HomeBlack & RightThe Dixiecrat Myth Black & Right March 19, 2010 Black & Right 65 Comments The left is quite annoyed that myself and others dare link the racist, segregationist past in this country to Democrats, at that flies in the face of everything they claim to champion, when it comes to civil rights, racial tolerance, etc. The Democrats’ own website, to this day, attempts to take fraudulently credit for the civil rights movement and legislation, and when called on it, the recitation is the same: “we’ve grown” and “don’t forget about the Dixiecrats”. Defensive liberals claim the Dixiecrats, as a whole, defected from the Democrat Party when President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (no thanks to Democrats), and became Republicans which they claimed were more accepting of segregationist policies. Well, I decided to get some opinions on the matter from some historians. I contacted Professor Larry Schweikart of the University of Dayton for advice. Larry and I worked on a documentary based on a chapter on Ronald Reagan from his best-selling book, A Patriot’s History of the United States. The idea that “the Dixiecrats joined the Republicans” is not quite true, as you note. But because of Strom Thurmond it is accepted as a fact. What happened is that the **next** generation (post 1965) of white southern politicians — Newt, Trent Lott, Ashcroft, Cochran, Alexander, etc — joined the GOP. So it was really a passing of the torch as the old segregationists retired and were replaced by new young GOP guys. One particularly galling aspect to generalizations about “segregationists became GOP” is that the new GOP South was INTEGRATED for crying out loud, they accepted the Civil Rights revolution. Meanwhile, Jimmy Carter led a group of what would become “New” Democrats like Clinton and Al Gore. Larry also suggested I contact Mike Allen, Professor of History at the University of Washington, Tacoma (who also appeared in the Reagan documentary) for input. There weren’t many Republicans in the South prior to 1964, but that doesn’t mean the birth of the souther GOP was tied to “white racism.” That said, I am sure there were and are white racist southern GOP. No one would deny that. But it was the southern Democrats who were the party of slavery and, later, segregation. It was George Wallace, not John Tower, who stood in the southern schoolhouse door to block desegregation! The vast majority of Congressional GOP voted FOR the Civil Rights of 1964-65. The vast majority of those opposed to those acts were southern Democrats. Southern Democrats led to infamous filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The confusion arises from GOP Barry Goldwater’s vote against the ’64 act. He had voted in favor or all earlier bills and had led the integration of the Arizona Air National Guard, but he didn’t like the “private property” aspects of the ’64 law. In other words, Goldwater believed people’s private businesses and private clubs were subject only to market forces, not government mandates (“We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.”) His vote against the Civil Rights Act was because of that one provision was, to my mind, a principled mistake. This stance is what won Goldwater the South in 1964, and no doubt many racists voted for Goldwater in the mistaken belief that he opposed Negro Civil Rights. But Goldwater was not a racist; he was a libertarian who favored both civil rights and property rights. Switch to 1968. Richard Nixon was also a proponent of Civil Rights; it was a CA colleague who urged Ike to appoint Warren to the Supreme Court; he was a supporter of Brown v. Board, and favored sending troops to integrate Little Rock High). Nixon saw he could develop a “Southern strategy” based on Goldwater’s inroads. He did, but Independent Democrat George Wallace carried most of the deep south in 68. By 1972, however, Wallace was shot and paralyzed, and Nixon began to tilt the south to the GOP. The old guard Democrats began to fade away while a new generation of Southern politicians became Republicans. True, Strom Thurmond switched to GOP, but most of the old timers (Fulbright, Gore, Wallace, Byrd etc etc) retired as Dems. Why did a new generation white Southerners join the GOP? Not because they thought Republicans were racists who would return the South to segregation, but because the GOP was a “local government, small government” party in the old Jeffersonian tradition. Southerners wanted less government and the GOP was their natural home. Jimmy Carter, a Civil Rights Democrat, briefly returned some states to the Democrat fold, but in 1980, Goldwater’s heir, Ronald Reagan, sealed this deal for the GOP. The new “Solid South” was solid GOP. BUT, and we must stress this: the new southern Republicans were *integrationist* Republicans who accepted the Civil Rights revolution and full integration while retaining their love of Jeffersonian limited government principles. And what did Malcolm X say about the “Dixiecrats”…? I’m sure the more learned Democrats will have issues with these explanations. Oh well. Jeffrey I love this! It makes so much sense! But, how did the North become progressive? 