The Racism Inside The Democrat Party

Loading

Of course the WaPo never mentions in this report of racist attitudes that all the racism the Obama campaign received was coming from other Democrats:

For all the hope and excitement Obama’s candidacy is generating, some of his field workers, phone-bank volunteers and campaign surrogates are encountering a raw racism and hostility that have gone largely unnoticed — and unreported — this election season. Doors have been slammed in their faces. They’ve been called racially derogatory names (including the white volunteers). And they’ve endured malicious rants and ugly stereotyping from people who can’t fathom that the senator from Illinois could become the first African American president.

~~~

Victoria Switzer, a retired social studies teacher, was on phone-bank duty one night during the Pennsylvania primary campaign. One night was all she could take: “It wasn’t pretty.” She made 60 calls to prospective voters in Susquehanna County, her home county, which is 98 percent white. The responses were dispiriting. One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn’t possibly vote for Obama and concluded: “Hang that darky from a tree!”

Documentary filmmaker Rory Kennedy, the daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy, said she, too, came across “a lot of racism” when campaigning for Obama in Pennsylvania. One Pittsburgh union organizer told her he would not vote for Obama because he is black, and a white voter, she said, offered this frank reason for not backing Obama: “White people look out for white people, and black people look out for black people.”

Obama campaign officials say such incidents are isolated, that the experience of most volunteers and staffers has been overwhelmingly positive

McQ notes that the majority of racism depicted in the article are anecdotes, hearsay, and history:

However, when it comes down to actually putting names to the incidents, only three anecdotes do that – and they’re all about Clinton supporters. That is to say, Democrats

Geez, I woulda thought it was only us Republicans who were the racists.

Oh, I’m not saying there are racists in this country. There always will be. But don’t gloss over the 92% of blacks that voted for Obama when you talk about racist. When almost a 100% of a certain race vote a certain way for another person of their same race, its not because of his policies.

And just wait till the general. The word “racism” will be thrown around like beads in New Orleans. Hope McCain is prepared.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
63 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

But don’t gloss over the the 92% of blacks that voted for Obama when you talk about racist. When almost a 100% of a certain race vote a certain way for another person of their same race, its not because of his policies.

Do you know the percentage of the African American vote that Kerry got? Gore?

Gore got 90% and Kerry 88%.

And wahtis your point Fit Fit. There are 2 people in the Democratic Primary and 92% of blacks voted for the Black candidate. No racism there. Move along. And I am sure that if Clinton was the nominee about 90%of Black votes would go her way.

And isn’t it funny how they always vote Democrats into power, and they get nothing for it. If it wasn’t for republicans in the 60s there would not be the Civil Rights Act, which was almost unanomously voted against by Democrats, and champoined by Republicans. But the Democrats have fooled them into thinking the Democrats really are going to help them, but in the end they only help the Democrats stay in power and do little for blacks or the poor in this country

You won’t find me defending either party on their great success in helping African Americans (or anyone else) in this country . The point is, in November, the African American vote will likely break the same as it has for the last few elections. I think it’s obvious that Obama benefited from racial identy politics in the primary. But what is Curt’s point in throwing out these 90% percentages as if they are completely unprecendented? Does Curt think calling blacks racist is a good way to attract African Americans into conservative politics?

Proving some Democrats are racist does mean some Republicans aren’t. Most Republicans I know are not racist, but most white racists I know are Republicans.

Most White RacistI know are Demcrats. Look at KKK Byrd, he was in the KKK. Look at Gore’s Father, he was one of those Democrats that voted against the Civil Rights Act. And Clinton’s mentor was a known racist. The only racists I know in the Republican Party are Buhchanan and Ron Paul who are both out of the mainstream of GOP politics. And Strom Thurmon is not in the Senate any more

And personally I know many more racist whites that are Democrats than racists Republicans.

I don’t know any of those people. I am speaking of the people I’ve met growing up in the Carolinas.

So you do not know who Al Gore is, or Senator Byrd the eldest member of the Democrats in the Senate.

Man that is sad if you want to follow politics and do not know who Robert KKK Burd is or Al Gore and Al Gore Sr.

How old are you??? Just wondering.

I know of all those people. I was born in the middle of Watergate.

Please i have argued this point untill i am blue in the face. The South gets a bad wrap as racist and republican but lets take a step back for a minute. I grew up in Alabama, born in Miss. Live in NY.

I have long argued that the south is the least racist area in the country. My points are that racial integration is the greatest in the south because we where initially forced. therefore we assosiate with people of different colors closely allowing differences to melt away. While middle americans grow up never even seeing a black person in real life. Also, the KKK headquarters moved out of the South and into the midwest. Another point is that where have all the most recent race riots been? (my Cal friends hate that point!)

Racism as a whole is dead in this country and the only ones that trumpette it are the ones that have profited off it. Racism is now an individual problem, and should be treated as such.

Finally, with all that said and all the race riots in recent memory being committed in Blue states i can only say that no one party holds any monopoly on racism. You will always have people that are racist but they are few and far between.

Scott J-

I think both the South and Republicans get the bad wrap. But your experiences don’t jive with mine on the “few and far between” bit.

The fact that the writer of this post would accuse African Americans of racism because 90% voted for Obama feeds into the stereotypes that some whites associate with African Americans; i.e., African Americans always vote for the black person running for office, regardless of their qualification. African Americans are politically monolithic, and the vast majority of African Americans hate white people. In other words, African Americans are dumb, lazy, and racist.

The fact of the matter is that African Americans voted for Senator Obama because they view him as a better candidate than Senator Clinton; as do the majority of the White Americans that voted in the Democratic primaries. The reason most African Americans vote Democrat is because their hasn’t been a viable alternative from the Republican side.

No African American in their right mind would vote for the party that gave America Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms and the other like minded avowed racists that permeate the Republican party. The Democratic party has issues too. However, in the last 40 years, they have been more responsive to the African American community and that is why most African Americans support the Democratic Party.

