DC Emancipation Day, thanks to the Republican Party
by Michael ZakRepublicans would benefit tremendously from appreciating the heritage of our Grand Old Party, founded in 1854 to oppose the Democrats’ pro-slavery, anti-freedom agenda.
As they campaign for the mid-term elections, Republicans should ignore the lefty media spin and recognize that they hold the moral high ground. From the first chapter of Back to Basics for the Republican Party: “How can we expect to convince voters to place their confidence in us when we lack confidence in our own heritage.”
Today, the nation’s capital celebrates Emancipation Day. In his proclamation, the Democrat mayor, Adrian Fenty, omits something very important: the holiday commemorates the Republican Party’s abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. That’s right, the Republican Party freed the slaves in DC. And yes, the Democratic Party opposed freeing the slaves in DC – a fact which Democrats today dare not mention.
During the Civil War, one of the nation’s leading abolitionists was Senator Henry Wilson (R-MA), who would later serve as Vice President in the Ulysses Grant administration. In December 1861, Senator Wilson introduced a bill to abolish slavery in the District. The measure met with parliamentary obstacles from the Democrats, but Ben Wade (R-OH) outmaneuvered them. Six years later, had the bitterly racist Democrat, Andrew Johnson, been convicted during his impeachment trial, Senator Wade would have become President of the United States.
On April 16, 1862, the Republican-controlled 37th Congress passed Senator Wilson’s bill. Overall, 99% of Republicans voted to free the slaves in the District of Columbia, while 83% of Democrats voted to keep them in chains. That day, the GOP freed more than three thousand African-Americans. Among them was Philip Reid, who while enslaved had made the statue that stands atop the dome of the U.S. Capitol.
While serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, Abraham Lincoln had sponsored a bill to abolish slavery in Washington, DC. As President, he proudly signed the District of Columbia Emancipation Act, announcing “I have never doubted the constitutional authority of congress to abolish slavery in this District; and I have ever desired to see the national capital freed from the institution.” Emancipation Day finally arrived, thanks to Republican majorities in Congress.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
178 Comments
Democrats were racist then. They continue to be racist today.
The Democrats have to lie and hide their history. Don't forget the Democratic party is also the founder of the KKK! The MSM goes along with. From that can we assume that the MSM is racist. I think any rational think person would have to assume so. Shame on you NBC, ABC, CBS & CNN! If you watch and support them you are supporting racists!
Republicans should take note. Stories like this will not get told in the old media. Only in the new media. The old media will default to the old playbook of the past every time. Thats every time your stupid enough to try to engage them in a debate on there turf. Get it? If you think you will get votes going on some alphabet network spin off…" to talk to the voters"… your an idiot. Get it? Talk to the people.. AND LISTEN. Not some elite that claims to get your message out via their "network"., You will lose every time…
Get it?
Please note that Abraham Lincoln was also a racist. He wasn't truly interested in free the slaves so much as he was in deporting all non-caucasians to Haiti. If you were to take the time to read the book "Lincoln: In His Own Words", this would become quite obvious, along with the fact that Lincoln wanted the Confederacy to attack Fort Sumter in order to justify an attack against the Confederacy to force them (illegally) back into the Union. Any student of Constitutional Law would see that the Confederacy left the Union legally. Every state at the time of the Civil War had in its charter and Constitution words to the effect of "voluntary entrance in the the Union" and includes the right to also leave the Union. Lincoln was no hero to slaves. His actions were merely a political manuveer to gain popular support from the former slaves. Both parties need to address the dark part of thier histories.
Not much has changed, conservatarians are still opposing the party of anti-freedom and pro-indentured servitude
Bye bye progressive trash, I would like to say it was good to know you but that would be a lie.
Zeig heil freak, no get off our site.
>> President Barack Obama said Thursday he's amused by the anti-tax tea party protests that have been taking place around Tax Day.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9F3SNC81...
If amused means terrified then I buy it, else it's just hand waving to distract the base.
News flash! That was 145 years ago. Only one party has addressed the dark part of there history, the other uses the old media to lie daily about there dark history, because politically they can not come to terms with it. Welcome to the new media "Christopher" The truth is a powerful thing… and we will use it daily also.
Progressives need to be exposed for what they are. They are not serving the underpriviledged, they are family destroying poverty pimps and nothing more.
Progressives are solely responsible for the destruction of the Afro American family through their misguided compassion of the Great Society. They made obsolete the role of the father in the family and were successful in creating a permanent underclass.