50nites While you point out that opposition for the civil rights bill was from southerners you left out that 199 democrats voted FOR the bill. If it is your wish to pass this dressed up crap as fact then acknowledge that the “dixiecrat factor” is no longer in the democrat party and its exit picked up speed after the civil and voting rights bills were passed. Also please admit that all referencing to Blacks by conservatives of lazy govt hand outs and plantations are just a coincidence. One more thing.Admit that the voter ID laws are not aimed at suppressing the economic minority (elderly students and the poor) participation. Lastly why is the GOP 99% white? jjcassidy Blaming you for what they have done is not new to the liberal methodology. They took the assassination of president by a Moscow-loving loon and turned it into a “aura of hatred in Texas” (though, it’s true that Kennedy found a rough audience in Texas) where school kids cheered not because they were told that they could go home early, but as CBS reported, they cheered the assassination of the president. They took a Marxist atheist rent-a-mob pimp for the Democrats in San Francisco–who had been known to say that there was no truth in the Bible and had on occasion thrown the Bible down and stomped on it–and made sure you knew that he called himself Reverend Jim Jones, hoping that you would see this as a problem with religious cults and not yet another saga of charismatic Marxist leaders. Since liberalism seems largely to be based on feeling good, all they need is Strom Thurman to complete the circle. Once they have a single case, such as that the Heritage Foundation backed a form of individual mandate to turn it into “the Republicans got the healthcare plan they wanted”. Then they can feel good about their “case”. Mirza Borogovac It’s more than a myth as Nixon courted white racist votes with his so called “southern strategy”. jjcassidy Then why, for the longest time, did George Wallace have the South sewn up, when it was looking like a 3-man race? Having racists from the south vote for you and “courting” the racist vote are two different things. And this is how the post-hoc argument usually goes. So tell me, if Al Gore Jr. inherited his fathers seat in the same racist state as his racist father, was he inevitably racist himself? It seems like there is a stronger tie, father-to-son then simply being the next generation in a region known for its racism. Of course this sense, and I don’t expect you to recognize it. Mirza Borogovac I am not sure what your argument is. I am talking about something that republican party has admitted and apologized for. jjcassidy No Republican has apologized for anything more than essentially ignoring–or not specifically appealing to black voters, thinking they could get more volume out of white voters than black, anyway. And Kevin Phillips himself said that the “Southern Strategy” was as more blacks voted Dem, the racists would change party. Nobody says it was courting racist voters, except creative reading Dems. Mirza Borogovac I don’t know where you get your information. Here is washington post article in the apology in question: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302342.html charlesschmidt There is history and there is story telling.The GOP has led tha march for civil rights, not the DNP drrichardpaul What a bunch of hogwash. Reagan himself was a known racist, with ties to racist organizations. The Racist South in fact, historically proven, are the current Southern GOP. That’s why organizations like the Neo-Nazis have joined the GOP, and more specifically the TEA Party, especially recently. According to the SPLC, and other Hate Group Watchdog Organizations, the White Supremacists have nearly gone to the TEA Party to the tune of 5000% in 2012. Facts matter, and the lies that you just told in this poorly worded essay show that you care nothing for the truth. UpLateAgain I’m a Tea Party member. I’ve been to a number of rallies since 2009. I’ve yet to meet a member racist of any sort. THAT is a fact I’m aware-of. I know of incidents where open racists such as you mentioned have tried to join, and been rejected and asked to leave. Racism is anathema to Tea Party principles. There are pedophiles in the Catholic Church, but pedophilia is certainly not a precept of the Church. Likewise, racism is not a precept of the Tea party. Though given the temper of your screed, I’d be very surprised to hear you have not repeatedly tried to convince people that is the case. Your obvious hate and ignorance does nothing help your credibility here. Flashdealer Hear Hear! It sickens me when you find creatures like drrichardpaul. I am a member as well and I have never meet a member with racist ties/ideals. In fact the people that I have talked to (at bars or online forums such as this) that ended up being racist seem to disagree with