don'forget civil rights lawyer

• lets see her - BDAyes
  • What I have been reading from a couple diff. - Sharon.
    • She was in Wisconsin today, - Backwards typist
      • did she take any - BDAyes
        • Don't know. It was just a 1 minute report on the news (nm) - Backwards typist
    • yes! I knew it! - BDAyes
      • Hmmmm..... - ms
        • Ah, correct me if I am wrong, but Obama...sm - oldtimer
          • don'forget civil rights lawyer - Roque
        • Would rather hear a few ers and uhs - followed by thoughtful brilliance than...sm
        • see message - BDAyes
      • hold on to your hats - BDAyes
  • Nice to see some reinforcements - show up. It's been a long morning. nm
  • I gotta agree with you here.... - ms

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Although you are correct that Lincoln was a Republican, in those days, Republican was not what it is today, nor Democrat, no Tory nor Whig, etc. How could it be, the times they have-a-changed. He called himself a Democrat many times during his career and was extremely anti-slavery but did not fall in with the abolitionists. What with Republicans, Democrats, Whigs, Jacobins, etc. it would be really difficult to say one party abolished slavery.People from all sides supported and opposed it. Lincoln just happened to be president and the **War of Northern Aggression** quelled those who had seceded.

 Lincoln was very anti-war, did not like the idea at all so the civil war was distasteful to say the least. He did, however, have no problem enlisting and personally fighting in the European versus Sac Indians war which makes him not my most favorite president...but then, everyone makes mistakes. He did that in his younger years.

The civil rights act I have always believed rests with LBJ. He is not my favorite either. In fact, I did not like him much at all, but he did, in his predecessor's memory, carry the civil rights act to fruition. I remember him saying on the day that he signed it, the south is lost to Democrats as of this day. Here is a link of the timeline. It is pretty straightforward, comes from LBJ for kids site so it is not overly lengthy or boring.

http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/lbjforkids/civil_timeline.shtm

Actually in the House 100% of the southern Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Act so it seems you may have skewed the results a bit in order to generalize.  Actually the vote went by geography rather than party lines as is obvious below. 

As far as the Dems having a lot of catching up to do....politics change over time.  Democratic affiliation changed with FDR.  Perhaps you have a lot of catching up to do yourself!

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT VOTING

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7-87   (7%-93%)
  
• Southern Republicans: 0-10   (0%-100%)

• Northern Democrats: 145-9   (94%-6%)
  
• Northern Republicans: 138-24   (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1-20   (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
  
• Southern Republicans: 0-1   (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
  
• Northern Democrats: 45-1   (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
  
• Northern Republicans: 27-5   (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)

Civil and political rights are a class of rights ensuring things such as the protection of peoples' physical integrity; procedural fairness in law; protection from discrimination based on gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, etc; individual freedom of belief, speech, association, and the press; and political participation.

So acorrding to you, we should just scrap this whole civil rights thing that would protect those who do not have as large a voice and go for a majority vote? 

House Debate and Passage
The House of Representatives debated the bill for nine days and rejected nearly one hundred amendments designed to weaken the bill before passing H.R .7152 on February 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11. A bipartisan coalition of Republicans and northern Democrats was the key to the bill's success. This same arrangement would prove crucial later to the Senate's approval of the bill. 

I thought after reading your post that there was something wrong with that statement, Republicans passed the civil rights act; Huh?? Then I remembered at that time the south was predominantly Democratic and I believe those elected officials were voting more on their constituents' demands than on the platform of the Democratic party. That also explains why Johnson said, **As of today, Democrats have lost the south.** and he was right. It looks to me like a bipartisan deal. I got the above information from the Everett Dirksen Library Archives.

This also demonstrates to me how a party can change or evolve its platforms. The Democratic south was once **the little people, the working class,  the most good for the most people party.** After the civil rights act the south became predominantly Republican and remains so. In 1964 the south did not want equal rights for women, blacks, religions. They wanted things to stay the way they were. I think the Republicans provided that for them. In 1964 I think it safe to say that WASP was pretty much the bulk of the Republican party and that appealed to the south who were being forced at gunpoint to change.

I don't know about the suffrage movement but I always wonder if they caught the same flack then that NOW gets now. I am going to look that up though.

During the civil war the rich people, who owned slaves, worked up the poor people, who did not own slaves, into a frenzy about how the north was bossing them around, how they should leave the union and it was an ideological war.  All the rich people left their plantations and went north until the war was over.  The poor people fought out, brother against brother, without shoes, for an idea.  The rich people came back after it was over and kicked the freed slaves off their land, right into the laps of the poor people who had to compete with them now for jobs.  The rich stayed rich, alive, and healthy, and all of the poor people were slaughtered. 

Are all you republicans rich? Don't fight for them, they are on vacation.

to be something we would do on a country wide basis.  I mean...what is the point if you can't leave your state because other states don't accept them.  I meant this as a country wide thing.  If the whole country recognized civil unions with the same benefits as marriage kind of thing.  I guess I wasn't specific enough. 

As it goes, same sex marriage is only accepted in the states that allow it.  I mean...you have to live in those states to have the rights of marriage...right?  Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one because I really don't know. 

As a nation, we did not used to spend so much time splitting hairs over words.

What if back when the 19th amendment was enacted, they had said:  Women having the right to 'vote' would upset men.   So instead of 'voting' we're going to call it 'ballot casting.'  That way, women can have the same rights as men, but only men can be 'voters' and won't feel they're losing their special status. 

How about if during the civil rights movement, when segregation was eliminated, instead of integration they had called it:  'The right to attend the same schools and go to the same restaurants and ride in the front of the bus'?  Calling institutions 'integrated' would upset the southern states. 

How about when women began to demand 'equal pay for equal work'?  What if they had said:  Okay, you can have the money and the responsibility, maybe even the corner office, but only a man can be called VP of Sales.  Instead, your title will have to be something else, maybe Sales Coordinator, othewise the men who are VPs will get angry. 

I suppose a fair number of women or blacks would have considered this a win, because they were gaining the benefit, if not the exact status of the changes.  But a fair number of folks rightly would have said:  Huh?  Aren't these silly distinctions?  A lot of people would have wondered why they didn't just shut up and 'settle.'  

If a civil union conveys such benefits as inheritance rights, parental rights, credit rights, insurance rights, the right to make medical decisions for a spouse then, really, what's in a name?

Never in my lifetime have issues gotten so ugly/hateful.  This will be the first illegal election in history if Sen. Obama is elected.  People do not care that he does not meet the requirements to be President.  They will go against the constitution just to get him elected.  Why?  I know there are a lot of people who would like Arnold Schwarzenegger to run for President.  If Obama who is not a native born, and is possibly not even a US Citizen can be elected and have the constitution violated for him, then we should be able to do it for Gov. Schwarzenegger.  There are so many people who will say we have to protect the constitution, yet they’ll turn a blind eye when it comes to electing someone who is not an American born, and who is possibly still a citizen of Indonesia (forget that he is Muslin, I don’t care about his religion, he may possibly be a citizen of another country).  We have a candidate who is so busy running around like a chicken with his head cut off suppressing the truth from Americans, and there are Americans attacking others (no that that girl with a B in her face – I hope she is prosecuted for what she has done), but others who attack (verbally and physically) anyone who is not allowing this lie to proceed.  Mr. Obama was supposed to be checked out thoroughly before he could run and the DNC failed to do that.  Mr. Obama is calling for the health records of all candidates, yet he won’t release his own.  Sorry but a one-page statement from his doctor saying Mr. Obama is healthy, that's all you need to know, with no details whatsoever (and from someone whose parents died at a young age and he smoked his whole life and took drugs and drank) the American people have a right to know this – especially since their side is pushing to have Palin & McCains “full” records be known to the public and people are screaming and shouting its their right to know the full health records of the republicans, shouldn’t that go for Obama too?  Then there is the issue of his school records.  Why is he desperately trying to suppress those.  Most likely it will show he is a citizen of Indonesia and never became a US Citizen.  You know if a democrat president is elected fine, just let it be a legal one.  Follow the constitution and not this love-fest everyone is sharing towards Obama.  Some good democrats that would make fine presidnets are Richardson & Kucinich.  I'd even be okay with Edwards.

But I say we are heading toward a civil war because we have people already threatening that if Obama does not win there will be “riots in the streets like we haven’t seen”, but if he is elected and it is illegal there will be riots of another kind.  You are going to have so many Americans angry and disenfranchised with the government that if you thought the Boston Tea Party was ugly this will be worse.

Then we have the issue of the every day American citizens.  We are suffering.  There’s no doubt about it.  We are heading into a depression (do not blame Bush for the whole thing as it started its downward spiral under the Carter administration and continued through the Clinton administration, and yes some republicans are to blame), but Americans are suffering.  We are losing our jobs, our homes, cannot afford to send our kids to college, let alone buy gas and groceries or go to the doctor.  More and more people’s savings are being wiped out and their retirement plans are worthless.  Yet the politicians (both republican AND democrat) are getting richer and richer.  The latest saying in the Washington political scene is “if you were not a millionaire before you came in you will be one when you leave”.  Politicians are no longer working for the American people; they are working for themselves and their rich friends and against us.  They don’t care about us - they don’t care one iota.  They have made so many loopholes to protect themselves and have lied so many times they are covering their lies with lies and saying exactly what they think we want to hear.

All I say is if Sen. Obama is elected, the election will be a fraud, the office of President will be a fraud, and with the three branches of office (house, senate, and president) ALL being democrat, he will not be impeached for fraud and they will continue on with their illegal activities.  And the country will see a civil distress.  Why should we abide by laws when our government doesn’t.

People need to wake up.  The constitution is being violated and they are all okay with that.  It’s all very sickening.  I just think its disgraceful that people would rather see our country destroyed than to elect Senator McCain.  Sure I wish it was someone else (R. Paul, M. Romney, D. Hunter or any of the others, but its not).  If McCain gets in don’t worry, it will only be four years and then another election will be held and maybe this time a candidate will be chosen on the democratic side that is legal.  That is of course if the Mayan calendar is wrong.

Listen to the link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfV8iXiB9Xg

DH said its disgusting that he's laughing about it.

our opinions, short of using obscenities.  As soon as the Thought Police are empowered, this may change, but currently we are free to say what we think. 

I personally do not think Obama is stupid or naive, but I do believe he is a suck-up when it comes to currying favor with foreign countries and throwing his own country under the bus to do it.  He really believes that the worse he can make this country's history look, the more radiant his countenance will appear in comparison.  He truly believes he is the Hope Diamond in a hog wallow.  The arrogance is all his.