Leftists Can’t Break 200-Year Racism Habit

Pages: 1 2

Democrats spent the first century of this country’s existence refusing to treat black people like human beings, and the second refusing to treat them like adults.

After fighting the Civil War to continue enslaving black people and then subjecting newly freed black Americans to vicious, humiliating Jim Crow laws and Ku Klux Klan violence, Democrats set about frantically rewriting their own ugly history.

Step 1: Switch “Democrat” to “Southerner”;

Step 2: Switch “Southerner” to “conservative Democrat”;

Step 3: Switch “conservative Democrat” to “conservative.”

Contrary to liberal folklore, the Democratic segregationists were not all Southern — and they were certainly not conservative. They were dyed-in-the-wool liberal Democrats on all the litmus-test issues of their day.

All but one remained liberal Democrats until the day they died. That’s the only one you’ve ever heard of: Strom Thurmond.

As soon as abortion is relegated to the same trash heap of history as slavery has been, liberals will be rewriting history to make Democrats the pro-lifers and Republicans the pro-choicers. That’s precisely what they’ve done with the history of race in America.

In addition to lying in the history books, liberals lied on their personal resumes. Suddenly, every liberal remembered being beaten up by a 300-pound Southern sheriff during the civil rights movement.

Among the ones who have been caught falsely gassing about their civil rights heroism are Bob Beckel, Carl Bernstein and Joseph Ellis. (Some days, it seems as if there are more liberals pretending to have been Freedom Riders than pretending to be Cherokees!)

In the 1950s and ’60s, Democrats were running segregationists for vice president, slapping Orval Faubus on the back and praising George Wallace voters for their “integrity.” (That was Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in The New York Times.)

But the moment the real civil rights struggle was over, liberals decided to become black America’s most self-important defenders.

Of course, once we got the Democrats to stop discriminating against blacks, there was no one else doing it. So liberals developed a rich fantasy life in which they played Atticus Finch and some poor white cop from Brooklyn would be designated Lester Maddox (racist Democrat, endorsed by Jimmy Carter).

White journalists who didn’t know any actual black people (other than Grady the maid) became junior G-men searching for racists under every bed, requiring a steady stream of deeply pompous editorials.

You will never see anything so brave as a liberal fighting nonexistent enemies.

Pages: 1 2

  • Banastre Tarleton

    But it was the Democrats that pushed through the Civil Rights act knowing full well that they would lose the Southern vote for a generation …infact it was their finest hour as even Newt Gingrich admitted
    Most racist folks have either grown out of it or moved to the far Right of the Republican Party …it's a generational thing ; racism , for the most part ,is a thing of the past in America ; a dirty secret best forgiven and then forgotten

    • Omar

      Once again the so-called "party switching" realignment myth has rose. The truth is that classical liberals from both parties (before the New Left took over the Democratic Party in the late '60s and early '70s) overwhelmingly supported and passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. At that point, the southern racists knew that they have lost. The reality is that classical liberalism (modern conservatism) has lived on in today's GOP, while New Left politics destroyed the classical liberalism of the Democrats. In the almost 200 years of its existence (from 1828 to the present), the Democrats have gone from being the party of slavery and bigotry (1828-1930s), to embracing classical liberalism (1930s-late 1960s), to embracing radical left-wing politics like identity politics (1970-present). If there is any party that has transformed the most from different perspectives throughout history, it is the Democrats. The Republicans have been consistent with their base throughout the party's history. That's the reality.

      • Maxie

        Socialism and eventually Marxism found a home in the Dem party during the FDR era. FDR's Adm. was infiltrated with Soviet sympathizers (Alger Hiss, Elizabeth Bently, Lachlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, Lawrence Duggan, among others) – who steered policies and spied for the USSR. That treachery has been a part of the MarxiCrat party ever since. See the Venona transcripts.

      • Maxie

        S0cial!sm and eventually Marx!$m found a home in the Dem party during the FDR era. FDR's Adm. was infiltrated with S0oviet sympathizers (Alger Hi$$, Elizabeth Bently, Lachlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, Lawrence Duggan, among others) – who steered policies and sp!ed for the U$$R. That tre@chery has been a part of the MarxiCrat party ever since. See the Venona transcripts

    • Chris Nichols

      Not one Democrat who voted against the Civil Rights Act and Voting rights act, which was the majority of them, switched parties, not one.

