Unveiled: Democrats’ Racist Past

[glockmail]

By Frances Rice

Democrats who say they don’t care about civil rights history do so because they want to hide the Democratic Party’s racist past. Hypocritically, these same Democrats are quick to falsely accuse Republicans of being racist, while pontificating about why black Americans vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party—a party whose failed socialist policies have turned black communities into economic and social wastelands….

It was Democrats who started the Ku Klux Klan that became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party to lynch and terrorize Republicans-black and white. Democrats passed those discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws and fought every piece of civil rights legislation from the 1860’s to the 1960’s. Shamefully, Democrats fought against anti-lynching laws, and when the Democrats regained control of Congress in 1892, they passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil right laws enacted by Republicans. Republicans founded the HCBU’s and started the NAACP to counter the racist practices of the Democrats. It took Republicans six decades to finally enact civil rights laws in the 1950’s and 1960’s, over the objection of Democrats.

It defies logic for Democrats today to claim that the racist Democrats suddenly joined the Republican Party after Republicans—including Republican Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.—finally won the civil rights battle against the racist Democrats. In fact, the racist Democrats declared that they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than vote for a Republican, because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks….

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-Unveiled%20Democrats%20Racist%20Past&tp_preview=true

[glockmail]

It sounds like something that I wrote a while back.....

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=238808&highlight=radical+republicans#post238808

[Hagbard Celine]

I don't know what your point is Glock. The "racist" party you speak of is about to nominate a black man for president of the US. If you're trying to shame Dems for "having a racist past," it seems you may be a day late and a dollar short since having a black prez elect trumps any racism accusations you can come up with.

[crin63]

Democrats cant see that in their continuous portrayal of blacks as victims (their victims to be sure as stated in your post) they are actually treating them as a lesser person.

Were sorry, but you just aren't capable of getting jobs, education and housing on your own so we will create affirmative action, we'll give you special consideration and legislate how others treat you. We will lower the standards for you so you can compete because otherwise you will fail. How is that not racism. You are telling them they are a lesser person.

I don't care how many black men you have run for president until you treat everyone as equals you are promoting and engaging in racism.

[Hagbard Celine]

What a load of crap. Yeah, Democrats really portray blacks as victims. That's why they're nominating one for president. :rolleyes:

This is one of the doofier things I've ever read on this site and that's saying a lot.

[crin63]

What a load of crap. Yeah, Democrats really portray blacks as victims. That's why they're nominating one for president.

If its such a load of crap why don't you address the issues I listed?

[glockmail]

I don't know what your point is Glock. The "racist" party you speak of is about to nominate a black man for president of the US. If you're trying to shame Dems for "having a racist past," it seems you may be a day late and a dollar short since having a black prez elect trumps any racism accusations you can come up with.As you so nicely demonstrated, democrats finally found a clean, articulate magic negro to assuage their white guilt. Republicans have no such guilt, as the party was created to free blacks and has worked tirelessly for civil rights.

From my earlier link:


Surveys show that black Americans think conservative, but vote liberal because they have been barraged for over 40 years with falsehoods about the Republican Party by the Democrats who have hijacked the civil rights record of the Republican Party and taken blacks down the path of Socialism.

[Hagbard Celine]

As you so nicely demonstrated, democrats finally found a clean, articulate magic negro to assuage their white guilt. Republicans have no such guilt, as the party was created to free blacks and has worked tirelessly for civil rights.

From my earlier link:

Haha. The "magic negro" in movies is one of my favorite stock movie characters.
Anyway, you make too many baseless accusations man. Democrats don't stand for racism.

[glockmail]

Haha. The "magic negro" in movies is one of my favorite stock movie characters.
Anyway, you make too many baseless accusations man. Democrats don't stand for racism.
Of course they do. The entire organization is built on using race to further their socialist agenda. Obama wouldn't be where he is now if he was a white guy.

