Republicans are already selling access to government in order to raise money!

[iceaura]

Surely if you flat out "make shit up" you will just be found out. Eventually.

Sure. That's when the "both sides do the same" blame deflector is invoked.

When the stores see a run on ammo in response to an election, so that some have to ration it to keep a supply on hand for their longtime customers; when people asphyxiate themselves covering their houses with duct tape and plastic wrap; when people drive their children five blocks to school to protect them and want the government to tap their phones and torture suspects;

the source of such panics is not often the Democratic Party and its media manipulation.

 

[joepistole]

I don't like raining on your hate parade here... but if you are a member of MoveOn.org, then you would know that President Obama has been "selling access to the government" for a while now in mass e-mails addressed to members. Check it out:

Here's another:
Why is the President asking us for money..? In this letter from Obama, he doesn't even refer to it as "health care reform" anymore. Now, he's calling it "health insurance reform."

Excuse me.? Hey asshole... the whole idea behind health care reform was to institute public healthcare reform. Fuck the insurance companies. I don't care if they get "reformed" or not. What people expect is a tax supported public health care system... just like every other modern nation -except- us already enjoys.

And as if that wasn't slimy enough, read what Obama says a bit later in his letter. Why are we donating money..? To whom..? Is this some kind of blackmail, or what..? Why do Americans need to give money to Congress..? To offset the corrupt, under-the-table donations that they're all accepting from the insurance companies..? Does Obama want us to BRIBE OUR OWN CONGRESS to get them to do their fucking job..?

What the hell is this shit..? For what reason does the President ask the people to send money to the government in exchange for legislation..? Why does he need donations from the public..? Don't our taxes already pay for the salaries of these fucking corporate whores..?! And when did it start being called "insurance reform" instead of health care reform..? First the bastard loots the treasury and gives it to Wall Street... and now he wants to pick our pockets, in exchange for legislation? I've been predicting (and dreading) this bullshit for the past ten years and lo and behold, here it is: a government for hire.

My direct ancestors didn't need to be bribed when they fought at Bunker Hill. They fought because they had principles and they had the courage to stand up for those principles. They were lions -- not sheep.

We need more lions in America. And we need them right now.

I don't see how that is selling as selling access. Selling access is different than soliciting campaign donations. Selling access is giving the impression to donors they can have special privilages for their donation. There is no such implication in any Democrat solicitations I have seen thus far.

 

[joepistole]

Surely if you flat out "make shit up" you will just be found out. Eventually.

It would be nice if that were true. But look at the Swift Boaters, totally made up shit. The truth got less than one percent of the media coverage while the lies represented as truths got 99 percent of the media coverage.

 

[WillNever]

I don't see how that is selling as selling access.

Joel: that is because you are looking at things through blinders. That e-mail is essentially a bribe. "Give me more money and I might make sure health insurance reform goes through." He is also falsely suggesting that donations will somehow help to change the minds of senators, when in fact he wants that money purely for re-election. That's pretty sick (not to mention selfish), when you think about it.

Just the other night, he was telling everyone that if they don't help his healthcare reform efforts succeed, that it might affect his candidacy in the next election. As though we're supposed to care about reform for his sake.

 

[joepistole]

Joel: that is because you are looking at things through blinders. That e-mail is essentially a bribe. "Give me more money and I might make sure health insurance reform goes through." He is also falsely suggesting that donations will somehow help to change the minds of senators, when in fact he wants that money purely for re-election. That's pretty sick (not to mention selfish), when you think about it.

Just the other night, he was telling everyone that if they don't help his healthcare reform efforts succeed, that it might affect his candidacy in the next election. As though we're supposed to care about reform for his sake.

No, he was just making known the issues we are facing and the need to fix them. Unfortunately our system works on money. He needs money to get people elected that support his solutions. I don't see anything nefarious in that position. I think you are reading too much into the solicitation.

 

[Jack_]

LOL, I hate to say it but you guys are all so predictable. You can no stand on your facts or reason so you have to go to the ad hominem (personal attacks). Once, just once, I would like to meet a Republican/conservative devotee with a brain...someone who is honest and can reason and knows something of which they speak.

Interesting, do you make such false generalizations about blacks as well?

 

[Jack_]

It would be nice if that were true. But look at the Swift Boaters, totally made up shit. The truth got less than one percent of the media coverage while the lies represented as truths got 99 percent of the media coverage.