About the black vote many of you commented on…..it seems kind of absurd to accuse them of racism just because they vote for Obama. There is a difference between voting for someone because you feel an affinity with them (are women voting for Hillary all sexist?), and when you vote against someone because of an absurd hatred of their race, or gender, or faith. I haven’t seen any polling indicating that the driving force behind support for Obama in the black community is hatred of whites.

One other thing to mention about the black vote – if you look at the polling numbers from end of last year, beginning of this year, the majority of the black vote was for Hillary. It was only as the community learned more about Obama as a candidate that is shifted to him. And then after Bill and Hillary started making stupid comments about Obama and race, the #s shifted dramatically.

And by the way, I don’t think anyone was naive enough to believe that racism was some sort of Republican problem. It is just as pervasive among Democratic voters.

Did you know that all of those people you said were first Democrats.

Aside form that, I really want to know what havethe Democrats deon that is so good for the African Americans. They have made them slaves to the government by welfare, and far more African American children are born without fathers, because welfare will give more money to fatherless children. Is there less poverty in the AfricanAmerican community because of all these great programs by the Left in this country. No.

And who was it that pushed through the Civil Rights Act, it wasn’t Democrats. Who was it that wants to fullfil Martin Luther King’s dream of a colorless society, I think it is the Republicans. We do not see anyone’s skin color, you are judged by what you do, not by the color of your skin. The Democrats judge people by groups, they are African American, Females, Latinos. Isee them all as Americans, nothing more nothing less. They arejudgedby character, not ethnicity, gender, race cre4ed or wahtever else you wantto qualify them by. A colorblind society, isn’t that what MArtin Luther King and the Civil Right Movement was all about. Not putting one person ahead of another because of Race, Gender or Creed. Well my friend that is exactly what the Democrats have foistered onto our society.

Of course the WaPo never mentions in this report of racist attitudes that all the racism the Obama campaign received was coming from other Democrats:

Duhhhhh, isn’t that sort of, ummmm, implicit in the fact that this is the DEMOCRATIC primaries, so obviously Obama campaign workers were contacting registered DEMOCRATS?

“as do the majority of the White Americans that voted in the Democratic primaries”

I don’t think the Obamessiah has won the “majority of the white vote” in any primary except VA. Outside of that, the highest number I have found is just over 40%.

Sorry.

You’ll have to prove that one.

***

Interestingly you chose to mention Strom Thurmond (a former Democrat) and Jesse Helms while ignoring a much longer list of other very recognizable names.

I wonder why.

Do you really want to get into comparisons of which political party has done more for the advancement and equal treatment of blacks?

You probably don’t because I can assure you that the facts are much different than your perceptions.

DELETED BY USER

Curt,

I know that individuals like yourself find it difficult to believe that African Americans actually listen to and can make decision based upon the information given to them by a candidate. Notwithstanding your disbelief in the aforementioned premise, this is actually what has happened in the case of Obama vs. Clinton. Whether you believe it or not does not make it any less truer. It just makes you look foolish. Because based upon your absurd premise, 92% of African Americans are not only racist, they’re stupid too. Not even David Duke believes that.

*SMH*

In light of the markedly unbalanced numbers it is easy to see that Curt may indeed have a valid point.

Whether you believe it or not does not make it any less truer. The sheer numerical differences belie your position.

Aye Chihuahua,

Yes I knew that Jesse and Strom were both dems before they changed to republicans. Did you know that Helms and Strom (and a whole bunch of other avowed racist politicians) became republicans after Jim Crow was abolished? I wonder why? Could it have been that they felt more comfortable being avowed racists in the republican party? Things that make you go hmmmmm….

Anyway my friend the fact is as I stated very clearly in my first response, I believe that the democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin. That is why I am an independent. My purpose for commenting in this thread was to contra pose a viewpoint to the author’s premise. As far as this writer is concerned, democrats nor republicans care about anything other than making money for their corporate sponsors and spending our money on unnecessary horsepuckey.

The vast majority of the 92% of African Americans that support Obama perceive him to be the better candidate. There are probably no more African Americans voting for Obama because he is black, than it is whites voting for Hillary, Paul, and McCain because they are white/female. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous and plays into the ignorant, boot licking and uninformed negro stereotype and I could not let that absurdity go unchallenged.

Aye Chihuahua,

You wrote – “In light of the markedly unbalanced numbers it is easy to see that Curt may indeed have a valid point. Whether you believe it or not does not make it any less truer. The sheer numerical differences belie your position.”

Response – Not really. The premise that 92% of African Americans are racist and support Obama because he is the same color as them is an absurdity beyond psycho-social comprehension. But you’re free to believe what you want to believe.

If your premise were true then Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Shirley Chisolm, Carol Mosley Braun, and Alan Keyes should have receive 92% of the African American vote when they ran for President. They did not. As such, their is no precedent for you and any other like minded individuals to grasp hold too that supports your premise. Unless you have some information or historical trend to support your position, you may want to rethink it.

Heru, so you’re saying that the AA voters are “differently smart” than white voters because they picked Obama purely based only on his great achievements in such high numbers?

You know what buddy, it’s clear as day to anyone with half a brain that it’s racial solidarity. This is not DailyKos so your politically correct points won’t find a lot of support.

Heru, your last point is absurd. To claim, for instance, that white racists are not really racists because they will vote for David Duke in higher numbers than for some liberal Catholic from New York makes no sense because they do see other factors besides race.

I’m not looking for support my friend. Nor am I a supporter of political correctness in any form or fashion. Additionally I did not write, intimate, or even suggest that AA voters are “differently smart” than white voters. What I did write was that to the vast majority of AA voters, Obama is clearly the better candidate and unless you or any other person can at least cite a precedent (there aren’t any…btw) to support the absurdity that suggest that 92% of AA voters are racist and support Obama because he’s black, then you are simply wrong on this.

Igor,

I made no such claim. Please read my post again….