      • trickyblain

        Strom Thurmond — who switched in 1964 in opposition to the civil rights act — doesn't count, I guess.

        • Loyal Achates

          Shhh, you're not supposed to know about that.

          Really, Ann, you're going to use party affiliation from even 200 years ago to indict leaders of the same party TODAY? Why do you think the South shifted so dramatically from the Dem column to the GOP, hm?

          • Rose Petal

            Q. Why do you think the South shifted so dramatically from the Dem column to the GOP?

            A. The switched occurred in 1980. The reason they swtiched is because after voting for Carter in 1976, Carter started enforcing the Warren Court decision to ban prayer in school.

            Johnson failed to properly enforce the Civil Rights Act. It took a Republican President, Nixon, to do that. So the Republicans did not pander to the racists.

            It's time to stop bashing the South as you your rhetorical question is based on the premise White Southerners now vote for the GOP because they are racists. May I remind you that White Southerner have now voted in the first two govenors of Indian origin, Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley. There are voting in black Congressmen such as Tim Scott in mostly white districts.

            I am sad that with the way Democrats demonize Republicans, the reponse Democrats give is to Demonize non-white Republicans like Tim Scott and call him an Uncle Tom, a sell-out, or some other pejorative.

          • Omar

            You are right, Rose Petal. For many years, the contemporary Democrats have falsely accused the GOP of racism in general. The contemporary Democrats came from New Left activists, who in the 1960s, have protested against the United States and its democratic system. As we all, know, the New Left despised the classical liberalism (modern conservatism) of both the Democrats and the Republicans during the Civil Rights/Cold War years of the 1950s and the 1960s. During those years, the main party base for both parties were almost identical to each other. The domestic policy of both parties was to support civil rights reform (as demonstrated by the overwhelming bipartisan support for the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965), while the foreign policy of both parties was to combat and stop the spread of communist totalitarianism. When the New Left activists took over the Democratic Party in the late '60s and early '70s, they destroyed the classical liberalism of the Democrats, leaving the Republicans as the main party of classical liberalism. Since then, the main agenda of the contemporary Democrats (and the left in general) is to promote a radical agenda, which includes promoting identity politics and other divisive issues. As we all know, the left derides anyone who opposes the left's divisive agenda as "racists" and "bigots", despite lack of evidence. The insults get worse when they are directed against conservative minorities. The left derides such people as "Uncle Toms", sell-outs", "Oreos", "house slaves", "coconuts", self-hating", "inauthentics" and "suffering from Stockholm Syndrome". The left's racist smear campaign against Herman Cain last year is one of many examples of the left's racism and bigotry directed at conservative minorities. Unfortunately, the left is very good at influencing public opinion, since the left controls academia, and the contemporary Democrats have dominance over minority voters, particularly blacks. It is time for all people, regardless of characteristics, to reject the left's radical agenda and fully embrace the classical liberalism and opportunities that America offers to the world.

  • sdsali

    @Banastre. No, it was Republicans who voted for it. A greater percentage of REpublicans in Congressvoted for the Civil Rights Act than did Democrats. The 1965 Civil Rights Act had been languishing in Congress until John F. Kennedy was assasinated by an avowed Communist, Lee Harvey Oswald. Lyndon Johnson changed his position on the act and with the hep of the Republicans it was passed. The 1865 Civil Rights Act was enacted entirely be Republicans. It is still used by private parties to enforce Civil Rights and isknow as e. g. 42 U. S. C. §1981–1987

    • tarleton

      Well if it were strictly true that it was Republicans who were really in favour of civil rights then why didn't they enact the Civil Rights Act between 1952-60 when they had the Presidency ?….. it smells a bit fishy to me

      • kasandra

        Check your high school civics book. Legislation is passed in Congress and only then is signed into law by the President. Who controlled Congress between 1952 and 1960? BTW, it was President Eisenhower who sent federalized troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect black children trying to attend, I believe, Central High School. BTW, it was Arkansas that gave us William J. Fullbright who was a segregationist and ran the most racist campaigns known. He was later known for the Fullbright Scholarships and being President Clinton’s mentor.

        • 1776ClassicalLiberal

          That's dangerous to ask a Lib to study history. They may actually get the facts straight and learn the truth by doing so.