Look at Obama's made up shtt.

He claimed all health care debates would be on c-span.

That is a lie.

He claimed he would close Gitmo, that is a lie.

What now?

 

[Raithere]

Or, what are the Democratic Party's equivalents of conservative white-slavery fearmongering or death panels?

First off, I'd like the make the point that the topic isn't about Republican lies. The presentation doesn't tell anyone to go out and make crap up so that's really a different issue. Still, at least as an aside, it's worthwhile. Just off the top of my head though?

White House was involved in planning 9/11.
Jeb Bush fixed the '00 election.
The war in Iraq is the result of a corporate driven conspiracy.

I don't completely disagree with you though. I find the distinction a bit more subtle, however, than a simple move to the right and making shit up. What I do see is that fanatical crackpots seem to be setting the topic and tone of public discourse.

While the Democrats seem to prefer addressing nutcase radio show commentary rather than real arguments they at least seem to be able to avoid actually taking up leftist crackpot notions as a running platform. Some of the Republicans, however, don't seem to be able to make that subtle of a distinction and actually appear to draw their speaking points from the lunatic fringe. All in all, right now I'd give the point to the Democrats but then this kind of insanity seems to switch sides whenever control does.

The scary part is that the debate never becomes productive. There are real points on both sides of most major debates and they get obscured by this nonsense. Public appeals on both sides are emotional and reactionary in nature and they're ideologically driven because that pretense is the only real distinction between the parties. Compromise, agreement and the possibility that we'll be able to find any real solutions fade into the background.

~Raithere

 

[Raithere]

Right wing whackos seem to think there is something wrong with addressing a crisis head on.

We are discussing the use of fear to influence people. So is your point that it's okay to use fear as long as it's something you personally are afraid of? Or is it that it's okay for Democrats to use fear and not for Republicans?

You are a fool if you want to handle every crisis like the George II administration.

I agree.

All of the things you listed are true statements.

Well, no. Actually, they're not. But even if they were the point is, once again, the use of fear in getting a reactionary response from people, and the selling of access. So you need to make the distinction along with Tiassa if we are talking about the presentation you referred to in the OP or if you are upset about politicians lying.

~Raithere

 

[Tiassa]

This and that

White House was involved in planning 9/11.
Jeb Bush fixed the '00 election.
The war in Iraq is the result of a corporate driven conspiracy.

What Democratic candidate or office holder pushed these?

You know, like Sarah Palin (VP candidate) pushed the death panel thing?

And, yes, I see your later paragraph about nutcase radio commentary and so on, but the last sentence, about the insanity switching sides, kind of blew it.

Fearmongering is an American tradition. Buy our car, or your kids will die in a crash because the others aren't safe enough. Use Wildroot hair creme, or nobody will like you (especially the girls). Nothing new about selling fear.

However, if I said, "Use Wildroot or aliens will come down and steal you from your bed at night and stick strange machines up your ass," would that really be effective? In politics, that kind of wild-eyed bullshit seems to sell, especially on the right wing.

The scary part is that the debate never becomes productive. There are real points on both sides of most major debates and they get obscured by this nonsense. Public appeals on both sides are emotional and reactionary in nature and they're ideologically driven because that pretense is the only real distinction between the parties. Compromise, agreement and the possibility that we'll be able to find any real solutions fade into the background.

This is as much the fault of voters as politicians. At least.

• • •​

I don't see how that is selling as selling access. Selling access is different than soliciting campaign donations. Selling access is giving the impression to donors they can have special privilages for their donation. There is no such implication in any Democrat solicitations I have seen thus far.

But it does tell us about how conservatives view the world. They seem to require an incredibly simplistic explanation. Their rhetoric has lost almost all subtlety, and their perception is more and more retarded by the week. Some would suggest this happens on both sides of the aisle, according to who is in power, but then I think of the time Swift's "Gay Manifesto" was read into the Congressional record as if it was real. I mean, fuck, you can put a disclaimer at the front that says, "This is fucking satire!" and they still don't get it.

 

[Raithere]

Your delusion that both parties do it. Democrat don't make shit up to scare people.

Here are a couple of sites you might want to familiarize yourself with:

http://www.politifact.com/
http://www.factcheck.org/

Just because Republicans refuse to accept scientific proofs does not mean there are not proofs.

I believe in the scientific method, evidence, and logic... not rhetoric. I don't give a shit who's talking.