They need to not only recognize the folly of their 'well intentioned' social engineering disasters, THEY NEED TO PAY FOR THEIR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY!
Could you copy that to Michael Steele please
This needs to go viral, that'll shut the lefties up – for a second.
This is old revisionist history. Your High School teacher was wrong it has been rebuffed many times. Lincoln’s position on slavery was actually stronger before he became a national candidate. You are also attempting to judge a man outside of his times. A fair read of history finds Lincoln a strong opponent of slavery. If he were to be judged negatively it would be on his support of federal power. Now I propose the question what would you have done? When you have a succinct and intelligent answer we can debate its merits. WWCD
Michael Steele has to go. Even he knows it. But where does that leave us? Whats your pick fellow bloggers? I'll throw a name out there———>Karl Rove.
The guy does have wicked skills, he can run the cable/Sunday shows in his sleep and always stays on message, I can't think of anyone better at the inside baseball of electoral politics… (outside of Dick Morris.) The conservative rep's will love him, The RINO'S will fear him, And the Left will HATE him… (added bonus)
I hold no animosity towards Steele, in better times he would have been a good pick for the party.
Now we find ourselves desperate for leadership on a national level and the current drama at the RNC is not helping. There are very few people to choose from that can preform the delicate task of: Bringing the republican party together, Embracing the Tea party movement, And rifling off daily zinger's to the "Old Media" to keep them scrambling. It is quite clear Steele is just not up to the job. We need someone to stand out, and quick. The clock is ticking.
"To MiPain" I have been wearing them out…
Nothing shuts the lefties up, they just "revise" what they don't like!
NOT! Only ONE party needs to do that and we all know what party is the most racist in the country. The party that divides by color of skin and capitolizes on suffering. Slamming Lincoln and trying to rationalize just wont make it in todays world. People are aware of just how lying and corrupt the democratic party has become. Only investigations and trials will do.Lets open up washingtom and let the chips fall where they may.
" … the Democratic Party opposed freeing the slaves in DC – a fact which Democrats today dare not mention."
The real question is, why do the Republicans act like they don't dare mention it!
I always knew you were a fascist Calista. At least your out of closet about it now. More power to you!
The Hard-Left Democrat way of thinking hasn't really changed that much in some 156 years. Only now they want everyone kept on the plantation serving Master. Regardless of Race, Nationality or Religion. Yep The Party of The People….Right… include me Out.
Let's talk about the 21st century and how righties choose to treat homosexuals as second class citizens. I guess that makes the Republicans the new Democrats.
You are a pathetic, revisionist bastard. I can only imagine your take on the Holocaust. You're discusting!
Take a hike Gender Pimp, your efforts to divide through: racial, gender, sexual preference, income, class, ethnicity, religion,,,,you name it (and ususally do) on this site will only be met with the appropriate derison.
Conservatives and in particular TPM memebers are wise to your game, go play your divisive quips with your buds at HuffBlow
Anon… is that you? What percentage of the 60% of conservatives in this country look down on homosexuals as 2nd class Americans? Its a non-issue. There are much more important issues facing this country today, your talking point is tired and old… take it else where… *Yawn*.
Ain't that the truth! They will never change. They are the party of evil and they prove it with every bill they write.
Barrack Obama's and Bill Clinton's rhetoric on the Tea Party folks yesterday is stuff,………..
that campaign slogans are made of
Mr. President,…….We are not,……. "AMUSED"
Mr. Clinton do you not remember how you were branded a racist by the same people you are now defending.
If only you could have heard how foolish you sounded,..you make one hell of a puppet.
Some will dislike the choice fearing Rinos and Bushisms, personally I like the choice your right about the inside baseball skills. Sometimes I would trade that for pure ideology though. Probably best choice all things considered
Here is my wild card, Palin is another possibility for a little different reason she is 100 percent ideological but lacking in the insider skills would her charisma and physical presence make her the darling of the circuit. I know the Rinos would prefer her off the trail. The tea party folks would follow her into the party and the MSM might embrace her in a non-electorate roll
Makes you wonder why the Republicans don't call the day of the founding of the Republican Party "Emancipation Day" and throw big, splashy parties in Washington. Get FoxNews to cover it, at least. I'll bet it would set the heads over at DailyKos spinning and spewing pea soup! I wonder how many blacks would be quite surprised to find out the answer when they ask "How can those Republicans claim that?"