        • scum

          That's because Eisenhower: a) legally had to act; and b) he felt the challenge to the nation-state from states' rights segregationists.

  • sdsali

    Correction it was the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Roughly 60% of Democrats and 80% of Republicans voted for the ACT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_

    • scum

      Right around the time that Strom Thurmond, in Sept 64, initiated the conservative exodus from the Democratic to Republican Party. You people are hilarious.

      • Omar

        Scum, Thurmond (who switched from Democrat to GOP) and John Lindsay (who switched from GOP to Democrat) were one of the few people who exchanged parties between the two major parties during and after the '60s. Most of the contemporary Democrats came from the New Left, not the GOP. Likewise, Robert Byrd was a Democrat for his entire life.

  • sdsali

    Further Correction. Civil Rights ACt of 1875 was passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Ulysses S. Grant, also a Republican. The federal government stopped enforcing it after the election of 1876 in which Democrat Samuel Tilden received more popular votes than Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, who received more electoral votes. To keep the peace and prevent a new civil war the Republicans agreed to a compromise which involved not enforcing the Act and withdrawing Federal troops from the south. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_… The southerners, all Democrats then created the Ku Klux Klan and passed Jim Crow laws. They were all Democrats.

    • tarleton

      True enough , but that was well over 100 years ago and political parties have evolved and changed over the years

      • davarino

        Uh huh, the democrats changed from abusing blacks, to using them.

      • Paul B.

        Read those links. The facts are clear that the GOP historically supported civil rights more than the Dems. But they did it in a responsible way, so the Dems co-opted the movement with the help of their PR arm, the mainstream media. But as Coulter says, the Dems have never been about treating blacks as responsible adults. Enter the decidedly unreverend Jackson and Sharpton and the rest of the race pimps that keep blacks in bondage through an embittered sense of entitlement. They are the blacks' worst enemies. For proof, look at the Democrat party's sellout to the teachers unions in their opposition to the one single thing that would raise blacks out of the ghetto: school choice.

    • scum

      Of course. This is standard history. At the time, RADICAL REPUBLICANS strongly supported civil rights for blacks. This was opposed by the 'states-rights' Solid South. Our fearless Governor of Texas is strongly in the latter camp. After all, he supports gutting the Constitution and leading Texas out of the Union. You people are hilarious.

      • Omar

        Scum, both parties supported Civil Rights reform during the mid-20th century. The Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965 were overwhelmingly supported by both Democrats and Republicans (before the New Left took over the Democratic Party in the late '60s and early '70s). During the mid-20th century, both parties believed in classical liberalism (modern conservatism) and their party platforms at the national level were almost identical to each other. Yes, the civil rights laws vote was divided between the South and the rest of the country, but the party platform for both parties at the national level were in support of civil rights legislation. When the key civil rights legislation passed through in the mid-1960s, the southern racists knew that they have lost. Furthermore, in subsequent decades, even the South has changed in many ways, politically (there are many minorities in prominent positions of government at the national, state and local levels in the contemporary South). I mentioned in my earlier post that the Democratic Party had a transformation in its almost 200 years of its history (1828-present). In those almost 200 years, the Democrats have gone from being the party of slavery and bigotry (1828-1930s), to embracing classical liberalism (1930s-late 1960s), to embracing radical left-wing politics (1970-present). As for "Radical Republicans", while it is true that some post-Civil War Republican legislators called themselves "Radical", they are not the same "radicals" as far-left communist radicals like Bill Ayers and Huey Newton. The "Radical Republicans" would not have sided with the New Left radicals who tried to transform the United States into a communist country. As for "Our fearless Governor of Texas" (I'm assuming you are talking about George W. Bush), he had the most diverse cabinet in the history of the U.S. presidency. Also, when did Bush ever "gutted" the Constitution? And, no, Bush never advocated for Texas to secede from the Union. In fact, he advocated for unity among the American people. That's the reality.

  • davarino

    B-rock been good to me, he gave me a free fone. Keep Obama in president, cause Romney sucks.

    • amused

      you competing with the other FPM clown Mr.Bean , davarino ? haven't seen him around lately ….are you sure he wasn't your alter-ego ?