~Raithere

 

[iceaura]

White House was involved in planning 9/11.
Jeb Bush fixed the '00 election.
The war in Iraq is the result of a corporate driven conspiracy.

What are those supposed to be? They aren't Democratic Party media initiatives, and they aren't all three even completely false.

What you need is a pattern of Democratic Party media initiatives that involve making shit up and having major Party spokesmen repeat it loudly in the mainstream media. There isn't one.

I don't completely disagree with you though. I find the distinction a bit more subtle, however, than a simple move to the right and making shit up. What I do see is that fanatical crackpots seem to be setting the topic and tone of public discourse.

Rightwing fanatical crackpots. That's where the move to the right and make shit up observation came from.

While the Democrats seem to prefer addressing nutcase radio show commentary rather than real arguments

There aren't any real arguments with any influence. The nutcase radio - and TV, and a lot of the newspaper - is where the political action is - address it or lose.

they at least seem to be able to avoid actually taking up leftist crackpot notions as a running platform.

They avoid that tendency so urgently and completely that they take up no leftist notions at all, crackpot or otherwise.

Some of the Republicans, however, don't seem to be able to make that subtle of a distinction and actually appear to draw their speaking points from the lunatic fringe.

That's essentially all of the Republicans - the entire leadership, and every Congressman I can recall seeing on TV for sure. Unless you can show me an exception, we can say all of them.

All in all, right now I'd give the point to the Democrats but then this kind of insanity seems to switch sides whenever control does.

It's been a Republican specialty since 1968, and their defining political characteristic since 1980 - regardless of "control".

There are real points on both sides of most major debates and they get obscured by this nonsense.

Often, there aren't.

Public appeals on both sides are emotional and reactionary in nature and they're ideologically driven because that pretense is the only real distinction between the parties.

There have been very few, if any, emotional, reactionary, and ideologically driven public appeals universally supported on the Dem side of US partisan discourse. The Dems don't have that kind of ideological unity or political discipline.

The scary part is that the debate never becomes productive

That's the intent. It's not a "debate", it's a media effort to prevent the US government from functioning in certain arenas.

But even if they were the point is, once again, the use of fear in getting a reactionary response from people, and the selling of access.

So far, you've presented no examples of the Dem Party doing either of those things.

 

[joepistole]

What are those supposed to be? They aren't Democratic Party media initiatives, and they aren't all three even completely false.

What you need is a pattern of Democratic Party media initiatives that involve making shit up and having major Party spokesmen repeat it loudly in the mainstream media. There isn't one.
Rightwing fanatical crackpots. That's where the move to the right and make shit up observation came from.

There aren't any real arguments with any influence. The nutcase radio - and TV, and a lot of the newspaper - is where the political action is - address it or lose.

They avoid that tendency so urgently and completely that they take up no leftist notions at all, crackpot or otherwise. That's essentially all of the Republicans - the entire leadership, and every Congressman I can recall seeing on TV for sure. Unless you can show me an exception, we can say all of them. It's been a Republican specialty since 1968, and their defining political characteristic since 1980 - regardless of "control".
Often, there aren't. There have been very few, if any, emotional, reactionary, and ideologically driven public appeals universally supported on the Dem side of US partisan discourse. The Dems don't have that kind of ideological unity or political discipline.
That's the intent. It's not a "debate", it's a media effort to prevent the US government from functioning in certain arenas.
So far, you've presented no examples of the Dem Party doing either of those things.

Amen Ice, he is not answering because he cannot.

 

[Raithere]

What Democratic candidate or office holder pushed these?

Ah, okay. I love the whole post-facto criteria adjustment but let's give it a whirl.

"There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud." - Edward Kennedy

“In 2000, our presidential election came down to one state where the brother of the man running for president was the governor of the state. So we have our problems too,” America’s top diplomat said." - Hillary Clinton (as Secretary of State) in Nigeria, discussing political corruption.