……And after the democrats failed to keep blacks in physical chains they went to work to put them into welfare chains. The very people who claim to look out for and advocate for blacks are the very people knowingly keeping them on the plantation and acting as their slave masters.
If the Republicans are the ones who freed the slaves, why do Republicans today (like the governor of VA) want to celebrate the confederacy? Weren't the original Republicans the enemies of the Confederacy? Hmmm………
Thank God for teh internets. If it were up to Govt. edjumcation and the MSM, NO unrevised history would be available these days. Oh yeah, very little is. So let's push to get the truth reinserted into our children's history books and remove every last shred of revised, leftist, PC drivel.
I'd like to see the truth begin to spread at Juneteenth celebrations (still alive and well in the south).
True freedom can only be found in conservatism.
Great article! The one thing that wasn't mentioned, though, is that back in the 1850s it was the Democrats that were ignorant and uncivilized and it was the Republicans who were progressive. In 2010 it's the Republicans that are ignorant and uncivilized and it's the Democrats that are progressive. A lot has changed in the past 16 decades.
Here are just a few points from Bob Parks’s:
May 6, 1960 – President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats.
May 2, 1963 – Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights.
June 9, 1964 – Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate.
June 10, 1964 – The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr.
August 4, 1965 – Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting.
Republicans have dared mention it. But Democrats have placed their fingers in their ears and shouted "la la la la!!"
Democrats learned how to control 'those people' 140 years ago. First came the noose. The only thing that's changed since is the sophistication of the plantation. Blacks are still taught to act, think and vote as one, the better with which to manipulate them. There is no meaningful Black history taught in our schools or we wouldn't have this problem. Instead we'd have truly free men, individuals thinking for themselves, unafraid to call out the Poverty Pimps who suck their victims dry of all hope and optimism.
It's pathetic how all your histories of the Republican party stop in the early 60s. You know, around the same time you decided to embrace the "southern strategy" and appeal to racial resentments?
Also we have commenters like bluecollarbytes above , who are apparently unaware of how patronizing their comments about black people are.If you want to know why blacks vote democrat , just read the above comment. The contempt in it is palpable.
Right , the broad coalition of people who overwhelmingly elected our first black president are racist, but the mostly white republican voters are color blind. Uh huh, sure…..
Clinton drew a parallel between Timothy McVeigh and the Tea Partiers.
I draw a parallel between the Democrat Party and the Communist Party!
I "require" Ann Coulter's book, "Treason" for a proper understanding of the follies of the Democratic Party since WWII. It was an eye-opener for me. No, it was life-changing for me.
[...] DC Emancipation Day, thanks to the Republican Party [...]
CHRISTPOPHER, You are “full of it”, man. I did a comprehensive study of Abraham Lincoln in college for an essay. I studied every I could find about Lincoln. He hated slavery. As a young man working on the Mississippi River and seeing the barges of slaves in chains he was extreemly moved with compassion for them. He dispised slavery. Abraham Lincoln was a very compassionate man. A very good man. Don’t be lying like that. And books lie when written by liars.
Ha! Throughout it's pro-slavery and pro-Jim Crow days the Democrats wrapped themselves in the cloak of progressivism, using every newfangled pseudoscience like Eugenics to justify their racism and bigoted policies, while Republican conservatives looked back to the ideals that have been with America since its founding, with men like Ben Franklin and George Washington, conservative ideals.
Democrats still use progressivism, but now wrap up their inherent racism in identity politics.
Every time Ole Slick points that damn finger, I want to break it off and shove it up his azz.
They went from pro-slavery to pro-segregation, with that movement coinciding with the beginning of the Eugenics craze. Even before adopting Eugenics Democrats believed themselves progressive in the new race-based pseudosciences, and used these to concoct new explanations of why slaves were better off in bondage, why their race was inherently inferior and needed the paternal guidance of a slave owner.
The fact is the anti-slavery movement was always a conservative movement. It drew on old, time-tested ideals spawned from Christian egalitarianism, that all men are created equal. It was conservatism that freed the slaves, and progressivism that would have kept them in bondage, had it not been defeated.
I agree with that statement except the part where you brainwashed libs start calling conservatives racist for disagreeing with the leftest commie fanatic we have as president. A broad coalition, both Democrat and Republican put him in office. He just ran on the Democrat ticket. He lied his way into power. He promised hope and change and hasn't delivered. Well, at least not in the way the voters wanted. Hope was completely dashed and the change was him trying to change our country into a third world communist nation. He's doing a great job! NOT!