me on fundamental Tea Party values… Makes me realize that they actually aline with Demoncratic values more than they care to realize (sad part is that they are too uneducated to figure it out and they end up inappropriately representing us negatively). I’m not saying that this is the norm, I’m just stating that this is the norm in my experience. JoshK I suggest if you want to find the truth and not pass along incorrect information you will look up the roll call on these votes. You will find that both Southern Republicans and Southern Democrats were against civil rights. Northern Democrats and Republican’s voted for civil rights. Southern Republican’s and Democrats held Conservative Views. The Northern R&D’s held liberal views. I suggest, instead of responding out of ignorance, take some time out and get the facts. http://www.black-and-right.com/ IceColdTroll Hello, Mr. Parks??? IS there another link for that documentary you mention at the top of this post? The link you give is basically an ad site for garbage disposals and divorce lawyers. http://www.black-and-right.com/ Bob Parks Corrected, thanks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYFq7fIawKg https://twitter.com/thehiredmind Hired Mind There is one undeniable thread here, that no Democrat can argue with: as the South became less racist, it became more Republican. That’s the way I usually put it in arguments with Democrats, because there are simply no facts that refute that basic thesis. As the old South fell away, fewer and fewer people were afraid to stand up and identify as Republicans. The whole “Southern Strategy” of the Nixon campaign was the result of seeing an opportunity for a Civil Rights-supporting Republican to make inroads in the South, where no such opportunity would have been possible before. Fernando Ospina Interesting logic. Seems that you’re trying to imply that more Republicanism causes less racism. As the South became more Republican, Blacks became more Democrat. Why would blacks become more Democrat if Republicans made so much progress on becoming less racist. Not to mention anti-segregationist does not equal anti-racist. https://twitter.com/thehiredmind Hired Mind “Seems that you’re trying to imply that more Republicanism causes less racism.” Sure does. Which party treats black Americans like everyone else, like grown men, and which treats them like pets? Democrats: “You vote for us, son, and we’ll take care of you.” All the while, handouts from the government trough have been purposely targeted toward black families, sapping strength and energy, and the desire to stand on one’s own feet. Welfare has been purposely targeted at black mothers, encouraging the break up of the black family because you get paid more if your child’s father isn’t in the home. Much of the Democrat platform seems designed to destroy black families; it could have been designed by the KKK (a Democrat organization). “As the South became more Republican, Blacks became more Democrat.” Wrong. blacks Americans didn’t even remotely start supporting the Democrats until the 60s, when Lyndon “I’ll have them ni**ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years” Johnson made a big deal about the ’64 Civil Rights Act, ignoring all the preceding Civil Rights laws, all of which were pushed by Republicans. “Why would blacks become more Democrat if Republicans made so much progress on becoming less racist.” Well, that’s just it – Republicans didn’t have to make any “progress on becoming less racist”, as they weren’t the racists to begin with. Fernando Ospina I guess it’s more likely that all the racists, Klan members, and descendants of slave owners all moved to the northern states to free the South of all racists and join the racist Northern Democrats. It would be absurd to think that the political party labels switched while the general populations and cultures stayed the same. https://twitter.com/thehiredmind Hired Mind Who ever said the South was free of racists? The Democrats still have some influence there, sheesh. he_who_scoffs_at_danger Blacks went for the Democrats since Hoover. he_who_scoffs_at_danger Blacks went for the Democrats since Hoover. Cam_Winston Scroll down & look at the table (forgive the formatting, site has been dead for years) in the link. http://blog.rjwest.com/2005/03/16/losing-a-region/ The south was heavily dominated by Democrats as late as the mid 90s. They voted for Reagan & Nixon, but then again 49 states did, but they voted Democrat down ticket. And let me emphasize the word “dominated”, as the table illustrates. chrisdj614 I’ve got into a number of arguments with liberals about this. THey can never name any example to support this myth outside of Strom Thurmond. Winghunter Thank you for offering the truth of the Democrat race lie. However, what a truly vile and demonstrable false charge against Goldwater – he was no infantile Libertarian. He knew privileges without principles would destroy liberty just as thoroughly as abuse of power. While we’re on the subject of the