- Dołączono
- 17 Sie 2018
Because they know that they'll get called out by their own privilege.I'm surprised that thry haven't gotten angry over Trump living because of high quality treatments that should "be for the people, and not for Orange Man".
I think you're misconstruing what I'm saying. I haven't claimed that the KKK were solely Republicans (not that it matters anyway, they're racist to begin with regardless of political affliction.)but don't pull this "buh duh Democrats who made duh KKK were really Republuhkuns" bullshit. Not when half the Democrats in congress were still there when the Democrats were voting against civil rights and demanding black kids trying to get into white schools have the dogs set on them.
You also claim you've been told all day that that Democrats were responsible for the Civil Rights act. That isn't true. You can look up the vote. Republicans supported it in Congress and democrats rejected it in congress.
You're absolutely right. As proven here.
An examination of the House vote shows a similar pattern. The House voted 290 to 130 in favor. Democrats split their vote 152 (61%) to 96 (39%) while Republicans split theirs 138 (80%) to 34 (20%). The no vote consisted of 74% Democrats. Clearly, the 1964 Civil Rights Act could not have been passed without the leadership of Republicans such as Everett Dirksen and the votes of Republicans. As the online Wall Street Journal so aptly subtitled Mr. Steele's article, "Trent Lott jeopardizes the very productive ideas his party stands for."
I said the Democrats TOOK CREDIT for passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, not that they were the ones to push it through alone. The credit alone was because Johnson, a Democrat, signed it into law with MLK's push for Blacks to vote him over Goldwater. That's partly the reason why Blacks always vote Democrat, and they know it. It's obviously more complicated than the barren explanation I'm given and I'm sure which can be interpreted a different way.
But earlier you said:It breaks down every time you ask someone to define it, like here, where you've just spent multiple posts decrying the Republicans as the really real racists because party switch, but then just have to shrug and say "boomers" when I point out that none of the actual politicians switched.
Also pretty strange that somehow despite the "parties switching" supposedly via the voters "migrating", effectively none of the politicians actually switched. The only KKK members that left the Democratic party were the ones that died in office. So if the Democrats were the party of choice for racists, but then the racists were "courted" by the Republicans, seems like that still leaves all the old racist-appealing Democrats squarely in office. Like Biden.
It would be rather simple to just blame party affliction, and you'd have a valid point. But what you failed to mention is the voting demographic with baby boomers is substantially higher than any other age group in America. The baby boomer generation is old fashioned. Resistance to change in general, I'm not speaking for everybody in that demographic. The DNC is still trying to paint themselves as the moral guardian for minorities, while the RNC, while getting better, still has that fundamental religious group which was overshadowed by the war mongering past of Dubya and Jr.
It sounds like you're saying I'm denying the directions in which the Democrats are going today because I don't like Trump. That couldn't be further from the truth. History shouldn't be used as a crutch, but as a reference point of how and when things turned out the way they did.
Ostatnio edytowane przez moderatora: