“It is the same group we faced in the South with those white crackers and the dogs and the police. They didn’t care about how they looked," Rangel said.It was Democrats who did set the dogs and police on blacks. DEMOCRATS. Bull Connor, for example.
Because of this, Rangel said the Tea Party could be defeated using the same tactics employed against Jim Crow.
"It was just fierce indifference to human life that caused America to say enough is enough. ‘I don’t want to see it and I am not a part of it.’ What the hell! If you have to bomb little kids and send dogs out against human beings, give me a break,” said Rangel. "
"During this time [1963, Birmingham Ala], Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., in cooperation with local civil rights leaders, led demonstrations in Birmingham against racial segregation. Connor ordered Birmingham police officers and firemen to use dogs and high-pressure water hoses against demonstrators. Images of the resulting mayhem appeared on television and in newspapers throughout the country and helped to shift public opinion in favor of national civil-rights legislation. Images of the demonstrations are still regularly broadcast and published and have helped cement Connor and Birmingham as symbols of racial intolerance.It was Democrats who implemented Jim Crow. DEMOCRATS.
It in no way involved Tea Parties or Republicans or libertarians. It involved Democrat totalitarians who suppressed blacks in any way possible.
From HHudson at HumanEvents.com:
"Do Democrats believe blacks and Latinos, old people and youngsters, are too stupid to acquire a photo I.D. by next November?
"Moreover, decrying all Republicans as racists is a Democrat article of faith. But why dredge up Jim Crow?
"In 1832, the phrase “Jim Crow” was born. By 1900, every former Confederate state (including Wyoming, Missouri, Ohio, Utah, Kentucky, Kansas and Oklahoma) had enacted “Jim Crow” laws prohibiting everything from interracial marriage to racially integrated public school systems. These state laws served to place blacks back on a virtual plantation. Similar to the “Black Codes” that came before them, Jim Crow laws were numerous. However, one denominator codified their sound support in Southern states: They all resulted from Democratic legislators of the “Solid South.”
"When Bill Clinton was 18, his future vice president’s father, Sen. Al Gore Sr., was locked arm-in-arm with other segregationist Democrats to kill the Civil Rights act of 1964. Clinton’s “mentor” and “friend,” klansman J. William Fulbright, joined the Dixiecrats, an ultra-segregationist wing of Democratic lawmakers, in filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and in killing the 1965 Voting Rights Act."
And this:
"[quoting Jesse Jackson] 'There is no doubt that the Democratic Party is the party of the Confederacy, historically, that the Democratic Party’s flag is the Confederate flag. It was our party’s flag. That Jefferson Davis was a Democrat, that Stonewall Jackson strongly identified with the Democratic Party, that secessionists in the South saw themselves as Democrats and were Democrats. That so much of the Democratic Party’s history, since it is our nation’s oldest political party, has its roots in slavery.'”How did the same Jim Crow Democrats who fought tooth-and-nail with segregationists to keep blacks on a virtual plantation become the party that now wins 95% of the black vote? Republicans passed Civil Rights laws, Democrats wrote revisionist history."
ADDENDUM:
Today's news: Black teen unemployment is 41.6%. That's Change for ya.
7 comments:
The Democratic Party WAS the right-wing party. So what?
That's your take-away? Really? A label change?
The Democrat Party was, and is to this day, the party of racism. Democrats have not changed anything but their tactics. The Democrat Party has changed tactics twice: first it invented Jim Crow to suppress blacks after it lost its slaves; second, after it lost Jim Crow, it invented Ghetto politics and welfare suppression of blacks.
The Democrat Party has never lost its desire to dominate and to use blacks to its own ends, by whatever means they can conjure.
Now they have worked themselves from moral absurdity to rational absurdity as they accuse the Republicans and Tea Party and everyone who is not part of their tribe as racist.
The Republicans freed the blacks from slavery. The Republicans freed the blacks from Jim Crow. Now the Democrat demogogues accuse the Republicans and Tea Parties as racist? The Democrat irrationality is palpable. The Democrat desperation is obvious. The Democrat immorality is dangerous to the entire nation... especially to blacks.