"The motivation for war is simple. The U.S. government started the war with Iraq in order to make it easy for U.S. corporations to do business in other countries. They intend to use cheap labor in those countries, which will make Americans rich." - Michael Moore

Now admittedly, Michael Moore is just a demagogue like Rush and not a politician. And although referal to conservative crackpots seems to suffice for some of the other posters you haven't really done so, so I'll give you that one. And Kennedy fell short of stating the White House planned 09/11 but he did assert that the entire reason for going to war was fabricated. So I'll give you those two. But let's see if we can come up with any other outrageous lies:

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." - Edward Kennedy

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton

"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors." - President Clinton

The same sentiment was echoed by Hillary, Pelosi, Kerry, and Gore.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

Of course, after it came up false the tune changed:

"But the administration, then, decided to launch this invasion virtually alone and before the UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were any weapons of mass destruction there" - Bill Clinton

""No one can tell him he's wrong … even though there are no weapons of mass destruction …" - DNC Advertisement

Oops.

However, if I said, "Use Wildroot or aliens will come down and steal you from your bed at night and stick strange machines up your ass," would that really be effective? In politics, that kind of wild-eyed bullshit seems to sell, especially on the right wing.

And where in the presentation do you see it being stated that anyone should make shit up and lie to their donors? I mean I do enjoy the enthusiasm and the liberal cheer-leading and all but are you seriously trying to tell me that Democrats don't lie?

This is as much the fault of voters as politicians. At least.

It's all the fault of the voters, they can't get into office otherwise. The only thing I can fault the politicians for is taking advantage of the partisianship, gullibility, stupidity, and short memory of the American public. I mean, it's just not nice.

But it does tell us about how conservatives view the world. They seem to require an incredibly simplistic explanation. Their rhetoric has lost almost all subtlety, and their perception is more and more retarded by the week.

Well I did join this thread with a comment about stupidity and will state again that I'm not sure why anyone is shocked. But I'm amused that you think there's that much more integrity or depth on the liberal side.

There's this, straight from the gain website:

"Surrogates/Third Parties - Often, it will make sense to have a surrogate be the one to raise unpleasant facts about an opponent. This can be another political figure who is supporting your candidate, you or another member of the campaign staff, or a third party— such as the head of an affected constituency group with little or no direct connection to the candidate.
Third parties are often the best ones to carry these kinds of messages. A press conference by the local PTA president can be a more useful way to discuss the facts of your opponent’s education record than an appearance by your candidate. Work closely with these surrogate groups so that the message they are putting forward is consistent with yours, and to ensure they know how to attract media coverage. Be careful, however, about making it seem as if your campaign is using outside groups as puppets. "

And there's good old ACORN with it's convictions of voter fraud:

http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html

Talking about selling access, do I really have to mention my ex-Govonor who was impeached on charges he was trying to sell Obama's vacant senate seat? How about the corruption charges he now faces, including racketeering?

Of course, he's just the latest in a fine tradition of Illinois gubinatorial corruption. We had Ryan (R), Walker (D), and Kerner (D) all convited too. Of course, Illinois Democrats are no strangers to corruption...

"Of those, an astonishing 30 were Chicago aldermen; that's around 20 percent of those elected to the City Council during that period."
http://www.slate.com/id/2206523/?GT1=38001
http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/corrupt100807.htm

Here's another fun one from 1996:

"The FEC documents describe Democratic fundraisers who set specific prices for foreign nationals to make illegal campaign contributions in return for meetings with then-President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore. A Democratic finance vice chair, for example, said organizers would have to contribute $100,000 in return for Gore's appearance at a Buddhist temple in Los Angeles."
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/fec.htm


So please, do keep trying to convince me that the Democratic party is somehow above it all; pure, truthful, and a stalwart defender of the public's best interest to the last man. No, I'm quite sure that the only corrupt, lying, cheating, manipulating politicians are Republican.

Thanks to you all I've found renewed faith in our politicians and our political system... now we just have to figure out how to get all those nasty Republicans out of office.

The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the foe, that's all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they'd all flown in the last war

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
No, no!

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

~Raithere

 

[Raithere]

What you need is a pattern of Democratic Party media initiatives that involve making shit up and having major Party spokesmen repeat it loudly in the mainstream media. There isn't one.

That's a different issue than what's in the presentation now, isnt' it? But I've already stated that I do think the Dems do a better job of not actually quoting the lunatics. However, I certainly don't believe that means they don't have an agenda.

There aren't any real arguments with any influence. The nutcase radio - and TV, and a lot of the newspaper - is where the political action is - address it or lose.

Don't forget the self-proclaimed pundits in hollywood and the movie industry.

They avoid that tendency so urgently and completely that they take up no leftist notions at all, crackpot or otherwise.

So you don't consider the redistribution of wealth, universal government funded healthcare, or enginerred social integration leftist concepts? Or is just the rhetoric they avoid?

