WTF GOP

[AthenaAwakened]

The Civil Rights Act of 1957, Pub.L. 85–315, 71 Stat. 634, enacted September 9, 1957, primarily a voting rights bill, was the first civil rights legislation passed by Congress in the United States since Reconstruction following the American Civil War.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was also Congress's show of support for the Supreme Court's Brown decisions. [1] The Brown v. Board of Education (1954), eventually led to the integration of public schools. Following the Supreme Court ruling, Southern whites in Virginia began a "Massive Resistance." Violence against blacks rose there and in other states, as in Little Rock, Arkansas, where that year President Dwight D. Eisenhower had ordered in federal troops to protect nine children integrating a public school, the first time the federal government had sent troops to the South since Reconstruction.[2] There had been continued physical assaults against suspected activists and bombings of schools and churches in the South. The administration of Eisenhower proposed legislation to protect the right to vote by African Americans.

Democratic Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, an ardent segregationist, sustained the longest one-person filibuster in history in an attempt to keep the bill from becoming law. His one-man filibuster lasted 24 hours and 18 minutes; he began with readings of every state's election laws in alphabetical order. Thurmond later read from the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and George Washington's Farewell Address. His speech set the record for a Senate filibuster.[3] The bill passed the House with a vote of 285 to 126 (Republicans 167-19 for, Democrats 118-107 for) [4] and the Senate 72 to 18 (Republicans 43-0 for, Democrats 29-18 for).[5] President Eisenhower signed it on September 9, 1957.

The way the GOP used to be.

 

[Bronzeage]

It's not as bizarre as it seems. Political control of the south was in the hands of Conservative white Democrats. The Republican party had not had a real presence since Reconstruction. There were conservative and liberal(progressive) wings inside southern state Democratic politics.

The Civil Rights Act and the later Voter Rights Act brought real change to the political landscape. The arch conservative anti-integration faction of the Democratic Party became marginalized as it became clear that a Democratic Presidency was going to enforce Federal Law, even it mean putting National Guard troops on school campuses. The GOP was able to exploit this division in the Southern Democrats and formed an all white southern wing of the GOP, which included religious conservatives. Today's GOP reflects this change.

 

[Underseer]

It's not hard to understand.

All the Republicans except Lincoln wanted the most retributive policies in the reconstruction era. Then Lincoln was assassinated, which resulted in the obvious, which in turn resulted in most Southerners voting Democrat for a really long time.

Then came the now infamous Southern Strategy, which not only resulted in racists leaving the Democratic party for the Republican party, but probably resulted in a number of non-racists in the Republican party making the opposite trip.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Well, did all the Republicans from back in the day die? Were they wiped out by an asteroid hitting the earth? Were they raptured?

Where fuck our they?

 

[Underseer]

Well, did all the Republicans from back in the day die? Were they wiped out by an asteroid hitting the earth? Were they raptured?

Where fuck our they?

The ones that stayed got drowned out by the massive influx of racists from the Southern Strategy. As I hinted at before, I have to imagine that some Republicans from back in the day must have become disgusted by the changes and switched to the Democratic party. Others didn't care enough about issues of race to publicly argue with the new members of the Republican party, while the few that did probably got drowned out both in the noise machine and in the voting booth.

 

[Sarpedon]

America has two major parties, but many political factions. Each party is made up of a loose alliance of factions. Sometimes the factions realign. In today's republican party, the factions are obvious. You can see the factions in the democratic party too, if you squint. There's a big difference between, say the faction that Elizabeth Warren is part of, and Bill Clinton's. The Democratic party's commitment to pluralism and tolerance makes it more resistant to internal factions than the GOP, with its emphasis on black and white moral divisions.

In other countries, with different election rules, factions like the ones that make up our parties are themselves parties. I used to think this was better than our system, but I am beginning to appreciate how much better it is that coalition building happens within our parties, rather than within our national politics. The break down of our government in the last few years is almost entirely due to the break down of the republican coalition. In other countries, this sort of thing is the norm.