attempted hijacking of wise patriots, Ayn Rand ridiculed Libertarians also. “Libertarianism is to authentic Conservatism what Barack Obama is to 19th century Liberalism” http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/to_get_ron_paul_you.html#ixzz1i5mU4gpM KKeys Excellent article. This and the Democrat Race Lie. I do think it this period is often referred to as a “switch” because of the fundamental change in the core voter base and platform; clearly a lot has changed and both parties have essentially only remained the same in name alone. I would, however, consider it just as misguided to associate the later generations of southern voters and politicians (R) with the views of their segregationist predecessors, as I would to associate the modern Democratic Party with the voting record of its former segregationist members. After all, the Republican Party didn’t incorporate those old segregationists, they just inherited their kids – except for the notable exception of Al Gore, Jr. http://www.facebook.com/kwimsatt1 Keon Wimsatt This myth is widely held and IMHO is the lynchpin reason why many Blacks who know the Republicans’ legislative history of supporting their civil rights but need a reason to dismiss it so they have an excuse for their Democratic Party affiliation. http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000285088326 Laura Perez-Garcia Great piece! I’ve been looking for something well written and that makes sense on this very topic! Thank you! 4joachim Republicans talk too much. People’s eye glaze over after the second sentence. Democrats managed to create the fake out that they were helping blacks. They lied. America bought it.,” American History in Black and White, Setting the Record Straight,” by Barton, is short sweet and to-the-point. Republicans freed the slaves. There were already black legislators until Woodrow Wilson SEGREGATED U.S. Democrats FOUGHT TO KEEP SLAVERY, even after the Republicans set them free. Justin @kvernon The first paragraph of your comment sums it up perfectly. I would never claim that Republicans were/are racist or that Democrats were/racist. It’s not about the party, it’s about the racists who follow(ed) eiter party. The racists used to vote Democrat, now they vote Republican. While it is a fact that racists used to be Democrats, it’s silly for anyone to try to use that irrelevant fact to take attention off of the racism sitting comfortably within the GOP since the 1960s. joshua0853 Kvernon: Sorry, but I must take issue with the last part of your post. You know, the part that mentions a sampling of “conservatives and Republicans” as frequently expressing their racism. I don’t believe you. On second thought, let me say this: There are two other possibilities: You perceived racial motive when there really was none. Example: A conservative expresses concern about the way many young men in the Black community dress (pants down past their butts). You might ascribe that concern as being racist when all they mean is that such behavior tends to prevent those young Black men from succeeding in life and reaching their goals. Is it possible that some of those people were lying to you? It wouldn’t be the first time someone lied to somebody taking a poll. Just a thought. Perhaps your intent was honest; I can’t judge that. What I can judge is my experience with conservatives and Republicans of all colors. It does not match up with your assessment. I am Black, and conservative. I used to be a Democrat but I left that Plantation once I wised up and saw that party for what it was…and is. Seriously, I wish I had time to go into some detail here, but I’m cramming for finals and just happened to see this post on a friend’s pc. You are so wrong on this issue. I know from personal experience spanning some 22 years or better; seen through the prism of having lived through the turbulent 60s and 70s. I don’t claim that there are no Republican racists–I can’t know that for certain. However, I can claim that I’ve met very few; and NONE in the Tea Party, of which I am a member. I know racism. I’ve been personally affected by it. I’ve experienced it up close and personal. Hostility of that kind cannot be hidden for long. If it exists within conservatism, the Republican Party, and the Tea Party, especially to the extent claimed by liberals, I WOULD KNOW IT! And I would have no part in it, if that was the case. There is so much more I’d like to say, but I must get back to the books. Four final exams in four days…can’t wait for it to be over! GoodMojo Extremely well expressed, sir! I hope your finals went well! kvernon I think the basic analysis here is skewed when you try to make the concept rest on party, i.e., the Democrats were the racist or the Republicans are the racist. Fact of the matter is the ideology of both parties changed over the years, so this should be analyzed by ideology, Conservatives v Liberals. To say that the Lincoln Republicans are the same ideologically as Nixon, Reagan, Bush or the current contenders is a