All-American Basketball Alliance - for white Americans only

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Sure, but all of history, not half of it.

Slavery, racism, sexism, etc were part of the social fiber of the country. I'm not real keen on holding people who were born 80, 90, 100 years ago to our current social standards. It's dishonest and unfair.

After civil rights passed, the Southern Democratics left the party and joined the Republicans and that's where they have been ever ever since. That doesn't mean that after that, the Democrats were somehow these perfect people who didn't behave in the same way that the republicans did.

However the truth is, the Southern anti-civil rights member of the democratic party left it to join the Republicans; that is as true as the Democrats being the racist party you say it was. Both statements are true, the question is which is more important? What happened before 1964 or what happened after it, when the Dixiecrats left the democratic party?

Look at the states you list...what you rail against isn't Democrats, but Southerners.

Here's a list by region of who voted for and against the civil rights act in 1964

By party and region

Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)

Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)

Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)

Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)

Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)

Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)

They were both as bad as each other, but the Northerners of both parties carried the day and at the end, many of the Southerns left the party and joined the republicans. Also note the percentage of votes.

Let's not ignore the full scope of history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

Actually I can think of only a few Democrats that left the party to become Republicans and THEY renounced and apologized for their segregationist views before doing so, Strom Thurmond and John Connoly are the only ones that come to mind off-hand. Many SEATS formerly held by Dixiecrats were LOSt in elections to Republicans who were NOT racist, but then, that is not the same as them "leaving the party" In fact the south waws referred to as "the solid south" until Carter's re-election attempt in 1980.

Democrats have been, and still are, the party that supports government dependence over indiviual achievement and it is democrats that tell us that miniorities "can't" do something and "need our help", whcih means "need our control on where to live" Our city ghettos are more segregated than where I grew up in Texas where we were always living with black people and Spanish speaking people and thought nothing of it. I never saw or lived in a city and region more segregated than Chicago and was frankly amazed. It is nothing like a southern city. The suburbs are lilly white and the ghettos are as black as my shoe. The Dan Ryan expressway may as well be filled with water and crocodiles for the segregational purpose it serves. And is there a more Democrat city than Chicago?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I am not speaking for him, it's obvious that he doesn't see himself as superior , I don't feel inferior to him or his opinions. Why do you feel inferior to him Marc?

Were equal! Funny how you like to categorize ppl this way. That leads us right back to the topic of racism (superior and inferior)

Perhaps even sheds some light on how you shelve ppl.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Sure, but all of history, not half of it.

Slavery, racism, sexism, etc were part of the social fiber of the country. I'm not real keen on holding people who were born 80, 90, 100 years ago to our current social standards. It's dishonest and unfair.

After civil rights passed, the Southern Democratics left the party and joined the Republicans and that's where they have been ever ever since. That doesn't mean that after that, the Democrats were somehow these perfect people who didn't behave in the same way that the republicans did.

However the truth is, the Southern anti-civil rights member of the democratic party left it to join the Republicans; that is as true as the Democrats being the racist party you say it was. Both statements are true, the question is which is more important? What happened before 1964 or what happened after it, when the Dixiecrats left the democratic party?

Look at the states you list...what you rail against isn't Democrats, but Southerners.

Here's a list by region of who voted for and against the civil rights act in 1964

By party and region

Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)

Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)

Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)

Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)

Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)

Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)

They were both as bad as each other, but the Northerners of both parties carried the day and at the end, many of the Southerns left the party and joined the republicans. Also note the percentage of votes.

Let's not ignore the full scope of history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

I also appreciate your ability to think beyond inane one-liners that do nothing but expose ignorance and misinformation.

This study, if you will, is flawed in another manner. Kentucky, Kansas, Missouri, Maryland and Delaware WERE slave states and had large numbers of slaves throughout the Civil War. The emancipation proclamation specifically did NOT apply to them and slavery was "allowed" to continue in these states until the amendment banning it was enacted after the war was over. These states did not joint the Confederacy offically though both Missouri and Kentucky had delegations in both the US and Confederate congresses and were officially "nuetral" in the war. Some Confederate flags have 13 stars and some have 11 stars depending on the maker's attitude of Kentucky and Missouri. In Texas they were considered "border trash". To consider them as "northern states" would not be correct. Most especially Kentucky which functions in the very de-centralized local government form common to the south, not the north.

At any rate, it is a misnomer to say that Democrats fled the party and joined the Republicans, it just didn't happen all that much. It was done more by election than anything else.

I thought of one other that did it...Phil Gramm of Texas, but that was long after the civil rights act had anything to do with politics and had nothing to do with racism or civil rights. There may have been a few others during the Reagan era, but it would be a strecth to claim anything regarding civil rights associated to those, that was simple fiscal conservatism and nothing else.

[Peikko 1,575]

Were equal! Funny how you like to categorize ppl this way. That leads us right back to the topic of racism (superior and inferior)

Perhaps even sheds some light on how you shelve ppl.

I am not categorizing anyone, you are. I don't feel superiour or infererior to anyone, you do, if you did not you would not have agreed with Danno's dodgy post. I am asking you why you feel inferior and you feel threatened even by that. You have a lot of issues Marc.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I am not categorizing anyone, you are. I don't feel superiour or infererior to anyone, you do, if you did not you would not have agreed with Danno's dodgy post. I am asking you why you feel inferior and you feel threatened even by that. You have a lot of issues Marc.

True! But a lot less than you.