhere.

Let me start over. Republicans bad, DemocRATS good.

Huh? Not bad, right?

Wait a minute! I think I got it! Everybody was on acid back then!

Orrrrrrrrr.....you're on acid now.

[Texas Eagle]

Lyndon Johnson was a protege of FDR and as liberal as he could be. This set him far apart from the majority of Democrats in the south.

I figured it out! Back in the 60s, Texas was an Upper Northwest Plains state located in the South Pacific Yukon Territory.

Whew! Now I totally understand.

[Pelham]

That sounds fact and logic free enough to represent what passes for thought in your little noggin.

For those, not you, who wish to learn something about Lyndon Johnson, googling “Lyndon Johnson protege FDR” yields 450,000 hits including a selection from Robert Caro’s LBJ biography “Master of the Senate”

I can understand why you never learned that Lyndon Johnson was an FDR liberal- that information was cruelly hidden from you inside of books.

If we could just get that into some really cool cartoons a whole new generation of Texas Eagles could learn what you missed.

[Texas Eagle]

I can understand why you never learned that Lyndon Johnson was an FDR liberal- that information was cruelly hidden from you inside of books.

I appreciate the sentiment. However, I feel compelled (excuse me while I spit out a little tobacky juice), to point out that you are the one that said yesterday's DemocRATS were the equivalent of today's Conservatives especially in the southern states like Texas which shoulda (excuse my dialect) SHOULD HAVE meant Johnson was a big Conservative, but, instead, he was perhaps the biggest Liberal (I'm putting two and two together here based on your assertion that he was an FDR protege [whatever that word means]) *patooie* (sorry for spittin' without warnin' ya), and yet those same Republicans of yesteryear who are today's DemocRATS are to blame for helping Johnson pass the biggest government expansion since The New Deal.

So, in short, today's Republicans shouldn't take any credit (or blame, depending on your point of view) for passing Civil Rights legislation because today's mean ol' hateful Republicans are yesterday's mean ol' hateful DemocRATS but today's good ol' boy Republicans SHOULD take the blame (or credit, depending on your point of view) for helping pass cartoonish Great Society programs because they are yesterday's good ol' boy DemocRATS.

Or something like that.

Just to shuck it down to the cob as we say down here in The South (actually, I'm from The West - California to be specific - but I'm just pretendin' to be from The South for the sake of this argument), Republicans, bad. DemocRATS good.

[2harddrive]

Many urban blacks probably don’t know that it was a REPUBLICAN President, Abraham Lincoln, who gave them their freedom, either.

[wardaddy]

(actually, I'm from The West - California to be specific - but I'm just pretendin' to be from The South for the sake of this argument)

Wow..who knew?

[WOBBLY BOB]

Which is the Real ‘Racist’ Party: Fifteen Questions for Democrats
http://bigjournalism.com/fross/2010/02/08/which-is-the-real-racist-party-fifteen-questions-for-democrats/
Great Moments in Democrat Racist History - FDR
http://theblacksphere.blogspot.com/2009/04/great-moments-in-democrat-racist.html

[Yulee]

Is it true that once an African became a slave in the Muslim world, that they were emasculated, so they could not reproduce. If true, this realization should bring a change in young blacks attitude about Islam.

[Yulee]

Hence no black Muslim in Africa or the Middle East can trace their ancestry back through their father's side of the family.

So Barak Hussein Obama’s ancestors were slave traders, and he can only have the name Hussein, through this relationship to his Muslim ancestor. True or not????

This is unlike American blacks (like Obama's wife) who could, if possible trace their ancestry back to a male African ancestor, who probably in no way worshiped the moon god Allah.

[Yulee]

I grew up in the South, and was raised by conservative Democrats. These Democrats were totally sold out to FDR. It was unthinkable to even consider registering as anything but a Democrat, since local and state politics were dominated by the Democratic Party.

At the same time my family admired Abraham Lincoln, and the stand that Eisenhower took on integration. States rights were important to my family, but my family (poor and rural)worked with and associated with blacks throughout the depression and afterward. We looked forward to an integrated society, and were ashamed by the Jim Crow laws that existed at the time. Members of the KKK were viewed as someone to never associate with in any way.

My family would vote Republican in national elections, but because of state and local Democratic domination, no Republican stood for office.

We came to realize that the national Democratic Party had been hijacked in Chicago in 1968, and that the media was slanted very left of center. Reagan was a wonderful breath of fresh air, and little by little my family migrated out of the Democratic plantation.

I still have cousins who serve office as Democrats, but were big supporters of W. No, the Democratic Party left conservative Democrats by starting to subdivide everyone into groups and then pitting one group against another, in order to destroy our republic. In the 60's the statement came about that "The media is the message". Yes this message became the drumbeat to convert our republic to a socialist dictatorship. It is really strange to see that once a Democrat become president, he is looked upon by Democrats as an anointed king who can do no wrong. I'm sorry but emperors Jimmy Carter,Bill Clinton, and Barak Obama are not wearing any clothes. Each was a total embarrassment to those who love the republic established by our constitution.

[Yulee]

Great piece:

Little by little the socialist have wormed their way into the media, state department, federal government career service, and the judicial system. The press demagoged Tail-gunner Joe, even though his charges eventually were confirmed by documents in the Kremlin, after the fall of the Soviet Union.

With the 1968 election cycle they openly intimidated the Democratic leadership, until it bowed to their demands that it serve as their agent to establish a socialist government, in place of the republic which our constitution requires.

That's the reason many conservative Democrats moved their registration, not integration. Most of these former Democrats represented the mainstream view of the American public. The problem was that the Democratic Party moved so far to the left, that these individuals had no other place to go.

I am beginning to believe that the "independents" and "moderates" that exist now are those same folks, but still hold the views propagated by the media and others that the Republican Party is bigoted and hateful. They've swallowed the koolaid and have no place to go. America is still a shining city on the hill, but so much smog and hot air has been put out by the Democrats that its hard to see. It's still there, but we need to rip the curtain away so all can see those behind the curtain who want to destroy our republic.