miscue. Likewise you cannot compare Reconstruction era Southern Democrats with todays democrats, what can be compared is the concepts of conservatism and liberalism, those remain by definition relatively constant. The variables would be societal changes along the timeline of American history, which affects the definitions somewhat, civil rights, women’s suffrage, and other issues that affect what a conservative or liberal believes as our society changes. So the terms have to be parsed out these days to exact a finer point, such as Socially Liberal / Fiscally Conservative. I’m not sure Liberals make the same kinds of distinctions due to the nature of liberalism, though I have heard even liberals describe themselves as Socially Liberal but Fiscally Conservative, usually they claim to be Independents, but this becomes another debate which is more along the lines of how one see’s themselves ideologically vs how others might see him, Like most conservatives viewing anyone moderate to left as Liberal, You know, RINO’s and such but forgive the departure. That said, you will likely have racist from both “parties”, but which ideology is more likely to have racist? Or a better questions is which ideology would a racist find him or herself more likely to adhere to? I am well aware of the concept that dependence on the government makes victims of people, which might be construed as “racist” by some, This argument fails when you realize that if the government makes victims, it is regardless of race. There are plenty of poor whites out there in the same governmental “trick bag” as blacks and hispanics. I have taken the opportunity to avail myself to a not so random sample of people who claim to be Conservatives and Republicans on an internet forum kind of like this, and when they had the occasion to express their racism (which seemed to be frequently), I took the liberty to ask what party or ideology they claimed. They would pretty consistently say “I’m not a Republican” I’m a Conservative”. I was a moderator on that board for several years and it got to the point after Obama was elected that it became unbearable to remain a moderator or a member. Basically it wasn’t the complaints about policy, but because all objectivity was gone from any political discourse and blatant racism had become very pervasive. Or the argument became very trite … like the above post, about the NAACP saying colored, why can’t I. Or a generally expressed hatred of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, which was extremely common and usually without context to the topic. Pingback: The Democrat Race Lie (Don’t let the lying Dem’s fool you) « Coach Semanko's Blog val1224 Democrats have always had a “thug arm” of their party to keep voters in line. In the old days it was the KKK. Today it is unions, groups such as SEIU, etc. Ingeniously, they also now use groups like the NAACP. You have to hand it to them – it’s pretty ingenious to use blacks to keep other blacks “in their place”. How very sad that black America has allowed themselves to be enslaved once again. I am yearning for the day when blacks in this great nation realize the glory of the INDIVIDUAL and realize that they live in a country where they have develop their own thoughts and ideas and, yes, even VOTE the way they want, rather than waiting to see how Jesse Jackson tells them to vote for. Mom Strom Thurmond, like any politician, ran on any platform he thought would get him elected (1948). He had an illegitimate black daughter that he took care of (financially) his whole life. Perhaps his change to the party of Lincoln (first Republican President) was getting tired of the racist Democrats. The Republican Party was created in 1854 with one of it’s main purposes was to abolish slavery. The Democratic Party had a 40 year control of both the House and the Senate (40s to 90s). From 1958 to 1968, the least number of Democratic Senators was 64. The most, over the same ten year period, was 68. Do you all remember the big deal of which party in both 2008 and 2010 could get to 60 or keep the other from achieving 60? Why, with 64-68 Democratic Senators from 1958-68 did the Democrats have such a hard time passing the Civil Rights Bill? They controlled the House and had more than a majority (some say super) in the Senate. Why so hard to pass? Chris Can you disprove these claims, John? John All you right-wing ideologues parrot the same crap!!!! Revisionists… Keep pushing and you'll get what you don't want. The middleclass will revolt against you B's and the ELITE's you pimp for. John C. zebo That was kind of accident gwyneth paltrow nude but this gymnastic stance has made me feel pretty horny. Take a look at Sarah Chalke naked and you will see that her body doesn’t have any wrinkle spots or some extra famke janssen nude video fat. First of all, like all famous women fran drescher bush she has an amazing hairstyle and that’s just can’t be ignored. Damn it, I haven’t toni braxton topless pictures seen her real naked photo on the web but that website