I didn’t really know where to post this until I saw the category “culture” and thought, ‘that’s actually pretty appropriate’.

Here’s Josh Marshall on what just happened in Mississippi:

Childers On Track To Win It

I didn’t think the Dems would pull this one off. The Republicans brought Cheney in late bout of campaigning — maybe not such a bad idea. But it looks like Childers is going to win this thing. He’s only narrowly ahead. But it’s pretty much only his strong precincts that are still to report.

Late Update: AP’s called it. Childers takes Mississippi’s 1st district, an incredibly Republican district.

Later Update: To put this into some broader perspective, the Republicans have lost three straight Republican districts to the Democrats in by-elections this year. Hastert’s district in Illinois, Louisiana 6th, and now Mississippi 1st. Each successively more Republican than the last. In Mississippi 1st, President Bush got 62% of the vote there in 2004.

Symbolic Number Update: On the symbolic level, this pulls the House GOP caucus down to 199 — below 200.

Absolutely amazing; it’s a political ‘culture’ shift away from Republicans.

Just to clarify the record a bit.

Helms never held office as a Democrat. He ran for the Senate, as a Republican, for the first time in 1972, hardly the height of racial tension in this country.

Thurmond changed parties in 1964 which was about the same time that the Democrats were doing everything they could to resist Civil Rights efforts.

Thurmond then went on to support the extension of the Voting Rights Act, and voted to honor MLK, Jr. with a federal holiday. He was a defender of blacks against lynching and poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats.

In addition he hired African-American staffers, endorsed racial integration in the 1970s, enrolled his white daughter in an integrated public school, and supported blacks being appointed to the federal bench.

In light of that record his views of race certainly moderated over the years. Your contention that he was “more comfortable being [an] avowed racists in the republican party” is certainly not supported by his actions.

***

In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes.

www [dot] congresslink [dot] org/print_basics_histmats_civilrights64text.htm

“If your premise were true then Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Shirley Chisolm, Carol Mosley Braun, and Alan Keyes should have receive 92% of the African American vote when they ran for President. They did not. As such, their is no precedent for you and any other like minded individuals to grasp hold too that supports your premise.”

***

The fact is that Jackson did capture 92% of the black vote when he ran in 1988.

www [dot] time [dot] com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1581666,00.html

So, there’s the precedent.

***

I didn’t do any research into the other candidates that you listed since it is getting late and I have work tomorrow but I will see what I can dig up.

From the Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, Tom Cole, about today’s special election in Mississippi and the challenges that lay ahead:

“We are disappointed in tonight’s election results. Though the NRCC, RNC and Mississippi Republicans made a major effort to retain this seat, we came up short.

“Tonight’s election highlights two significant challenges Republicans must overcome this November. First, Republicans must be prepared to campaign against Democrat challengers who are running as conservatives, even as they try to join a liberal Democrat majority. Though the Democrats’ task will be more difficult in a November election, the fact is they have pulled off two special election victories with this strategy, and it should be a concern to all Republicans.

“Second, the political environment is such that voters remain pessimistic about the direction of the country and the Republican Party in general. Therefore, Republicans must undertake bold efforts to define a forward looking agenda that offers the kind of positive change voters are looking for. This is something we can do in cooperation with our Presidential nominee, but time is short.

“I encourage all Republican candidates, whether incumbents or challengers, to take stock of their campaigns and position themselves for challenging campaigns this fall by building the financial resources and grassroots networks that offer them the opportunity and ability to communicate, energize and turn out voters this election.”

Aye Chihuahua

No problemo mi amigo. In the case of election 1984, Jesse received the AA vote because he was a viable candidate (like Obama) and not because he was simply black. If the AA’s that supported Jesse were racist, then Mondale would not have received 90% of the AA vote; nor would any other white candidate prior to and after Mondale. Additionally in the same article you cited, Al Sharpton had kinder words for Edwards then he did for Obama. So called liberal AA’s such as Andrew Young, Bob Johnson, Tavis Smiley and others support Clinton as well.

When Hillary and Bill interjected race into the mix in January (?) that is when we saw the numbers rise for Obama. Before that point, Hillary enjoyed a majority percentage of AA voters as opposed to Obama. From that point forward however, Hillary has seen a steady decline in AA support. One can’t piss off one’s constituency and expect them to vote for you.

Additionally Obama is not the presumptive Democratic nominee simply because AA’s voted for him. He is the nominee because the majority of Democrats believe in his message and believe that he can win the general election. The majority of voters that support Clinton believe in her message too. However we know at least 18% in PA voted for Hillary because she was white. Maybe the same number of AA’s voted for Obama for the same reason. I can accept that argument. However to write that 92% of AA’s are racist because they voted for Obama is offensive to the nth degree and de-legitimizes (if you will) African American’s intelligence and decision making capabilities. And that is wrong my friend no matter what side of the political aisle one may stand on.

Heru Ammen,

When a distribution deviates so drastically from the expected by being strongly skewed in a particular direction, it indicates the distribution isn’t “random,” i.e., that there is something “biasing” the data.

Since O’Bummer is no different in his far Left message than any other far Left Demokrat nut case, it can’t be the message. To test for that, one looks at how he’s received by Whites and Blacks separately. The fact that the split among White Demokrats is about what one would expect, indicates that the message to groups differing only in Color is being received differently.

Color is then the variable upon which the results strongly depend.

But I need to get better and more current numbers to see if that is actually what is happening on a large scale, and not just in the few areas that I’ve seen it.

A further proof can be brought if one can show an overt racism among Blacks that one doesn’t find among Whites. That can be seen at a mostly Black fund raiser, ” Comedian Chris Rock, who introduced the candidate, told the crowd they will regret it if Obama wins and they had voted for Sen. Clinton, the Democratic front-runner. “You’d say, ‘I had that white lady! What was I thinking?’ ” Rock joked.

Most whites shrug that off as that’s just their sense of humor. But, after hearing Wright and other popular black leaders speak, I realize it is RACIST! And if they aren’t uncomfortable laughing at a “joke” like that in public, they certainly won’t be inhibited when they are voting in private.