I agree with that statement except the part where you brainwashed libs start calling conservatives racist for disagreeing with the leftest commie fanatic we have as president. A broad coalition, both Democrat and Republican put him in office. He just ran on the Democrat ticket. He lied his way into power. He promised hope and change and hasn't delivered. Well, at least not in the way the voters wanted. Hope was completely dashed and the change was him trying to change our country into a third world communist nation. He's doing a great job! NOT!
Even if that were an accurate version of history, it still would have nothing to do with the last 50 years of race and politics in America which no conservative (understandably) wants to talk about.
The point was being made that reviewing the history of Democrats with their faults opens up the Republican party and its faults to view! Just as in a court of law, when you attack the character of a witness you open your own witness to character questioning, you, as the lawyer need to be careful!
Leftists are so stingy & godless they did not wish to be burdened with donating & serving organ-
izations who looked after the poor. That is why they decided it should be the job of Gvt. By push-
ing those duties over to Gvt they could avoid giving up their money & their time, & absolve them-
selves of guilt. So money has poured out of the US Gvt by the bushel basket load to no avail, be-
cause there are no strings attached. Folks like Piglosi & Biden hoard their wealth, ever complain-
ing of the plight of the poor & unprivileged. I will listen to their concerns when they have given away
75% of their net worth, not before.
I guess you did not read this book either: "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History" by James E. Woods Ph.D. Specifically chapters 5,6 and 7. Christopher is factually correct. When using the faults of others which are also faults of your own position, it is best to recognize it, unless you be labeled hypocritical and lose your firm ground.
This book was published in 2004 by a professor who has a B.S. in history from Harvard and a master's aned Ph.D. from Columbia University. If you graduated/did your review prior to then you have a small excuse, but no excuse because the information was available and you did not dig deep enough; you see, in the fourth debate between Lincoln and Douglas in 1858 there is a fantastic destruction of both your lack of investigation adn position by Abraham Lincoln's own words! They are on page 66 and 67 of Chapter 6. "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History" by James E. Woods Ph.D. Specifically chapters 5,6 and 7.
Do not let facts keep you from your opinion even when they do not match!
[...] » DC Emancipation Day, thanks to the Republican Party – Big Government [...]
[...] » DC Emancipation Day, thanks to the Republican Party – Big Government [...]
Tonight Bill O'reilly hit the nail on the head, when he said: "The limited number of blacks in the Tea PArty is due to the fact that 97% of Blacks voted for Obama" It would make no sense for those that voted close to 100% for Obama to protest his job performance. Especially when so many of them still think they are going to get FREE HealthCare, Free this & Free that. This statement does not include every & all African Americans, or all whites, or all Asians, or all Hispanics on the Government dole. But certainly goes a long way to explaining why the Tea PArty Movement is made up of predominantly white people. They are NOT protesting Obamas skin color, but his radical policies. And very few of them want the Government to take care of them from the cradle to the grave.
Read, weep, and learn.
Liberalism is 'curable' mental disorder when properly treated. The invisible shackles the Democrat Party has on black voters can be broken.
The pittance "payoff for a vote" strategy that positions Democrats as the "pimps" and minorities their "ho's" is a reprehensible, and a typical Democrat moral failing.
to wit:
Democrats fought against anti-lynching laws.
Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, is well known for having been a “Kleagle” in the Ku Klux Klan.
Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, personally filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 14 straight hours to keep it from passage.
Democrats passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil right laws enacted by Republicans.
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.
Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, reintroduced segregation throughout the federal government immediately upon taking office in 1913.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first appointment to the Supreme Court was a life member of the Ku Klux Klan, Sen. Hugo Black, Democrat of Alabama.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s choice for vice president in 1944 was Harry Truman, who had joined the Ku Klux Klan in Kansas City in 1922.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt resisted Republican efforts to pass a federal law against lynching.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt opposed integration of the armed forces.
Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd were the chief opponents of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Democrats supported and backed Judge John Ferguson in the case of Plessy v Ferguson.
Democrats supported the School Board of Topeka Kansas in the case of Brown v The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas.
Democrat public safety commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor, in Birmingham, Ala., unleashed vicious dogs and turned fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators.
Democrats were who Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the other protesters were fighting.