you’re seeing right now has got plenty of them. There is the other photo where she nude pictures of rosario dawson is talking that professional athletic pose before to jump and she is wearing her see through lingerie. You came here to stare at Jessica Simpson naked, rebecca hall full sex video right? Don’t worry, you’ll get your chance. of course giving himself is kind kendra wilkinson topless photos of banal and obvious so I say he prepares something more solid. She has some hairy pussy there and I think it was popular in selena gomez official twitter 80′s but right now you have to keep it shaved because your man can puke after he sees that kind of bush. I love watching Playboy magazines and Top Gear show too and these too things I tori black without underwear try to watch every day. I have to say she has got pretty nice size there lauren cohan full porn video and her tits are very smooth and elastic. no, it is just katharine mcphee website this event is pretty rare and very precious so we have to pay all our attention to that. My pants are going lil’ kim full sex scene to explode right in about five minutes so until then I will try to finish this review. The next quote will make you feel not so lonely if you’re trying to have a healthy serena williams official twitter life. Sometimes it is maggie lawson sex scene better to watch some celebrities in their hot bikinis than without them. http://www.black-and-right.com/ BobParks After how many hundreds of words, you demand I prove my case while the only wisdom you can come up with is "you're an idiot. plain and simple". And you wonder why no one takes the youth seriously. http://www.black-and-right.com/ BobParks Your well thought out retort, John…? Pingback: The Dixiecrat Myth « Truth Before Dishonor Pingback: The Angry White Guy » Blog Archive » Dem’s losing South, AP tries to re-write history http://www.craigfarmer.blogspot.com newliberal If the focus is whether Democrats passed every one of our nation’s civil rigthts laws, that is a lie. It is not accurate. But… Democrats, liberal democrats and moderates were the impetus of the recent (1960′s – present). In addition, Democratic presidents were instrumental in changes. I was focusing on the idea that racist democrats migrated to the Republican party. That is true. Today, if you are a person who believes in white superiority. You either don’t vote, vote extreme right wing, or vote democratic for President. On the local level it is more complex because some Democrats in the south are still descendants of dixiecrats but the trend is clear. Republicans believe in less govt. Less government when the society is racist = a party that supports racism. http://black-and-right.com Bob And I can appreciate the response because no one likes being called a racist when they know they’re not, right newlib? But the point of the original piece (which the argumentative left always ignores) is the two paragraphs on the Democrats.org’s “History” says to this day, “Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws, and every law that protects workers. Most recently, Democrats stood together to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act. On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight.” THAT IS A LIE and to defend that makes one what…? http://www.craigfarmer.blogspot.com newliberal i’m a proud democrat. the southern wing of our party was racist through the 1960′s. Some like byrd, hollings, stayed and changed (presumably), while others (and their voters) left to be indepdents and republicans. It is nonsense to argue that southern republicans supported the liberal goals of the civil rights movement. At one time, both parties had conservatives, moderates, and liberals. Where liberal republicans were just that. and conservative democrats were just that. Today, the most conservative democrat (ben nelson or lieberman) would be a liberal republican. And the most liberal republican would be a conservative democrats. The party’s have separated by ideology. People take this reality and try to confuse the history. Conservatives (used to be dems) support less taxes, less regulationi, less big goverment intrusion, move to republicans esp. in the face of big government forcing regulations (racial) that they disliked, and to pay taxes to force schools to open up. Please be serious. http://www.craigfarmer.blogspot.com newliberal lastly, people are conflating northern liberal republicans-who today would resemble democrats. and western more liberaterian republicans with southern republicans; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 shows of the 10 southern republican senations 0 out 10 voted for civil rights. they then used this as a base to expand http://black-and-right.com Bob @newliberal Strom Thurmond was one of the first senators to hire a black staffer. Would a racist in a racist party do that while Democrat Robert Byrd was filibustering the Civil Rights Act? And you’ve also admitted there were racists in the Democrat Party. You just left a bunch