[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
[quote]blake2616 wrote:
I’m not saying Reid isn’t a jackass. I think he’s stupid. BUT. The parties have switched names over the decades. Sure, Lincoln was called a Republican, but he wanted a strong central government AND the civil war was more about State’s rights than it was about slavery. Which means that Lincoln held the ideals of the current Democrats. So he doesn’t fall into the same party as the current Republicans. It is much easier to think of this in terms of ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal.’
Also, “southern democrats” were about as conservative as you can get. States Rights, low regulations, proponents of Christian faith in the laws(scopes, anyone?), etc.[/quote]
I think I get it?
Since the Democrats who controlled the Southern states in the 60s and prior and ran them in ways very discriminatory towards blacks were in other ways like today’s Republicans, therefore it is correct to blame the Republican party for how Southern states treated blacks.
And likewise, Democrats of the 60s being the prime opponents of the Civil Rights Act really in no way invalidates that the Democratic Party was the hero of the day for civil rights, because actually they, including Klansman Robert Byrd who remained the Democrats’ choice for Senate Majority Leader for decades and still is in office, were really like Republicans.
Makes perfect sense.
Now I understand why it is so widely believed that Democrats are historical heroes for civil rights and Republicans are at fault for what occurred under a Democrat-controlled Congress and in Democrat-controlled states. It makes perfect sense now that you’ve explained it.[/quote]
Tada!
Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican!
Please read Why Martin Luther King Was Republican :
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16500
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.
…
Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Sen. Al Gore Sr. And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King.
…
Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans.
etc, etc, etc
[/quote]
That was an interesting read Steely, I had no idea, nor would I have thought MLK was a Republican. Typically, it has been programmed within the media and stereotypes that Republicans are strictly “pro only-white.”
Let me ask some of you this, because you are some smart sum bitches… How has the definition of a Republican during the time of MLK changed so much from today? Today, it seems that the main stream media has labeled Dems as the immigrant and minority loving party, while the GOP is the opposite. Today we have labels of Republicans as being grumpy old white men with prostate and infidelity problems, with no love for those less fortunate.