Democrat Georgia Governor Lester Maddox “brandished an ax hammer to prevent blacks from patronizing his restaurant.
Democrat Governor George Wallace stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963, declaring there would be segregation forever.
Democrat Arkansas Governor Faubus tried to prevent desegregation of Little Rock public schools.
Democrat Senator John F. Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI.
Democrat President Bill Clinton’s mentor was U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat and a supporter of racial segregation.
Democrat President Bill Clinton interned for J. William Fulbright in 1966-67.
Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright signed the Southern Manifesto opposing the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright joined with the Dixiecrats in filibustering the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964.
Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright voted against the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
Southern Democrats opposed desegregation and integration.
Democrat Senator 1964 – Senator Al Gore Sr. votes against Civil Rights Act.
Talen
Moral COWARD Liberals like you prefer an oppressed minority underclass, with a few "select" elites to soothe the appearance of impropriety that might come from the truth of dying cities, ridiculously HIGH unemployment and general MALAISE and despair metted out to the minority UNDERCLASS by Democrat PIMPS like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and NOW, Barry Obama.
Get your "freak on" anyway you want – IN PRIVATE. Leave America out of it.
Texas has begun that EXACT process.
That's why Texas is Texas and other states are – well…not as bad as California, Illinois and New York.
The author is REWRITING HISTORY. There is NO evidence whatsoever that the Republican Party was founded to 'to oppose the Democrats’ pro-slavery, anti-freedom agenda.'
The Republican Party was founded by the Whigs……a Statist, Centralized power, corporate subsidizing, power structure.
Abraham Lincoln was a dictator. 12,000 Americans ( Northerners ) were imprisoned – without charges or trial – in Fort Lafayette..by Lincoln. This included newspaper editors, legislators ( Northern ) and innocents who merely questioned his policies.
Lincoln made it quite clear that he felt Negroes were inferior beings during his Presidential campaign.
Republicans hardly held the high ground during the Civil ( it wasn't… ) War. By the way, the official name of the conflict ( by the US Government ) is " The War of the Rebellion".
Read your history before you write a high school level ( aka dumbed down ) analysis of The Party.
Like the Constitution, for example. "Revision" … "Amendment" … what's the diff?
…la la la racist la la la!
I know you accidentally left that word out
and you continue to be a empty trash bin of half truths and out right lies. By the mid-sixties the goal of actually LIVING up to the Constitution was acheived. The next bill the idiot LBJ signed was a HUGE welfare/reinslavement act that amongst other negative consequences DESTROYED the nuclear minority family by dangling EXTRA FREE money for single mothers with kids. The results are every where around us where poverty and despair runs rampant. Detroit? DEAD. Akron? DEAD. Flint? DEAD. Democrats KILLED jobs and incentive and the American "dream" first for minorities, then for Americans of ALL races and creeds by taxing and regulating business OUT of American cities, leaving a struggling, violent permanent minority UNDERCLASS.
Ignore this liberal choad whacker palmtree. I totally agree, these Democrats NEED minorities to use and discard. I'm a fulltime student and I graduate next month. I have black football player classmates mainly from Houston and Dallas and I've watched these guys come in a freshman and GROW up, get their educations and become responsible, grounded productive ADULTS with real futures ahead of them. They're the lucky ones. They had skills to take them out of bad situations and carry them to better lives. I ran into a starting defensive tackle, he was an unfocused starry eyed "I'm going pro soon" dreamer. He won't play a DOWN of pro ball. HE WILL GRADUATE this summer and be able to make a nice life for himself.
No thanks to the friggin' Democrat Party or race pimps like Jackson and the like.
I second that Calista! Get off the site Chris and take anon-American with you!!
If you support Obama and his Regime, you support an Statist authoritarian who is an empty suit who speaks in platitudes who is beholden to the oligarchical collectivists and banking cabals. You are against freedom, liberty and our constitutional republic and the notion that all of our rights are inborn and are given by our creator. Some autocrat in Washington does not grant rights – the constitution simply enumerates them for added protection. The constitution also limits the Powers of the Federal Government yet an expansionist authoritarian view is used in modern times contrary to what Madison had intended. If you support Obama you support the biggest threat to our free will in our history, and when the last bastion of freedom in the USA falls, there is nowhere else to go.