Do you think that we are saying that all the AA that vote for Obamassiah is racist. WE never said that. But when you get 92% of any polulation it is nit normalm, unless you are in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was on the one vted for. So, if 92% of Whtes voted for Hillary nwould you consider that racist or just that the Whites just thought she was better??? It is amzing that people do not see the racism in the AA commuity. Look at Rev Wright, Al Sharpton, Louie Farakan, and all the other race baiters.

As I hav said before I could care less about someone’s color or ethnicity. It is what they are for. And 92% of any population for one person over another is not the norm. I reiterate if 92% of Whtes voted for Hillary, woukld you consider that racist. I think it would and would think that it would be s sh ame that they would do that.

But of course, AA can not be racist because of they haved been put down for so long. If Colon Powell or Condi Rice would run they would be called uncle Toms because they are not the right kind of Black politician. Just look at what Rev Wright called Condi, Codaskeeza. Or look at some of the ;olitical cartoons they have made of Colon powell, JC Watts, Lt Gov Steele. But there is no racism in the AA communityt though to you. They just want the gravy trin to keep rolling in from the government. The Democrats have ruined the lives of more AA than any Republican by giving keeping them beholden to the gopvenment for all of their needss and not helping them get out of the lower class. It is a shame that MLK dream has died and we hafvve come to this.

He had a dream of a color blind society, but the so-called AA leaders are all race baiters that keep racism alive.

stix1972

“He had a dream of a color blind society, but the so-called AA leaders are all race baiters that keep racism alive.”

He would be called an “uncle tom” today, because as a thoughtful and caring man, naturally …he was a Republican.

Chris-#15

Some good points, with which I would partially agree.

But there are real White/White bias and Black/Black bias, but the Black/Black bias appears measurably much more pronounced, at least if I’m reading this graph correctly.

And it’s too bad the voters who are “learning” about Obama are getting their info from the Obama campaign and the MSM, otherwise I am confident (hopeful, anyway) that many would stay away from him. Of course the Wright nonsense doesn’t seem to have affected his numbers, so maybe I am being more hopeful than realistic with that expectation.

There is more than adequate data to support the premise that was being presented.

You started out by saying that for the argument to be valid there must be a precedent. Then when a precedent was presented you switched to saying that Jackson got votes because he was “viable”.

Saying that Jackson received 92% because he was “viable” is laughable. Anyone who knows politics knows that Jackson was never “viable” and has never been elected to anything.

Then you switch your argument to say that if race was a factor Mondale would not have gotten 90%. That’s a false premise as well. Who else would they have voted for? Mondale was the white guy in the race. There was no black guy to choose.

In fact, that argument is just as false as using Keyes as an example. He is Republican.

***

Race may or may not be the driving factor. There are a lot of indicators that point in that direction. Whether blacks “chose” the Obameiester just because of his skin color or whether they flocked to him due to the racial stirring of the Clintons, I am not sure. In any case it certainly cannot be ignored or wished away.

Either way race plays into it heavily.

When you strip away the race and gender differences of these two, they are essentially the same candidate, pushing for the same issues, and using the same techniques and rhetoric. Neither brings a distinguished list of accomplishments to the table. Both are dramatically left of center. Therein lie my problems with both of them. It’s not race or gender. It’s issues.

Obie’s vote percentages among whites as well as the number of people who have said that they will either sit it out or cross over if he is the nominee should be enough to give the Dems pause.

The thing they have to remember is that their party cannot win without the white vote. Even 100% of the black vote will not be enough.

So is there really a difference between “racial identity politics” and racism?

I don’t think so.

Malageny
“So is there really a difference between “racial identity politics” and racism?

I don’t think so.”

This will be the Democrats downfall. Identity politics sorks if you have the White Candidate thatis supposedly forthe AA, Women, Latinos or whatever other groups you can come up with. Identity Politicsis exactly what I was talking about. that is what the Democrat Party is all about. they put peopl into groups, not individuals, andI think that that is racist in itself. On the other side, conservatives judge and look at people as individuals.

Yonason,

When people choose to run for office, they come before the people and make their case as to why the people should elect them. This is what all of the presidential candidates have done and the ones that are still running have made their case better than the ones that aren’t running. (I know my analogy is over simplistic here. But hear me out) To suggest that AA’s don’t think, do research, and then make a decision based upon the issues on the same level as all racial groups in this country is simply wrong.

We are not monolithic. Quite frankly if the Republican party would stick to fiscal conservatism and quit trying to be the party of God’s Holy Word as defined by southern baptists, there would be more AA’s republicans in this country. But the fact that AA’s had every facet of their lives directed by southern style social conservatism for over 300 years from slavery to Jim Crow is the main reason why very few AA’s identify with the republican party.

Senator Obama’s message has been accepted by the majority of Democratic voters. Whether one agrees with his political views or not, he obviously has earned the respect and admiration of the majority of Democratic voters. That can’t be taken away from him. So suggesting that AA’s voted for him based on the color of his skin (and not for the same reasons that whites voted for him) is wrong.

Aye Chihuahua,

I’ve seen no one give a precedent that supports the author’s contention. AA’s supported Jesse Jackson in ’84 because he was a viable choice. Additionally, Jesse could not have won any state primary with only AA support. Whites voted for him too. Shirley Chisolm, Carol Mosley Braun, Al Sharpton nor Alan Keyes received 90% of the AA vote when they ran simply because they weren’t perceived as viable candidates. Additionally, if Senator Obama doesn’t win the nomination, I can guarantee you that Cynthia McKinney won’t get 90% of the AA vote either.

In reference to your Mondale analogy, if the majority of AA voters were truly racist, then they would have fielded another AA candidate and voted for the black candidate instead of Mondale or sat home and didn’t vote for anyone. Racism is a system that perpetuates itself upon the belief of cultural, religious, and class superiority of one group of people over another. That is certainly not the case for the vast majority of AA’s. Nor is it the case for the vast majority of whites.