[Hagbard Celine]

Of course they do. The entire organization is built on using race to further their socialist agenda. Obama wouldn't be where he is now if he was a white guy.

Oh whatever man. Yes he would. And the Bobby Kennedy comparisons would be so rampant it would be outta control. Obama has made it a point to keep race out of the political discussion so far. All the talk about race is coming from the media. He downplays it at every turn and the only reason he gave that big speech about it to begin with was because he was forced to because Reverend Wrong made it a necessity.

[glockmail]

Oh whatever man. Yes he would. And the Bobby Kennedy comparisons would be so rampant it would be outta control. Obama has made it a point to keep race out of the political discussion so far. All the talk about race is coming from the media. He downplays it at every turn and the only reason he gave that big speech about it to begin with was because he was forced to because Reverend Wrong made it a necessity. RFK was only there because JFK was assassinated, and people felt sorry for him. There is no comparison.

Obama doesn’t have to address race directly because the 8000# elephant is not just in the room, but he’s standing on top of it.

[Guernicaa]

Yeah--You would post something like this.

If you understood history you'd also know that political parties have greatly changed over the years and the Democratic Party 100 years ago is not the Democratic Party today.

Traditionally, many Democrats were like today's virtually inexistent "southern democrats", and yes, many were racist. But today those people are no longer classified as "southern democrats", but have since become part of the Republican Party because of the shifting political landscape.

Today's Democratic party was most heavily shaped by the liberal economic policies and progressive attitude of FDR as well as the cultural revolutions of the 1960's. Today's Democratic Party does not secretly conspire to keep black people down with "failed" socialist policies as your warped mind seems to imagine. We strive to help people succeed in general by a mix of government assistance to help them get on their feet and advocating fiscal responsibility once a person is able to pick themselves up. Or in other words, healthy, happy people.

Maybe you haven't realized, but when awful, racist actions are sometimes done to black people that cause national attention (i.e. cops firing 30 bullets on an unarmed black male), the people we typically find defending the black male and advocating the prosecution of a hate crime are Democrats.
The people usually stating "he deserved it" and "there was no racist motive" and "he was dressed like a thug" are usually Republican gas-bags.

[Hagbard Celine]

RFK was only there because JFK was assassinated, and people felt sorry for him. There is no comparison.

Obama doesn’t have to address race directly because the 8000# elephant is not just in the room, but he’s standing on top of it.

I disagree man. He shouldn't have to address race other than to acknowledge that he's the first black man to ever win a nomination for President. His race didn't get him to where he is now, his talents and his ethic did. Would it be fair to say that John McCain wouldn't be where he is today if not for his time spent as a POW? Or if he wasn't white? Don't you think that the great people in our society get to where they are simply because they are great people?

[Monkeybone]

i just like the people that are saying how he deserves this.

[Hagbard Celine]

i just like the people that are saying how he deserves this.

I haven't heard anyone say that, but I agree that sounds stupid.

[glockmail]

Yeah--You would post something like this.

If you understood history you'd also know that political parties have greatly changed over the years and the Democratic Party 100 years ago is not the Democratic Party today.

Traditionally, many Democrats were like today's virtually inexistent "southern democrats", and yes, many were racist. But today those people are no longer classified as "southern democrats", but have since become part of the Republican Party because of the shifting political landscape.

Today's Democratic party was most heavily shaped by the liberal economic policies and progressive attitude of FDR as well as the cultural revolutions of the 1960's. Today's Democratic Party does not secretly conspire to keep black people down with "failed" socialist policies as your warped mind seems to imagine. We strive to help people succeed in general by a mix of government assistance to help them get on their feet and advocating fiscal responsibility once a person is able to pick themselves up. Or in other words, healthy, happy people.