 

[Bronzeage]

Well, did all the Republicans from back in the day die? Were they wiped out by an asteroid hitting the earth? Were they raptured?

Where fuck our they?

Most of them are now the middle ground undecideds.

The plain truth about US politics is most people simply don't have time to worry about it. They have jobs and rent and kids. Why on earth would a sensible person care who is chosen to be the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank? Does it really matter?

The GOP is not really a political party anymore. It is a political coalition of various groups which cannot find a home in the Democratic Party. None are large enough to attract the middle ground, but each is a large enough percentage of the party to influence the choice of candidates. This gives us the circus of a slate of fringe wackos, such as Rick Santorum, and lowest common denominators, such as Mitt Romney. Each group sends out their favorite son and then settles for the one that offends the least number of people.

When this soup is seasoned with news networks that have to fill the time with something, people like Michelle Bachman get national coverage. What we know as the Republican Party was created in the 1850's, when the Whig Party was broken apart by factions divided by the issues of slavery and Federal power. Abraham Lincoln went to Congress as a Whig, but was elect President as a Republican. We can expect a similar transformation of today's Republican Party over the next decade. It the Democrats win the White House again in 2016, it's a sure bet.

 

[Toni]

This isn't quite accurate. Eisenhower signed the Civil Right's Act of 1956 into power, providing voting protections for blacks and sent troops into Little Rock, AK to protect the 9 black children who enrolled there, following Brown V Topeka Board of Education.

More on Eisenhower and Civil Rights:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/opinion/12nichols.html?_r=0

Eisenhower was the last Republican with any claim to moral courage or integrity.

 

[Bronzeage]

This isn't quite accurate. Eisenhower signed the Civil Right's Act of 1956 into power, providing voting protections for blacks and sent troops into Little Rock, AK to protect the 9 black children who enrolled there, following Brown V Topeka Board of Education.

More on Eisenhower and Civil Rights:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/opinion/12nichols.html?_r=0

Eisenhower was the last Republican with any claim to moral courage or integrity.

Eisenhower was basically apolitical. Both the Republicans and Democrats considered drafting him as a candidate.

 

[Toni]

Being courted by both parties seems to not fit into the definition of apolitical.

Nonetheless, Eisenhower was a big proponent of Civil Rights legislation at a time when there was strong resistance by some Democrats. Teddy Roosevelt was considered progressive, for his day, as well.

Since Eisenhower's day, the Republican party has been filled with an increasingly right wing anti-progressive membership, but frankly, most modern Democrats are somewhat right of Eisenhower.

 

[Underseer]

Most of them are now the middle ground undecideds.

The plain truth about US politics is most people simply don't have time to worry about it. They have jobs and rent and kids. Why on earth would a sensible person care who is chosen to be the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank? Does it really matter?

The GOP is not really a political party anymore. It is a political coalition of various groups which cannot find a home in the Democratic Party. None are large enough to attract the middle ground, but each is a large enough percentage of the party to influence the choice of candidates. This gives us the circus of a slate of fringe wackos, such as Rick Santorum, and lowest common denominators, such as Mitt Romney. Each group sends out their favorite son and then settles for the one that offends the least number of people.

When this soup is seasoned with news networks that have to fill the time with something, people like Michelle Bachman get national coverage. What we know as the Republican Party was created in the 1850's, when the Whig Party was broken apart by factions divided by the issues of slavery and Federal power. Abraham Lincoln went to Congress as a Whig, but was elect President as a Republican. We can expect a similar transformation of today's Republican Party over the next decade. It the Democrats win the White House again in 2016, it's a sure bet.

Well, most of the extremism comes from that multibillion dollar propaganda machine that turned out to be a little too effective. Not only is the base far more extreme than the party leadership probably intended, but the old memes just don't want to die so other than becoming even more extreme, they have no way to turn the boat around on individual issues like immigration/Latinos.

 

[boneyard bill]

The way the GOP used to be.