Most folks in this country want good jobs an/or the opportunity to run a business. They want good schools for their children, cheap gas, and the opportunity to enjoy the American way of life. African Americans are no different in that respect and we have no special or hidden agenda to get unqualified AA’s elected President. We vote like everyone else in this country and if Hillary didn’t inject race into this election, she would be enjoying more support amongst AA’s.

Heru Ammen,

“…[T]he fact that AA’s had every facet of their lives directed by southern style social conservatism for over 300 years from slavery to Jim Crow is the main reason why very few AA’s identify with the republican party.”

Whoa, hold it RIGHT there! Are we living on the same planet?

Don’t you know that it was the Southern DEMOCRATS who were the slave holders? Are you so unaware that the Democrats are the ones who gave America Jim Crow? Are you that uninformed? (I’m not trying to convey anger, but astonishment, just in case that isn’t coming through too clearly).

The Republican party was founded to oppose Democrats who wanted to expand slavery into the new Western territories that were opening up at that time. Lincoln was a Republican, not a Democrat. Why do you think MLK was a Republican?! Because the Democrats were nearly all racists!

You tell me the AA community “researches” a candidate, and I have no doubt they do. But if all the information they have to go on is what is spoon fed them by their racist leaders (like Jackson, Rengel, Al (HymieTown*) Sharpton,”Reverand” Jeremiah (HateAmerica) Wright, Obama, etc., etc.,) and the Leftist MSM, there’s no way they will have the information they need.

There is so much material on this, and, time permitting I can get some more links for you later today or tomorrow.

Take a look at the graph I posted in #37, above. It shows that AA bias is running at roughly 5 times that of White! [If B&W were equally biased, the line would go through x=50, not x=10. If there were no bias, the slope would be zero.] And I am not saying it is racism, necessarily, but the IS a very profound and measurable BIAS. What it comes from, I don’t know. But it is there, and until we recognize that, we won’t be able to fix it.

So, before you start lecturing people about facts, first get your own facts straight, please.
———————————————————
* NOTE – (to a Jew, “Hymie” is one of many equivalents to the “N”-word for an AA.)

“But the fact that AA’s had every facet of their lives directed by southern style social conservatism for over 300 years from slavery to Jim Crow is the main reason why very few AA’s identify with the republican party.”

Oh come on now.

You’ve got to be kidding me.

Anyone who makes that sort of revisionist statement is either woefully misinformed or willingly trying to fool anyone who will listen.

Jim Crow laws were brought to you by, and supported by Dems. The Civil Rights movement was opposed at every turn by, guess who, the Dems. Who currently has a former member of the KKK serving in the Senate? You guessed it. The Dems. Guess who brought you the KKK. Which political party honored the KKK at their convention. Same answer.

There is a massive amount of information out there which confirms every single thing that I am saying if you wish to look for it. Even a couple of cursory Google searches will inform you if you wish to learn about it.

“Senator Obama’s message has been accepted by the majority of Democratic voters.”

What, exactly, is Obie’s message and how, precisely, is it different than Hilda’s?

I contend that they are one in the same.

“Most folks in this country want good jobs an/or the opportunity to run a business. They want good schools for their children, cheap gas, and the opportunity to enjoy the American way of life. African Americans are no different in that respect and we have no special or hidden agenda to get unqualified AA’s elected President.”

Please elucidate, in detail, how the message being presented by either of the Dem candidates for President will assist people in accomplishing the goals that you have laid out.

Also, please establish for me the Constitutional role of gov’t in providing for “good jobs, business “opportunity”, “good schools”, and “cheap gas”.

I contend that the gov’t has NO role in any of these things. Quite the contrary. If the gov’t would get out of people’s way and allow them to pursue their goals we, the American people, black, white, and every other color, would be better off.

You won’t get that with a Dem candidate who wants to tax and punish accomplishment.

Yonason

Yes I do know that it was democrats that were the the slave holders. They were also southern baptist conservatives. Please don’t take my argument as contra republican and pro democrat party. Party affiliations have nothing to do with one being racist or stuck on stupid. But one would be obtuse to suggest that a great amount of support that the republican party receives is from individuals that identify with southern baptist style conservatism.

Whether Hillary or Obama have the same message is irrelevant. What f’ed up Hillary was when Bill called Obama’s candidacy a “fairy tale.” Hillary is losing the AA vote to bad politics. What Bill did would have the same effect as someone calling a Jewish candidacy for mayor of NY a fairy tale, or a Asian candidate for mayor of San Francisco a fairy tale. It’s the reason why McCain now embraces southern baptist conservatives as opposed to dissing them like he did in 2000.

The fact is that Washington doesn’t consistently deliver what the people desire or need. However we go through this dog and pony show every four years and the people make a choice as to who they would rather have lie to them for the next four years. They cast their vote and hope for the best. Some vote along racial lines. Some people vote based upon religion, fear, or special interest considerations. But most folks vote because they like what they hear from one candidate better than the others and AA’s are no different in that respect.

BTW…the government has no constitutional role to provide jobs or cheap gas. However it should provide and support equal opportunity for all people that desire to and work to succeed.

Aye Chihuahua,

The fact is that white southern baptist conservatives NOW overwhelmingly identify with the republican party. White southern baptist conservatives were slave owners, klan members, and supporters of jim crow. The Republican Party works on behalf of issues near and dear to white southern baptist conservatives. That is why AA’s do not support republicans in great numbers. We’re not stupid my friend. Just because you buy a new house doesn’t mean you’ll treat me any better then you treated me in your old house. It just means you have a new house to kick my arse in.

Yonason,

You’re preaching to the choir my friend. I’m well aware of the BS that Jackson, Sharpton. et al, engage in. Regardless of his politics, from what I can surmise from my research, Obama is not from the same mode as those gentlemen. He definitely leans left of center. But not enough to turn me off completely.