  • PAthena

    See J. Christian Adams' book INJUSTICE about the Department of Justice under Eric Holder. responsible to President Barack Obama. On coming to office, Holder dropped the case against the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia who had intimidated voters at the polls. Holder pursues black racist policies.

  • Schlomotion

    One need only scan Ms. Coulter's bibliography and this article to know how she cranks out books so fast.

    She has a format that she reuses for every book. And she she shovels the same crap into all of them. You have probably thought to yourself as you were ranting in your living room "Damn. This is good stuff. I should have been talking into Dragon Dictation. I could publish this next week."

    That's what she does.

    • Omar

      Schlomotion, do us all a favor and keep your ignorance to yourself.

    • Pontotoc Bill

      I do not care of Ann Coulter cranks out books fast or not.

      She is correct and you are nothing but a guttersnipe.

      Try again, mental midget.

    • Mo Schlotion

      I'm still waiting for a response about how much a load of crap costs and whether you deliver.

    • Don Moel

      Well, if it's so easy, where are YOUR best sellers?

  • JakeTobias

    This administration pursues racist policies alright. But I can't get too worked up about the Philadelphia case. It seems to me, if any whites were going to vote there, it would be to vote for Obama, so the Panthers hurt their own cause. And yes, if Republicans tried a stunt like that, we would never hear the end of it. But what Republican would? I'm more interested in Fast & Furious.

    I am reading Ann's new book this week. If you want to get worked up, try the first chapter. Your head will fall on the floor. What's more, the book reminds us again blacks were able to finally intimidate the KKK, by taking advantage of their second amendment rights. Try that on your liberal friends.

  • trickyblain

    Ann leaves out the fact that not a single southern Republican voted for the CRA of 1964. So, yeah, "southerner" is a perfectly apt predictor of whether one historically tended towards racism.

    The CRA of '64 voting record supports this.

    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%)
    -Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
    -Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
    -Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

    • Omar

      Where did you get your facts from trickyblain? While the Civil Rights Act vote divide was between the South and the rest of the country, the party base for both parties overwhelmingly supported civil rights reform. That's the reality.

      • trickyblain

        It's reality because you say it is?

        Congressional voting records are actually public knowledge and available from a wide variety of sources. The party bases in the north widely supported the '64 CRA, while both bases in the the south widely rejected it. That's what the record very clearly shows.

        • Omar

          I am talking about the party bases on the national level. Of course the CRA vote divide was between the south and the rest of the country, but the party base at the national level for both parties were almost identical to each other. The fact is that the CRA enjoyed bipartisan support at the national level. That's the reality.

          • trickyblain

            This is true.

            The point, however, is that Ann is off-base in suggesting that Democrats were the sole racists in the vote. Not a single southern Republican voted for it, either.

          • Maxie

            Do you know if Sen Byrd had his KKK hood on when voted?

  • BLJ

    FDR and LBJ both created a huge voting bloc by getting blacks dependent on the federal government. The Great Society was the apex of their agenda. The only thing it has really created is the Bigotry of Low Expectations.

  • joe get

    There’s some classic democratic party campaign material from the 19th century, saying “the democratic party is for the white man, the republican party is for the negro”.

  • angst

    It's shocking to talk to high school and college students .They have no idea of the actual history of the US or the political party evolutions .
    They have no knowledge of the Democratic party split and their 2 candidates for president – both pro slavery- against Lincoln.Let alone MLK's political beliefs and the fact that the most horrifying political crimes were born from liberal ideology .
    Today's "democrats" are spoon fed a liberal biased education and taught they need an "evil" group to blame everything from the weather to racism,to pollution on. I guess it's easier to stereotype,accuse and demonize complete strangers than to actually listen to and discuss varying viewpoints.

    And they somehow create a moral superiority in their minds while spouting the same rhetoric Goebbels fed the German people .

    • amused

      Yea , I can see you've been eating your share of spoon fed too …in fact it's coming out your ears . Go find a toilet before your head explodes . BTW , that ain't angst you're feeling , its constipation and that shiit is backing up to your brain .

  • july

    Want to see a town that votes all democratic ,that has voter fraud every election and the police are convicted criminals ?