Maybe you haven't realized, but when awful, racist actions are sometimes done to black people that cause national attention (i.e. cops firing 30 bullets on an unarmed black male), the people we typically find defending the black male and advocating the prosecution of a hate crime are Democrats.
The people usually stating "he deserved it" and "there was no racist motive" and "he was dressed like a thug" are usually Republican gas-bags.I understand that's the lie currently being taught in schools and an alarming majority has bought into it, like sheep. However the facts, as eloquently stated by the author in the OP link, are undisputable.

[glockmail]

I disagree man. He shouldn't have to address race other than to acknowledge that he's the first black man to ever win a nomination for President. His race didn't get him to where he is now, his talents and his ethic did. Would it be fair to say that John McCain wouldn't be where he is today if not for his time spent as a POW? Or if he wasn't white? Don't you think that the great people in our society get to where they are simply because they are great people?

He's a junior senator that abstained from voting on over 100 issues brought before him, and he's been campaigning for most of his term. Any comparison to McCain is ludicrous.

[Hagbard Celine]

He's a junior senator that abstained from voting on over 100 issues brought before him, and he's been campaigning for most of his term. Any comparison to McCain is ludicrous.

I'm not comparing him to McCain. What I did was use the same yardstick you used for Obama on McCain. Why do you think it's fair to say that Obama wouldn't be where he is unless he was black, but it's not fair to say the same about McCain? They both made it to the Senate. They've both accomplished a lot in their lives--McCain more simply because he's older. Why can't I say McCain wouldn't be where he is today if he weren't white? Or if he hadn't been a POW? As in "he's only a senator now because voters felt sorry for him for being a POW." Is that fair? No it isn't.

[glockmail]

I'm not comparing him to McCain. What I did was use the same yardstick you used for Obama on McCain. Why do you think it's fair to say that Obama wouldn't be where he is unless he was black, but it's not fair to say the same about McCain? They both made it to the Senate. They've both accomplished a lot in their lives--McCain more simply because he's older. Why can't I say McCain wouldn't be where he is today if he weren't white? Or if he hadn't been a POW? As in "he's only a senator now because voters felt sorry for him for being a POW." Is that fair? No it isn't.
You're clearly mixed up now Celine.

[actsnoblemartin]

this is very well documented and accurate, a black pastor spoke of this on the radio


By Frances Rice

Democrats who say they don’t care about civil rights history do so because they want to hide the Democratic Party’s racist past. Hypocritically, these same Democrats are quick to falsely accuse Republicans of being racist, while pontificating about why black Americans vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party—a party whose failed socialist policies have turned black communities into economic and social wastelands….

It was Democrats who started the Ku Klux Klan that became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party to lynch and terrorize Republicans-black and white. Democrats passed those discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws and fought every piece of civil rights legislation from the 1860’s to the 1960’s. Shamefully, Democrats fought against anti-lynching laws, and when the Democrats regained control of Congress in 1892, they passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil right laws enacted by Republicans. Republicans founded the HCBU’s and started the NAACP to counter the racist practices of the Democrats. It took Republicans six decades to finally enact civil rights laws in the 1950’s and 1960’s, over the objection of Democrats.

It defies logic for Democrats today to claim that the racist Democrats suddenly joined the Republican Party after Republicans—including Republican Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.—finally won the civil rights battle against the racist Democrats. In fact, the racist Democrats declared that they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than vote for a Republican, because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks….

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-Unveiled%20Democrats%20Racist%20Past&tp_preview=true

[glockmail]

this is very well documented and accurate, a black pastor spoke of this on the radio


And when was the last time you heard anyone state correctly that MLK was a Republican?

[Yurt]

Oh whatever man. Yes he would. And the Bobby Kennedy comparisons would be so rampant it would be outta control. Obama has made it a point to keep race out of the political discussion so far. All the talk about race is coming from the media. He downplays it at every turn and the only reason he gave that big speech about it to begin with was because he was forced to because Reverend Wrong made it a necessity.

actually, his two books delve into race issues quite a bit. also, he believes race is very important and he does not down play it.


But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/obama-race-speech-read-t_n_92077.html