Often, there aren't. There have been very few, if any, emotional, reactionary, and ideologically driven public appeals universally supported on the Dem side of US partisan discourse. The Dems don't have that kind of ideological unity or political discipline.

I guess you don't watch, listen to, or read what I do. Because when someone tells me there is an immanent crisis and if I don't agree to their plan right now we will all meet with catastrophe, I consider that an emotional and reactionary appeal.

~Raithere

 

[C-Moon]

Democrat revisionist history

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.” Democrats.org

Let's see

October 13, 1858
During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee

April 16, 1862
President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

July 17, 1862
Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes Confiscation Act stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”

January 31, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition

April 8, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition

November 22, 1865
Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination

February 5, 1866
U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

April 9, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law

May 10, 1866
U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no

June 8, 1866
U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

January 8, 1867
Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.

July 19, 1867
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans

March 30, 1868
Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”

September 3, 1868
25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress

September 12, 1868
Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

October 7, 1868
Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”

October 22, 1868
While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan

December 10, 1869
Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office

February 3, 1870
After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

May 31, 1870
President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights

June 22, 1870
Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South

September 6, 1870
Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell

February 28, 1871
Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters

April 20, 1871
Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

October 10, 1871
Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands

October 18, 1871
After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan

November 18, 1872
Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”

January 17, 1874
Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government

September 14, 1874
Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

March 1, 1875
Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition

January 10, 1878
U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919. Republicans foil Democratic efforts to keep women in the kitchen, where they belong

February 8, 1894
Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote

January 15, 1901
Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

May 29, 1902
Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%

February 12, 1909
On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP

May 21, 1919
Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no

August 18, 1920
Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures

January 26, 1922
House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

June 2, 1924
Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans

October 3, 1924
Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention

June 12, 1929
First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

August 17, 1937
Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation

June 24, 1940
Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

August 8, 1945
Republicans condemn Harry Truman’s surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that “The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul.”

September 30, 1953
Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education

November 25, 1955
Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel

March 12, 1956
Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation

June 5, 1956
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law

November 6, 1956
African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President

September 9, 1957
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

September 24, 1957
Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

May 6, 1960
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats

May 2, 1963
Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights

September 29, 1963
Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School

June 9, 1964
Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”​

June 10, 1964
Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.

August 4, 1965
Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose. Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

February 19, 1976
President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

September 15, 1981
President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs

June 29, 1982
President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act

August 10, 1988
President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR

November 21, 1991
President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation

August 20, 1996
Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law



And let’s not forget the words of liberal icon Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood…

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population….​

 

[spidergoat]

Southern Democrats before the civil rights legislation were for all practical purposes, Republicans, and quite racist. But, most people know that.

 

[joepistole]

Southern Democrats before the civil rights legislation were for all practical purposes, Republicans, and quite racist. But, most people know that.

Very true, and how does any of this relate to what we are currently seeing in American politics? Answer, it does not.

The bottom line is that Republicans of the last few decades has been built and maintained on a foundation of deception, lies and fear. Democrats are still trying to keep the high ground. The question is will they be rewarded for this tactic or will the be burried in it? Republicans are quite good at this game. Unfortunately, the country has suffered greatly as a result.

 

[C-Moon]

Very true, and how does any of this relate to what we are currently seeing in American politics? Answer, it does not.

The bottom line is that Republicans of the last few decades has been built and maintained on a foundation of deception, lies and fear. Democrats are still trying to keep the high ground. The question is will they be rewarded for this tactic or will the be burried in it? Republicans are quite good at this game. Unfortunately, the country has suffered greatly as a result.

Well, this is one of the current lies.

“Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws… On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.”

 

[C-Moon]

Southern Democrats before the civil rights legislation were for all practical purposes, Republicans, and quite racist. But, most people know that.

What you mean is that most know the Democrat revisionist history.

The problem with it is that Democrats retained too many of its racist members including, but not limited to, Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd.

Democrats then moved into more creative ways to practice their racism via Plantation Politics.


Obama knows Dems practice plantation politics.

"Black people in the worst jobs. The worst housing. Police brutality rampant. But when the so-called black committeemen came around election time, we'd all line up and vote the straight Democratic ticket. Sell our soul for a Christmas turkey." Barack Obama


At least he sold out for the biggest Christmas turkey.

But anyway, that's what Dems still do to blacks. They sell fear, dependence and patronage.