The Obama regime is spiraling out of control, – domestically unpopular, massive world record deficits and globally a laughing stock. What a pathetic regime the Obama regime has become. And now they are losing control they may become more dangerous to the citizens of the USA and far less dangerous to fellow despots. Obama is a despot, just like Chavez and Ahmedinejahd.
great concept
This is a socialist coup d'etat in slow motion. This regime is unconstitutional, states are revolting in courts against Obaumistic Obama-death-panel-care (Krugman just jagged off at denying care the other day after the passed bill)
This is a dangerous time, if we don't box this treasonous rat vermin baby dictator Obama by sending him a strong message in November the last bastion of freedom my end in the hands of Chairman Maobama and his communist/socialist/progressive vile traitor lackey hyenas.
I have never been so sickened in my life, I fear for the debt my children will have to pay for this traitor's profligacy.
What an utter shame and disappointment Obama is. Its shocking how bad this empty suit ideologue progressive communist is. What a hollow shell filled with meaningless platitudes.
Democrats fought against anti-lynching laws.
Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, is well known for having been a “Kleagle” in the Ku Klux Klan.
Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, personally filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 14 straight hours to keep it from passage.
Democrats passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil right laws enacted by Republicans.
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.
Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, reintroduced segregation throughout the federal government immediately upon taking office in 1913.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first appointment to the Supreme Court was a life member of the Ku Klux Klan, Sen. Hugo Black, Democrat of Alabama.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s choice for vice president in 1944 was Harry Truman, who had joined the Ku Klux Klan in Kansas City in 1922.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt resisted Republican efforts to pass a federal law against lynching.
Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt opposed integration of the armed forces.
Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd were the chief opponents of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Democrats supported and backed Judge John Ferguson in the case of Plessy v Ferguson.
Democrats supported the School Board of Topeka Kansas in the case of Brown v The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas.
Democrat public safety commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor, in Birmingham, Ala., unleashed vicious dogs and turned fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators.
Democrats were who Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the other protesters were fighting.
Democrat Georgia Governor Lester Maddox “brandished an ax hammer to prevent blacks from patronizing his restaurant.
Democrat Governor George Wallace stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963, declaring there would be segregation forever.
Democrat Arkansas Governor Faubus tried to prevent desegregation of Little Rock public schools.
Democrat Senator John F. Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI.
Democrat President Bill Clinton’s mentor was U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat and a supporter of racial segregation.
Democrat President Bill Clinton interned for J. William Fulbright in 1966-67.
Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright signed the Southern Manifesto opposing the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright joined with the Dixiecrats in filibustering the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964.
Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright voted against the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
Southern Democrats opposed desegregation and integration.
Democrat Senator 1964 – Senator Al Gore Sr. votes against Civil Rights Act.
That pathological narcissism is showing up yet again! Keep pushing his "buttons"!
His own actions and words continually open the eyes of more and more Americans.
Signs of Narcissistic Personality Disorder:
* Jealousy and possessiveness; often envious or believes that others are envious of him or her
* Excessive need to feel special, adored, loved, appreciated, or admired;
* Rage attacks when you do not sufficiently meet his/her needs
* Controlling behaviors (trying to control how you spend your time, who you talk to, how you dress, etc.)
* Inflated self-esteem, or grandiosity (bragging, "fishing" for compliments)
* Dramatic, insecure behaviors
* Expecting you to take responsibility for making him/her feel better about him/herself
* Blaming you for behaviors or feelings (i.e., "YOU made me do this," or "YOU made me feel this way.")
* Not taking responsibility for angry behavior and justifying angry outbursts
* An attitude that demonstrates "the world revolves around me" and "you need to cater to my ideas, opinions, thoughts, and feelings."
* An unwillingness to reflect on his/her own behaviors?
* A grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
* Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
* Belief that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
* Sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
* Interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
* Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
* Arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitude
Please, cut the "high academic" crap. You are ascribing 21st century views to a 19th century man. Abraham Lincoln was a son-in-law of a slave holding family and his stance was HARDLY UNIQUE or at the time racist. That's why he widely NOT VIEWED as a racist. Context is EVERYTHING when looking as an issue like his views on race. If you are "playing lawyer" I have just BLOWN UP you line of questioning by providing MISSING CONTEXT.
The whole reason that the country of Liberia was formed was for the repatriation of slaves BACK to Africa. This was awide spread view as a "best solution" to the question of what to do aftyer emancipation. Nobe of Lincolns views would be held as radical by gthe standards of the mid 1800's.