The Democrats discovered that they could not control directly due to the Republican liberation laws, so they implemented co-dependency policies with government give-aways as the incentive to sign up with their new, "kind", "progressivism". This robbed much of the black community of its incentive for personal growth and achievement, and it encouraged the products of sloth and idleness.
The Democrats followed up with policies of educating under the Dewey plan, restricting access to better schools (the very first thing Obama did in office), fighting for sexual libertinism on the one hand, and palliative eugenic abortion on the other hand.
The next step was the Lie of Progressivism: progress toward what? Toward "hope"? Hope for what - change? Change from what to what? Progressivism, rather than having objective goals stated, gives out meaningless mantras which were meant to conjure irrational visions in the minds of their Victims. Victims who are purposefully maleducated and ghetto-ized... by the Democrats.
When 97% of a race votes for the quasi-member of their race who betrayed them, the party (Democrat) is obviously both racist and codependent. In other words, clinically irrational.
This post is as relevant as someone complaining that today's Germans are still to be blamed for WW2!
A naturalist,
All analogies always fail at some point, some fail sooner than others.
Your analogy fails immediately, because today's Germans are not blaming the French and British for causing the war due to their aggression on the Germans. That would be the correct analogy.
Today's Democrats - such as Rangel - are trying to extrapolate their own racist past onto the past of actual non-racists (Republicans) who were/are the actual liberators of the blacks.
The attempt at projection will work with the under- and mal-educated, as well as tribe members who wish to support the racism of the Democrats (as with false analogies), but it won't work outside the tribe.
Care to try again?
"actual non-racists (Republicans) who were/are the actual liberators of the blacks."
"Actual non-racists" is debatable.
The Democratic Party was the conservative party and the Republicans were the left-wing party. You might notice that your own poster refers to them repeatedly as "radicals" the opposite of conservative.
Radical -
-thoroughgoing or extreme, especially as regards change from accepted or traditional forms,
-favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms.
If you are interested in learning about how they switched over then google "southern strategy". Republicans courted the racists in the South after they started leaving the Democratic Party then they slowly coded the racism in more abstract terms.
Republican strategist Lee Atwater explained it most clearly.
"As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South...
You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."
Republican abandoned black people in order to court the southern white racists. Republican political strategist Kevin Phillips said in an interview in a 1970 New York Times article:
"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are."
Try again?
Democrats of the past are not Democrats of today.
Germans of the past are not Germans of 2013.
This post is as relevant as someone complaining that today's Christians are still to be blamed for the Inquisition!
Got it?
A Naturalist,
I see that you have no actual fact-based argument so you are referring to false analogies, yet again. That indicates pure desperation.
Here's the actual issue, which you have ignored: Today's Democrats are racist lying liars.
(1)They are lying about Republican racism. Especially about the myth of the Southern Strategy, which was a Democrat strategy for the south.
(2)They are lying about the actual race of George Zimmerman in order to make him into an icon of "white" racism, which no longer exists in terms of wanton violence against blacks (if it did, they wouldn't have to "make it up" and lie about it). they wish to persecute the "faux white" Zimmerman because of his race and ignore the dozens upon dozens of dead blacks at the hands of blacks.
(3) They are lying about their history, blaming Jim Crow on Republicans. they even refer to Bull Connor in the same breath as "republican" and "Tea Party".
(4) Their lies are constant and on all subjects. They lie by omission by ignoring the rapes and violence in the Occupy camps, and other onerous Leftist activities.
(5) They actually do include some of the past Democrats (Rangel and Jackson for example); and the racists were never purged, and except for Thurmond, never went Republican, contrary to their lies.
(6)Their constant lying is relevant to their racism today.
(7)Their racism today is relevant to their racism of 60 years ago;
(8) relevant to their racism of 40 years ago;
(9) relevant to their racism of 20 years ago;
(10) and relevant to their racism of 2013. The Left is racist against whites overtly and blacks covertly.
If you have a substantive argument to refute that, then make it. Refute any of these 10 items; or refute all of them. Your fact-free assertions are without meaning.
Post a Comment