To be frank with you – at this point their hasn’t been anyone that really impressed me enough to the point that I would vote for them. IMO McCain is an ass kisser. Hillary thinks she’s entitled to the Presidency. Obama may not be seasoned enough and the other (and third party) candidates are special interest whores. Bob Barr has some appeal. However his speech at the CCC a few years back (and the denial that he didn’t know what they represented) is still stuck in my craw.

If Hillary and Bill had not interjected race into the process then I feel you would have a valid argument. She did not start losing AA support until Bill called Obama’s candidacy a “fairy tale.” And as I stated earlier one can’t pizz off their core constituency and expect them to support you.

I think we’ve covered all of the points here. This will be my last comment on this subject for now. I just hope that I was able to convey some points for your consideration. Let us all agree to disagree if need be. After all, this is America; where we can still disagree without being fearful to do so.

Heru Ammen #33 wrote:

In the case of election 1984, Jesse received the AA vote because he was a viable candidate (like Obama) and not because he was simply black.

That seems to be offset by comments made like this:

”There is a Jesse Jackson groundswell, and it is becoming everyone’s black, patriotic duty to support him,” said Lawrence Briskar, dean of students at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland.

If the AA’s that supported Jesse were racist, then Mondale would not have received 90% of the AA vote; nor would any other white candidate prior to and after Mondale.

Again, you are comparing a Democratic primary (Jackson’s numbers) to a general election (Mondale’s numbers as the Democratic candidate), where AA overwhelmingly vote Democratic.

Heru Ammen #23:

The vast majority of the 92% of African Americans that support Obama perceive him to be the better candidate. There are probably no more African Americans voting for Obama because he is black, than it is whites voting for Hillary, Paul, and McCain because they are white/female. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous and plays into the ignorant, boot licking and uninformed negro stereotype and I could not let that absurdity go unchallenged.

It’s not to imply anything of the sort! But to think that race identity hasn’t played a factor is to require a willing suspension of belief.

I believe there are even white voters, suffering from white guilt, who are also being influenced by race. And it’s not to say that race is the trumping factor; it’s not. But it is playing a factor amongst some people. There’s a certain excitement factor in seeing yet another “glass ceiling broken”, as if one were needed as proof-positive that America has moved beyond race. We will never move beyond race, so long as there are men like Reverend Wright who fixate on it, obsess over it, and keep reminding us of our divisions rather than what unites us as one people.

Even celebrating “the first Asian astronaut” or celebrating Tiger Woods not because he is a great golfer, but because he is a great “African(Asian)-American golfer” is to focus on the superficial- skin color. If Asian children need someone who “looks like them” to be “breaking glass ceilings” in the film industry, in sports, in politics, etc, then we are still stuck on race.

Heru Ammen wrote in #45:

What f’ed up Hillary was when Bill called Obama’s candidacy a “fairy tale.” Hillary is losing the AA vote to bad politics. What Bill did would have the same effect as someone calling a Jewish candidacy for mayor of NY a fairy tale, or a Asian candidate for mayor of San Francisco a fairy tale.

Are you sure you’re remembering this correctly?

How did Bill Clinton’s fairy tale comment imply race?

So saying Barak’s Foreign Policy is a “Fairy Tail” is racist. Man that has got to be the most asinine thing I hav ever heard. he was talking about Barak’s Iraqi Policy. Stop listening tothe MSM. Theydo not tell the truth half the time and only start up fights so they can cover it.

And I agree there is a diffefence in Barak and Hillary. At least Hllary has some kind of sense in what is going on in the world. Barak has lived too isolated of a life to comprehend what he says. 57 States, he said he would talk to the Mullahs in Iran, Bomb Pakistan. These are all much more than just gaffes, well all but the 57 states thingie. Do you actually think that talking to the Mullahs in Iraq will get them to stop making Nuclear Bombs. Bomb Pakistan without teling the Govenment of Pakistan is a big no-no, you know they already have Nukes and most of their country hates us to death.

Barak is a scary candidate because he is so naive and will get us into trouble faster than any of the other candidates will. He went to Rev Wright’s hate Whitey and America Church and that does not scareyou??? you think he is just a little left. Is he really a candidate that will bring people together??? Hell, he can not even bring the Democats together, much less the country. He should have wrapped thisup by nowfhe is the candidate that mostDemocratswant. HE has never crossed the aisle to help any Republican in any bill. At least Hillary is pragmatic enough not to go along with every single idea that comes from the DNC headquarters, Barak does. Every vote he has ever made is to the far Left, even farther left than the Socialist in the Senate, and much farther to the Left of Hillary. That is is he even votes for a bill. Mostly he says “present” which is a cop out.

Yes we will have to agree to disagree. There is no way that you can ever tell me that Obama is an ideal candidate. he is so flawed, but the MSM holds the water for him. I just wonder how the Super Duper Delgates will react when his Church gets indicted for illegal contributions, when they find out about what shananigans he has done in Chicago with the other crooks that run the Socialist Republic of Illinois, I should know I live there. Our whole government is run by crooks in both parties from Chicago. There is no way I would ever vote for any politician that comes out of the Chcago Machine. Rezko is nothing compared to what goes on in Chicago.That is just a little teaser, just look at all of our great govenors that are in jail. This is where Obama has come from, and I would never want the rest of the country to recieve that kind of corrupt govenment. You have to know that if he gets elected,he will have to pay off all of his handlers in Chicago off with positions, and pork. That is how Chicago works. Andhe associates himselfwith know terroiststhatblewup bombs on US soil, and Ayers in not at all repentant about it.

Enough of this we are never going to change eachothers minds. And forne thing, I do not believe thatall AA areracist,andI never said such a thing. But to get 92% ofthe AA for an AA candidateisa little much. I knw that in the General Elections they usually go for the Dem about the same percentage,but to say that all AA believe that Obama is the best qualified to be President is ludicrous.