I accept your apology. For some reason I am reminded of the movie The Three Amigos and their nemisis El Guapo ( two thumbs up for anyone that figures out this reference)
Crap. Pure crap from progressive re-written history. Got to Chavez and lick his boots and love communist Venezuela you rat vermin traitor liar.
see above. Sorry, you're "inaccurate".
The authors name is Thomas Woods, james Woods is the actor, and a damn fine American.
You are correct. I have straightened out these few people who are mistakingly trying to revise Lincoln by 20/21st century standards. It's complete crap to look atb Lincoln as a modern American. He was born in the very early days of our country and had VERY CONVENTIONAL views of race – circa mid 1800's. WE see thses views now as arcane and out dated, but compare thinking in any field or endecvor and most of the 1800's would be just as out dated and easily criticized.
Anyway, ignore these guys, thinking beyond a single demension isn't for "everybody".
I must leave now, where's my buggy whip and carriage. See how "out-of-date" that sounds?
I am framiliar with the book it is revisionist tripe. Let me guess some really cool professor gave it to you to read and now you know the truth. LOL this is the book that tells us the Kaiser was a good guy. He also asserts the Japenese had to attack pearl harbor because we had started an embargo against them. Read at least one more book before you profess knowledge.
"Facts"? I think you "facts" are out of sync with the context. Hence you "facts" are skewed.
And now that I've said it – they're "stewed".
See above. The Republican Party suceeded the Whigs and the MAIN issue of the day was SOUTHERN SLAVERY. So, naturally it is an easy case to make that the Republican Party OPPOSED SLAVERY and intended to make that doctrine the LAW of the land. Southerners REJECTED this stance and warned the country that should Lincoln be elected with his already stated intentions to declare slavery ILLEGAL and enacy emancipation – there would be a FIGHT.
And so the fight ensued.
All of this revisionist bullshit that declares that the South was interested mainly is "States Rights" is so much crap that obfuscates the actual intention of the South envoking "states rights" in the context of slavery, that is to continue slaveru as an institution NO MATTER WHAT.
The "Supremecy Clause" trumps states rights, and did in this case. So, we have a war and the South LOSES and some just can't accepyt that, 150 plus years later. I'm a Texan and I know slavery was wrong, why so racist?
By the way I'll match wits with you anytime, and I guarantee that you won't describe my writing or analysis as "high school" or dumbed down. You are WRONG and you are taking things out of context to construct your argument.
That might work at the local bar, but not with me.
hey, I "recognize" that list!
Credit talen, please. I lifted it from him a long time ago and I use it all the time and encourage others to follow suit, but just put a mention in there. I'm a student and proper citation is important.
yup Texas. That's the day the word arrived.
Republicans of today DON'T want to celebrate the Confederacy. You can think it, but tha doesn't make it true. Many Southern states still hold on to vestiges of their history, some gfood some not so good. Remembering helps prevent "replays"
Virginia was a very important Southern stae and the home state of Robert E. Lee.
here youy dickhead, you can read this twice.
By the mid-sixties the goal of actually LIVING up to the Constitution was acheived.
The next bill the idiot POS – LBJ signed (1965) was a HUGE welfare/reinslavement act that amongst other negative consequences DESTROYED the nuclear minority family by dangling EXTRA FREE money for single mothers with kids.
The results of BAD DEMOCRAT POLICIES are everywhere around us where poverty and despair runs rampant.
Detroit? DEAD. Akron? DEAD. Flint? DEAD. Democrats KILLED jobs and incentive and the American "dream" – first for minorities, then for Americans of ALL races and creeds by taxing and regulating industry OUT of American cities, and by kissing the asses of unions who BOUGHT the whorish Democrat Party – leaving a struggling, violent, permanent minority UNDERCLASS.
Its a GREAT list. It needs to be put all over the place to help expose these progressive Marxist freedom/librety hating rats.
Ahh……….Grasshopper……….you have much to learn and read. FYI I did my grad school thing long before you.
In 1861 Lincoln's and the Party's position was that slavery was secure. Their ONLY position was to oppose its extension to the Territories.
There are many things about the subject you are probably unaware of…..a grad student can't read everything. And of course you realize even a President can't declare slavery 'illegal'.
The most revealing act of Lincoln was the Emancipation Proclamation. NO slaves in the Union States were freed…what do you make of that???
These are FACTS grasshopper…………not revisionist history.
PS……….emancipation of slaves may have been peaceful….as it was in ALL countries in the Western Hemisphere……………If Lincoln offered $300/slave compensation, as was in the DC law.