So what happened? You overlook one very important point. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was a Voting Rights Act. So how come all those Southern blacks didn't start voting after it was passed? The answer is because Lyndon Johnson had it watered down. He pushed amendments into the bill that transferred enforcement from federal courts to local juries. That meant that Southern registrars could be confident that they would not be convicted for violating any provisions of the act. Johnson knew the act couldn't be stopped. Note that it got 72 votes in the Senate which was more than enough to over-ride a filibuster if other Senators had chosen to join Strom Thurmond.

But 72 votes was also enough to have amended the bill on the floor of the Senate and restore its original enforcement. So where were the liberals on this? Where was John Kennedy? Where was Hubert Humphrey? They could have joined with Republicans to pass the original bill. Why didn't they? Because they didn't want to enfranchise Republican voters, and Southern blacks heavily favored the Republican Party. Northern blacks had become majority Democrat during the New Deal, but Southern blacks had remained Republican. So Northern liberals went along with LBJ's move which allowed them to vote for a civil rights bill without actually enfranchising many voters. Martin Luther King was so outraged at the amendments that he very nearly came out against the bill, but he was persuaded that it was better to get something than to get nothing. Eisenhower tried again in 1960, but that bill met the same fate as the '57 act.

Meanwhile, Democrats shifted the debate from voting, which was a true "civil" right, to desegregation. Their platform in 1960 put desegregation at the top of the list of civil rights objectives. Republicans walked into the trap and countered with a platform that mirrored the Democrats. If Nixon had insisted on countering the Democrats by putting voting rights, rather than desegregation, as the first item on the agenda in 1960, I think he would have won the election.

So now the people who are praised as the great champions of civil rights: Kennedy, Johnson, and Humphrey, are actually the people who delayed the civil rights revolution by nearly a decade.

The Republican "Southern Strategy" is also badly misrepresented in most accounts due to the way events finally developed but also due to the bias of most academic historians. The Republican southern strategy actually began in 1928 when Hoover pulled 63 southern electoral votes to only 64 for the Democrat Al Smith. Smith was a Catholic and that was assumed by many to be the reason for the Republicans electoral strength that year. In fact, however, Hoover was a very popular figure, and he was running on the incumbent ticket with a strong economy at this back so there may have been other factors. But Smith's terrible showing in the South was still a problem that Kennedy had to deal with in 1960 and may have been a big factor in his choice of Lyndon Johnson as his running mate.

But Republicans saw the South as winnable from the that point on. The only question was how to go about it. Some wanted to appeal to Southern white conservatives who were disenchanted with FDR's New Deal. But others saw the black vote as the key to victory. If they could combine the new Southern Republican white voters with an expanded black voter base, they could hope to win at least some statewide races besides the presidency.

The strategy of appealing to conservative Southern white voters only solidified after it became apparent that the CRA of '64 was going to pass. At that point, Southern delegates rallied behind Barry Goldwater, who had announced against it, and provided the votes he needed to win the nomination. Prior to that, some Southern delegations had actually been leaning toward Rockefeller.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

So what happened? You overlook one very important point. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was a Voting Rights Act. So how come all those Southern blacks didn't start voting after it was passed?

well, lets look at what DID happen when they tried to vote. Their homes and churches WERE BOMBED! The had dogs turned on them as well as hoses and not just them but their children, and they where lynched. So before you go off on some revisionist rant about how sweet and wonderful all the white folk in the south were, revise that.

The answer is because Lyndon Johnson had it watered down. He pushed amendments into the bill that transferred enforcement from federal courts to local juries. That meant that Southern registrars could be confident that they would not be convicted for violating any provisions of the act. Johnson knew the act couldn't be stopped. Note that it got 72 votes in the Senate which was more than enough to over-ride a filibuster if other Senators had chosen to join Strom Thurmond.

But 72 votes was also enough to have amended the bill on the floor of the Senate and restore its original enforcement. So where were the liberals on this? Where was John Kennedy? Where was Hubert Humphrey? They could have joined with Republicans to pass the original bill. Why didn't they? Because they didn't want to enfranchise Republican voters, and Southern blacks heavily favored the Republican Party. Northern blacks had become majority Democrat during the New Deal, but Southern blacks had remained Republican. So Northern liberals went along with LBJ's move which allowed them to vote for a civil rights bill without actually enfranchising many voters. Martin Luther King was so outraged at the amendments that he very nearly came out against the bill, but he was persuaded that it was better to get something than to get nothing. Eisenhower tried again in 1960, but that bill met the same fate as the '57 act.