I am just goingto sit back andwatch the Democrat Party destroyi tself because of Identity Politics. you got to hand it to Alanski, he did teach Hillary well,and Obama learned a lot from him also. And it is ironic that they are going after eachothers throats with the same tactics.

stix1972 wrote:

This will be the Democrats downfall. Identity politics sorks if you have the White Candidate thatis supposedly forthe AA, Women, Latinos or whatever other groups you can come up with. Identity Politicsis exactly what I was talking about. that is what the Democrat Party is all about. they put peopl into groups, not individuals, andI think that that is racist in itself. On the other side, conservatives judge and look at people as individuals.

Mata Harley had pointed out that on Obama’s website, he has a category labeled “people”, and what he’s done is divide his supporters up into special interest groups, including doing so along ethnic lines.

I get mixed messages by those who want to look past skin color and see only the content of character, but who think the path to doing so is by anchoring oneself to racial identity, and the promotion of racial interests.

Looking under the category, “African-Americans”:

It is an exciting time for African Americans, who will play a pivotal role in this election. We want to ensure that you have what you need to share your ideas and turn your enthusiasm for Barack into action that can help lift up your families and communities.

There is no better advocate for African Americans than Barack Obama. Barack knows your story, because it is his story.

That’s racial identity politics.

As far as dixiecrats and democrat segregationists migrating over to the Republican Party, Gerard Alexander of the University of Virginia wrote this:

The myth that links the GOP with racism leads us to expect that the GOP should have advanced first and most strongly where the politics of white solidarity were most intense. The GOP should have entrenched itself first among Deep South whites and only later in the periphery. The GOP should have appealed at least as much, if not more, therefore, to the less educated, working-class whites who were not ints natural voters elsewhere in the country but who were George Wallace’s base. The GOP should have received more support from native white Southerners raised on the region’s traditional racism than from white immigrants to the region from the Midwest and elsewhere. And as the Southern electorate aged over the ensuing decades, older voters should have identified as Republicans at higher rates than younger ones raised in a less racist era.

Each prediction is wrong. The evidence suggest that the GOP advanced in the SOuth because it attracted much the same upwardly mobile (and non-union) economic and religious conservatives that it did elsewhere in the country.

He goes on to point out that the realignment of Southern voters did not begin in the Deep South, but in peripheral states. Eisenhower was not well-supported in the Deep South, but did well with the peripheral states. Nixon was also preferred over Wallace in 1968 by peripheral southern states. Alexander writes:

In the 1960’s and 70’s, nearly three-quarters of GOP House victories were in the peripheral rather than the Deep South, with the GOP winning twice as often in urban as rural districts.

Republicans also benefited from the immigration of million of midwestern and northeastern voters to the south in the 50’s. They brought two things with them: more enlightened views on race-relations, and their membership in the Republican Party.

Here’s just a partial list of a history of Republican “racism”:

March 20, 1854
Opponents of Democrats’ pro-slavery policies meet in Ripon, Wisconsin to establish the Republican Party

May 30, 1854
Democrat President Franklin Pierce signs Democrats’ Kansas-Nebraska Act, expanding slavery into U.S. territories; opponents unite to form the Republican Party

June 16, 1854
Newspaper editor Horace Greeley calls on opponents of slavery to unite in the Republican Party

July 6, 1854
First state Republican Party officially organized in Jackson, Michigan, to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies

February 11, 1856
Republican Montgomery Blair argues before U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his client, the slave Dred Scott; later served in President Lincoln’s Cabinet

February 22, 1856
First national meeting of the Republican Party, in Pittsburgh, to coordinate opposition to Democrats’ pro-slavery policies

March 27, 1856
First meeting of Republican National Committee in Washington, DC to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies

May 22, 1856
For denouncing Democrats’ pro-slavery policy, Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) is beaten nearly to death on floor of Senate by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks (D-SC), takes three years to recover

March 6, 1857
Republican Supreme Court Justice John McLean issues strenuous dissent from decision by 7 Democrats in infamous Dred Scott case that African-Americans had no rights “which any white man was bound to respect”

June 26, 1857
Abraham Lincoln declares Republican position that slavery is “cruelly wrong,” while Democrats “cultivate and excite hatred” for blacks

October 13, 1858
During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee

October 25, 1858
U.S. Senator William Seward (R-NY) describes Democratic Party as “inextricably committed to the designs of the slaveholders”; as President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of State, helped draft Emancipation Proclamation

June 4, 1860
Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) delivers his classic address, The Barbarism of Slavery

April 7, 1862
President Lincoln concludes treaty with Britain for suppression of slave trade

April 16, 1862
President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no

July 2, 1862
U.S. Rep. Justin Morrill (R-VT) wins passage of Land Grant Act, establishing colleges open to African-Americans, including such students as George Washington Carver

July 17, 1862
Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes Confiscation Act stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”

August 19, 1862
Republican newspaper editor Horace Greeley writes Prayer of Twenty Millions, calling on President Lincoln to declare emancipation

August 25, 1862
President Abraham Lincoln authorizes enlistment of African-American soldiers in U.S. Army

September 22, 1862
Republican President Abraham Lincoln issues Emancipation Proclamation

January 1, 1863
Emancipation Proclamation, implementing the Republicans’ Confiscation Act of 1862, takes effect

February 9, 1864
Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton deliver over 100,000 signatures to U.S. Senate supporting Republicans’ plans for constitutional amendment to ban slavery

June 15, 1864
Republican Congress votes equal pay for African-American troops serving in U.S. Army during Civil War

June 28, 1864
Republican majority in Congress repeals Fugitive Slave Acts

October 29, 1864
African-American abolitionist Sojourner Truth says of President Lincoln: “I never was treated by anyone with more kindness and cordiality than were shown to me by that great and good man”

January 31, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition

March 3, 1865
Republican Congress establishes Freedmen’s Bureau to provide health care, education, and technical assistance to emancipated slaves

April 8, 1865
13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition

June 19, 1865
On “Juneteenth,” U.S. troops land in Galveston, TX to enforce ban on slavery that had been declared more than two years before by the Emancipation Proclamation

November 22, 1865
Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination

December 6, 1865
Republican Party’s 13th Amendment, banning slavery, is ratified

February 5, 1866
U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves

April 9, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law

April 19, 1866
Thousands assemble in Washington, DC to celebrate Republican Party’s abolition of slavery

May 10, 1866
U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no

June 8, 1866
U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no

July 16, 1866
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of Freedman’s Bureau Act, which protected former slaves from “black codes” denying their rights

July 28, 1866
Republican Congress authorizes formation of the Buffalo Soldiers, two regiments of African-American cavalrymen

July 30, 1866
Democrat-controlled City of New Orleans orders police to storm racially-integrated Republican meeting; raid kills 40 and wounds more than 150

January 8, 1867
Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.