( $300 was about 15oz in gold coin )
In response to JamesB's comment to me :
Ahh……….Grasshopper……….you have much to learn and read. FYI I did my grad school thing long before you.
In 1861 Lincoln's and the Party's position was that slavery was secure. Their ONLY position was to oppose its extension to the Territories.
There are many things about the subject you are probably unaware of…..a grad student can't read everything. And of course you realize even a President can't declare slavery 'illegal'.
The most revealing act of Lincoln was the Emancipation Proclamation. NO slaves in the Union States were freed…what do you make of that???
These are FACTS grasshopper…………not revisionist history.
PS……….emancipation of slaves may have been peaceful….as it was in ALL countries in the Western Hemisphere (except Haiti )……………If Lincoln offered $300/slave compensation, as was in the DC law.
( $300 was about 15oz in gold coin )
– 90 —
races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything. I do not understand that because I do not want a negro woman for a slave I must necessarily want her for a wife
. My understanding is that I can just let her alone. I am now in my fiftieth year, and I certainly never have had a black woman for either a slave or a wife. So it seems to me quite possible for us to get along without making either slaves or wives of negroes. I will add to this that I have never seen, to my knowledge, a man, woman, or child who was in favor of producing a perfect equality, social and political, between negroes and white men. I recollect of but one distinguished instance that I ever heard of so frequently as to be entirely satisfied of its correctness, and that is the case of Judge Douglases
old friend Colonel Richard M. Johnson. I will also add to the remarks I have made (for I am not going to enter at large upon this subject), that I have never — 91 —
had the least apprehension that I or my friends would marry negroes if there was no law to keep them from it; but as Judge Douglas and his friends seem to be in great apprehension that they might, if there was no law to keep them from it, I give him the most solemn pledge that I will to the very last stand by the law of this State, which forbids the marrying of white people with negroes. I will add one further word, which is this: that I do not understand that there is any place where an alteration of the social and political relations of the negro and the white man can be made except in the State legislature — not in the Congress of the United States; and as I do not really apprehend the approach of any such thing myself, and as Judge Douglas seems to be in constant horror that some such danger is rapidly approaching, I propose, as the best means to prevent it, that the judge be kept at home and placed in the State legislature to fight the measure. I do not propose dwelling longer at this time on the subject.
And by the way the book never said Japan had to attack us but that FDR wanted them to attack us and he did all he could to facilitate that end result because of a desire to somehow enter into direct defense of England against Germany!
History is a bitch.
if you're referring to moi………………..I'm a staunch Constitutionalist Libertarian Libertine.
To me, BOTH Dems and Repubs are evil.
Oh I see! So when discussing the history of a politician/political party we should ignore the complete history because it was so many years ago. Ok, so if I refuse to look at history say older than 15 minutes ago you would have no problem with it because it was old history. My point here is that historical discussions deserve full context. Read what Lincoln said in his 4th debate. Yes he did hold opinion of the time and that reflects on the fact that he did not go to war to save the slaves but rather the Union. The mentality of that era is just as corrosive as the mentality of the early to late 1950s and the Democrat party. Like it or not that attitude prevailed in a mjor way and was and is still wrong!
Read what Lincoln said!
What would I have done about what? And my high school teacher has been dead for 30 years! Attitude is timeless. Those who had slaves or didn't have slaves but went along with it are as guilty of denying liberty then as they would be today! So the time frame is irrelevant to the concept!
Bill Clinton smears the Tea Party with his fears of domestic terrorism from the Tea Party. Obama already bought Bill Clinton off with $6 million for his Clinton Massage Parlor Presidential Library from the Stimulus Funds. What bribe has Bill Clinton accepted from Obama this time? It will come out in time.
Lies are libertarian now ? While I don't like Lincolns anti-State soverignty take on the republic, this is progressive commie crap. I've read on Lincoln and completley disagree the way the GOP is being characterized and this characterization is simply serving to strengthen the Marxist psychopath and his cronies, Reid and Pelosi.
Even Ron Paul chooses to stay undre the GOP banner rather than appear a loon.
I've found self declared libertarians hijacking stuff like Tea Party's and Ron/Rand Paul as a sounding board for crazy and stupid things, so while the libertarian may aim to be a big tent, its not a happy family tent, and if you are coming up with bull and it helps a Marxist, prepare for some crap shoveled your way.
You must be logged in to post a comment.