Meanwhile, Democrats shifted the debate from voting, which was a true "civil" right, to desegregation. Their platform in 1960 put desegregation at the top of the list of civil rights objectives. Republicans walked into the trap and countered with a platform that mirrored the Democrats. If Nixon had insisted on countering the Democrats by putting voting rights, rather than desegregation, as the first item on the agenda in 1960, I think he would have won the election.

So now the people who are praised as the great champions of civil rights: Kennedy, Johnson, and Humphrey, are actually the people who delayed the civil rights revolution by nearly a decade.

The Republican "Southern Strategy" is also badly misrepresented in most accounts due to the way events finally developed but also due to the bias of most academic historians. The Republican southern strategy actually began in 1928 when Hoover pulled 63 southern electoral votes to only 64 for the Democrat Al Smith. Smith was a Catholic and that was assumed by many to be the reason for the Republicans electoral strength that year. In fact, however, Hoover was a very popular figure, and he was running on the incumbent ticket with a strong economy at this back so there may have been other factors. But Smith's terrible showing in the South was still a problem that Kennedy had to deal with in 1960 and may have been a big factor in his choice of Lyndon Johnson as his running mate.

But Republicans saw the South as winnable from the that point on. The only question was how to go about it. Some wanted to appeal to Southern white conservatives who were disenchanted with FDR's New Deal. But others saw the black vote as the key to victory. If they could combine the new Southern Republican white voters with an expanded black voter base, they could hope to win at least some statewide races besides the presidency.

The strategy of appealing to conservative Southern white voters only solidified after it became apparent that the CRA of '64 was going to pass. At that point, Southern delegates rallied behind Barry Goldwater, who had announced against it, and provided the votes he needed to win the nomination. Prior to that, some Southern delegations had actually been leaning toward Rockefeller.

if we had bacon, we could have bacon and eggs, if we had eggs.

 

[boneyard bill]

well, lets look at what DID happen when they tried to vote. Their homes and churches WERE BOMBED! The had dogs turned on them as well as hoses and not just them but their children, and they where lynched. So before you go off on some revisionist rant about how sweet and wonderful all the white folk in the south were, revise that.

if we had bacon, we could have bacon and eggs, if we had eggs.

I'm afraid I don't get your point. My point is that the GOP is what it is today largely because the Democrats made it that way. I don't think things turned out quite as well as they expected because I don't think they wanted to lose their majority party status. But the civil rights movement became what it was largely by politicians being sneaky and underhanded, which is hardly a surprise, but it's a mistake the lionize the politicians who were at the head of it. They were just being politicians. In fact, it's a mistake to lionize any politician and usually a mistake to demonize them as well. You don't blame the lion for killing the gazelle. That's what lions do.

 

[Bronzeage]

I'm afraid I don't get your point. My point is that the GOP is what it is today largely because the Democrats made it that way. I don't think things turned out quite as well as they expected because I don't think they wanted to lose their majority party status. But the civil rights movement became what it was largely by politicians being sneaky and underhanded, which is hardly a surprise, but it's a mistake the lionize the politicians who were at the head of it. They were just being politicians. In fact, it's a mistake to lionize any politician and usually a mistake to demonize them as well. You don't blame the lion for killing the gazelle. That's what lions do.

Sneaky and underhanded?

Lyndon Johnson knew the Civil Rights Act would lose the south for the Democratic Party for the foreseeable future, but did it anyway. The GOP is what it is today because Republicans would rather run their party than run the country. You can't pin that on the Democrats.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Everybody knows LBJ was an SOB.

Hell, growing up I thought SOB followed LBJ in the alphabet.

And he was a ruthless politician

And he could, would, and did lie

And he was known to say nigger

and once back when he was eight, he stole a peck of apple.