July 19, 1867
Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans

March 30, 1868
Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”

May 20, 1868
Republican National Convention marks debut of African-American politicians on national stage; two – Pinckney Pinchback and James Harris – attend as delegates, and several serve as presidential electors

September 3, 1868
25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress

September 12, 1868
Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress

September 28, 1868
Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana murder nearly 300 African-Americans who tried to prevent an assault against a Republican newspaper editor

October 7, 1868
Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”

October 22, 1868
While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan

November 3, 1868
Republican Ulysses Grant defeats Democrat Horatio Seymour in presidential election; Seymour had denounced Emancipation Proclamation

December 10, 1869
Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office

February 3, 1870
After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race

May 19, 1870
African-American John Langston, law professor and future Republican Congressman from Virginia, delivers influential speech supporting President Ulysses Grant’s civil rights policies

May 31, 1870
President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights

June 22, 1870
Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South

September 6, 1870
Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell

February 28, 1871
Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters

March 22, 1871
Spartansburg Republican newspaper denounces Ku Klux Klan campaign to eradicate the Republican Party in South Carolina

April 20, 1871
Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans

October 10, 1871
Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands

October 18, 1871
After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan

November 18, 1872
Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”

January 17, 1874
Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government

September 14, 1874
Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed

March 1, 1875
Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition

September 20, 1876
Former state Attorney General Robert Ingersoll (R-IL) tells veterans: “Every man that loved slavery better than liberty was a Democrat… I am a Republican because it is the only free party that ever existed”

January 10, 1878
U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919

July 14, 1884
Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery

August 30, 1890
Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South

June 7, 1892
In a FIRST for a major U.S. political party, two women – Theresa Jenkins and Cora Carleton – attend Republican National Convention in an official capacity, as alternate delegates

February 8, 1894
Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote

December 11, 1895
African-American Republican and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Miller (R-SC) denounces new state constitution written to disenfranchise African-Americans

May 18, 1896
Republican Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting from Supreme Court’s notorious Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, declares: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens”

December 31, 1898
Republican Theodore Roosevelt becomes Governor of New York; in 1900, he outlawed racial segregation in New York public schools

May 24, 1900
Republicans vote no in referendum for constitutional convention in Virginia, designed to create a new state constitution disenfranchising African-Americans

January 15, 1901
Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans

October 16, 1901
President Theodore Roosevelt invites Booker T. Washington to dine at White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

May 29, 1902
Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%

February 12, 1909
On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP

June 18, 1912
African-American Robert Church, founder of Lincoln Leagues to register black voters in Tennessee, attends 1912 Republican National Convention as delegate; eventually serves as delegate at 8 conventions

August 1, 1916
Republican presidential candidate Charles Evans Hughes, former New York Governor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice, endorses women’s suffrage constitutional amendment; he would become Secretary of State and Chief Justice

May 21, 1919
Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no

April 18, 1920
Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus

August 18, 1920
Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures

January 26, 1922
House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster

June 2, 1924
Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans

October 3, 1924
Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention

December 8, 1924
Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis argues in favor of “separate but equal”

June 12, 1929
First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

August 17, 1937
Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation

June 24, 1940
Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it

October 20, 1942
60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries

April 3, 1944
U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system

February 18, 1946
Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools

July 11, 1952
Republican Party platform condemns “duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters

September 30, 1953
Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education

December 8, 1953
Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education

May 17, 1954
Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education

November 25, 1955
Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel

March 12, 1956
Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation

June 5, 1956
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law

October 19, 1956
On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America”

November 6, 1956
African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President

September 9, 1957
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

September 24, 1957
Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

June 23, 1958
President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights

February 4, 1959
President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats

May 6, 1960
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats

July 27, 1960
At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform

May 2, 1963
Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights

June 1, 1963
Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama

September 29, 1963
Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School

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
Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality

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. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirkson, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.

June 20, 1964
The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act

March 7, 1965
Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL

March 21, 1965
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace

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

August 6, 1965
Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

July 8, 1970
In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits

September 17, 1971
Former Ku Klux Klan member and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D-AL) retires from U.S. Supreme Court; appointed by FDR in 1937, he had defended Klansmen for racial murders

February 19, 1976
President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

September 15, 1981
President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs

June 29, 1982
President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act

August 10, 1988
President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR

November 21, 1991
President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation

August 20, 1996
Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law

April 26, 1999
Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President

January 25, 2001
U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee declares school choice to be “Educational Emancipation”

March 19, 2003
Republican U.S. Representatives of Hispanic and Portuguese descent form Congressional Hispanic Conference

May 23, 2003
U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture

February 26, 2004
Hispanic Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX) condemns racist comments by U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL); she had called Asst. Secretary of State Roger Noriega and several Hispanic Congressmen “a bunch of white men…you all look alike to me”

National Voting Rights Act of 1965 signed for a 25 year extension by President George W. Bush on July 27, 2006.

I believe Wayne Perryman has a new book out (“Unfounded Loyalty” is out of print).