out. Wikipedia as a source? I guess you are a “new liberal”. http://www.craigfarmer.blogspot.com newliberal I believe in free speech. But people who don’t can point to posts like this to show the damage. I’ll lead with facts: Strom Thurmond who was a “dixiecrat” switched to republicans in 1964 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_thurmond. He ran on a racist platform 1948, and moved with the conservatives from dem to rep. in the 1960′s. When politicians of that era use “local control, state’s rights” it may have had many meanings, but one of the most prevalant was segregation and racism. That is undisputed. JunkScienceSkeptic To the idea that Southern segregationists moved to the GOP and that the GOP has subsequently been detrimental to the South, let me pass along two words: “Atlanta, Detroit” Tells you about all you need to know, eh? Pingback: Democrats Are Racists « Fellowship of the Minds Pingback: MSM claims DC Tea Party hurled racial slurs, CNN video disproves it Pingback: Tea Party and Racial Slurs « The Republican Heretic JR I was recently having a Youtube comment war with a lib on this subject. He had no clue, of course. Didn’t even know MLKJ was a Republican, said he was a Democrat. Even thought Lee Harvey Oswald was a conservative. This guy was a good deal older than me. How long have they been teaching this crap in the government schools? MissJean I remember when my high school government teacher (also an office-holding Democrat) told us that Nixon did more for Civil Rights than JFK ever did. Oh, the shock and horror! n.n The devil is always in the details. We would like to think about the future, but the past is always present to haunt us. This will be one less issue to think about. Thank you, Bob, for doing the research. http://mauser.livejournal.com Mauser I have had this argument so many times that I’m going to quote the whole thing outright, and link to it, of course. http://www.syblemind.blogspot.com Syble @nicolas She is very pretty!! http://sgthartsock.blogspot.com/ Nicolas oh also, I remember you said back on february 1st I believe “not much has changed..”. That’s a good thing for most Republicans, as we STILL don’t and never will see skin color as a merit of worth, as it’s part of our upbringing (it was for me). Hell currently, I have a thing for a gorgeous conservative republican woman that I know, which speaks to my colorblind nature. For the most part, one of the points we’ve mentioned periodically is that if you ever want to know what a liberal is guilty of, listen to their criticism of conservatives http://sgthartsock.blogspot.com/ Nicolas do you think you could put this in the “special stuff” category on the right hand side of the site? I think more people need to know about this stuff Igor I’m sure the more learned Democrats will have issues with these explanations. Find me a shrill shill Democrap race-baiter that is “learned”. Go ahead. I’m waiting. In the meantime we have to be patient with them. Sheesh! Good luck with the “logic” thing, Machine. It’s like hitting your head with a hammer – it feels sooooo good when you stop. Igor eNeecie Can the Democrats claim they have changed if they never admit they had a problem? For the last few decades they have been promoting a Goebbels-type propaganda campaign aimed at making people believe that the two parties magically changed places sometime in the 1950s or 1960s. The most recent example of this was Reid’s quote criticizing the Republicans’ opposition to the health care bill by comparing it to those who opposed slavery and civil right, saying the Republicans wouldn’t want to be on “the wrong side of history” again. I am a Texas Republican and man, do I get sick of the racist label. Especially since the only open, n-word using racists I have ever met were all Democrats. In fact, the only case of job discrimination that I am personally aware of, where a man (a Gulf War vet, no less) was fired because of his race, was perpetrated by a Yankee, ponytailed liberal Democrat. Trishmac That’s true Machine, I often make the mistake of believing I may be able to get through to a lefty. My hubby says I am an incurable romantic, whenever I am “surprised” at the behaviors of some of the liberals we know. I just keep thinking that logic and common sense are natural occurrences, while apparently there are those among us who were not endowed with those traits! The Machine Well, the logical approach is good for us, because knowledge is power, but don’t expect the logical argument to have any effect at all on the average leftoid, for what they suffer from is a mental disorder and such will never respond to the logical argument, it only serves to entrench them deeper into their psychosis. These are people who swear up and down that there can be more than one truth and that there can be no such thing as an absolute truth, after all. Trishmac Thanks for that Bob! Very informative, and I love to have ammo like this for the inevitable arguments with liberals about racisim and party alliances.