And none of this, NONE OF THIS, has a goddamn thing to do with the GOP becoming a nest of reactionary, revisionist, racist dumbasses and dipshits spewing vile hatred 24/7.

 

[boneyard bill]

Sneaky and underhanded?

Lyndon Johnson knew the Civil Rights Act would lose the south for the Democratic Party for the foreseeable future, but did it anyway. The GOP is what it is today because Republicans would rather run their party than run the country. You can't pin that on the Democrats.

No. They hoped to hold the South by winning the black vote just as some Republicans hoped to win the South by enfranchising blacks. But Southern blacks weren't Democrats (why on earth would they be?) So they had to win over the black vote before enfranchising blacks. They did it by shifting the focus to desegregation. That's why they passed the CRA of '64 before passing the Voting Rights Act in '65. If they had passed the voting rights act, they wouldn't have needed the CRA of '64. Democrats refused to pass voting rights when the black Southern majority was still Republican. They had two chances, in 1957 and in 1960. But as soon as CRA '64 was passed and a Democratic president would get the credit for it, then they submitted a voting rights act.

In fact, it took a long time for Democrats to lose the South. Their ploy basically worked. They couldn't pull many Southern electoral votes without a Southerner on the ticket, but they held on to their Congressional base until 1994, and then the issue that probably cost them the South was gun control, not civil rights.

 

[Bronzeage]

No. They hoped to hold the South by winning the black vote just as some Republicans hoped to win the South by enfranchising blacks. But Southern blacks weren't Democrats (why on earth would they be?) So they had to win over the black vote before enfranchising blacks. They did it by shifting the focus to desegregation. That's why they passed the CRA of '64 before passing the Voting Rights Act in '65. If they had passed the voting rights act, they wouldn't have needed the CRA of '64. Democrats refused to pass voting rights when the black Southern majority was still Republican. They had two chances, in 1957 and in 1960. But as soon as CRA '64 was passed and a Democratic president would get the credit for it, then they submitted a voting rights act.

In fact, it took a long time for Democrats to lose the South. Their ploy basically worked. They couldn't pull many Southern electoral votes without a Southerner on the ticket, but they held on to their Congressional base until 1994, and then the issue that probably cost them the South was gun control, not civil rights.

When "when the black Southern majority was still Republican," it would have been a very small percentage of the black population. There was no time when the number of southern black Republicans would have been a significant addition to the GOP, at least in the 20th century.

 

[Toni]

My point is that the GOP is what it is today largely because the Democrats made it that way. .

Your point is very much mistaken and you are sounding suspiciously as though you believe Republicans to be spineless, witless idiots without any will of their own: victims of the evil machinations of Democrats.

Racists have flocked to the Republican party quite willingly under the banners of Goldwater and Wallace, among others, and their backwards mindsets have been codified by the likes of Regan who convinced them that it was all good old fashioned family values.

 

[boneyard bill]

Everybody knows LBJ was an SOB.

Hell, growing up I thought SOB followed LBJ in the alphabet.

And he was a ruthless politician

And he could, would, and did lie

And he was known to say nigger

and once back when he was eight, he stole a peck of apple.

And none of this, NONE OF THIS, has a goddamn thing to do with the GOP becoming a nest of reactionary, revisionist, racist dumbasses and dipshits spewing vile hatred 24/7.

What do you do for a living? Write for MSNBC? Name calling is not a rational argument. It is the refuge of those who are out of rational arguments. None of the things you say about the GOP are true. Everything I have said about the Democrats on this post are true. I have dealt in facts and apparently you do not like those facts and so you resort to name-calling.

The result is the YOU become the victim of the Democrats who get you to support them even when their programs are harmful to the black population. Like opposition to school choice, for example. The Democrats HAVE to take that position because they are in bed with the teacher's unions. But you do not. You are deceived into supporting the Democrats on that issue even while there is probably not one single thing that would benefit blacks more than being able to opt out of the public school system or choose a different public school than the one they are assigned to by our all-wise governments masters.