    EAST ST. LOUIS, Ill. (KMOV.com) – East St. Louis Mayor Alvin Parks has enacted a curfew for residents under the age of 18 after four people were killed and three others injured over a violent 36-hour span.
    the mayor said anyone under 18 years old will be arrested between 8 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. f they are not in school. Teens 17 and under will also be taken into custody if they are caught wondering the streets after 10 p.m.

    In addition, police will be allowed to stop and search more vehicles for guns, weapons, drugs and open containers. They can also search pedestrians for alcohol, demand state IDs and arrest men or boys under 18 years old for wearing royal blue or bright-red clothing.

    Imagine a white mayor making such as executive order and the screams of racism that would occur ?
    http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Mayor-issues-cityw

  • david horowitz

    This post proves once and for all that Coulter has joined the leftists. We hardly knew ye, Ann…

  • scum

    What Coulter pretends not to recognize is, 1) that blacks shifted from the Republican Party to the Democrats beginning in the 1930s; 2) Southern whites shifted in both 64 and 68 from Democrat to Republican (that's why the political map has changed so dramatically, NOT because everyone switched houses); 3) Most of her information has been more carefully laid out by 'liberal' historians, including Howard Zinn. LOL

    • Omar

      Scum, quit repeating the "party switching" realignment myth. The civil rights reform was supported by both parties during the mid-20th century. As for Howard Zinn, he was a Marxist propagandist. Of course he falsely accused classical liberals (modern conservatives) from both parties as "racists" and "bigots" because Zinn represents the communist agenda of discrediting America's freedoms and opportunities. Also, most contemporary Democrats came from New Left radicals in the '60s. It was (and is) the agenda of the New Left to get minorities to support their agenda. When the New Left took over the Democratic Party, it became much easier for the leftists to promite their radical agenda.
      What you do not recognize is that some politicians like Robert Byrd never switched parties at all. The fact is that the world has changed a lot since the mid-20th century. That's the reality.

  • scum

    "The central question that emerges is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where it does not predominate numerically. The sobering answer is Yes – the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced way." – WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY (1957). You people are hilarious. LOL

    • Omar

      Scum, read this for a change. From National Review: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/301053/yes-p
      I don't agree with everything on that article, but it challenges the "party switching" realignment myth that is so popular among leftists.
      Also, the quote you posted was from 1957, at a time when the civil rights struggle was taking place in the South. The world has changed a lot since then and so has the opinions of many people.

  • scum

    This article will help clarify some of the issues that the muddle-headed Ann Coulter intentionally obliterates: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-d

  • amused

    Coulter's just probably hawking her next book for you suckers to throw your money away on . And Yea Ann I'm sure ALL racists are Democrats …riiiiiight .
    Your article is juvenile Coulter , but then again so is your readership . Anyone with an intellect can easily read between your lines Coulter ….YOU are the racist !

  • fanlad

    The point still remains that the progressives from both parties, and liberal democrats have created a modern day culture of slavery in the United States, by growing large government entitlement schemes that has assigned generation upon generation of minorities to a dead end road with no way out. All of this for the purpose of declaring that the government is one who gives us our rights, not God. Remember this is a war between the have's and have not's, if you believe the liberal and progressive's propaganda. So it must follow, that the one who gives us our rights is the one who must also redistribute the wealth, and continue with class warfare against the have's. Welcome to Obama's world.

  • http://quark1912.wordpress.com/ quark1912

    Back in the 1920's & 30"s eugenics was extolled by all the progressives as necessary and just. The Catholic Church stood virtually alone in opposing eugenics and was denounced by these same progressives as being reactionary and behind the times. How times have changed when a Toronto Star columnist blamed the Catholic Church for supporting eugenics in the past. Perhaps in seventy or eighty years the Catholic Church will be blamed for the rise of abortion in the later part of the 20th and early 21st Century

  • amused

    LOL…thats funny and really ironic , catholics claim that they should not be using contraceptives and stress the
    rythum method ,which rarely works if at all , simply because no catholics do it . But catholics do get abortions , so in a sense you're right , but it's not gonna take 70 or 80 years . Get your head out of the past quark , for in the past , Popes went to war , took wives , committed incest and murdered their rival , one Popeeven exhumaned the body of his predecessor for the sake of putting him on trial to depose him . In Ireland were abortion is illegal [fair enough ] they' ve been wharehousing the bastard children beating raping and abusing them up to this very day .