Dems Claim They Led Fight for Civil Rights By Supporting Slavery


I’m starting to wonder if the Democratic Party isn’t a party of liars, but a party of people so abysmally ignorant of basic history that they don’t even know that they’re lying anymore.

For more than 200 years, our party has led the fight for civil rights, health care, Social Security, workers’ rights, and women’s rights.

That’s the claim on the Democrats site under “Our History”

I’m interested to hear about Andrew Jackson’s support for health care reform and his civil rights achievements on the Trail of Tears. And I doubt that Andrew Jackson’s Petticoat Affair (not what you think) really qualifies as feminism.

The Democrats seem to think that they were fighting for civil rights while supporting slavery. Perhaps they mean this notable support for civil rights from the Democratic Party Platform of 1868.

After the most solemn and unanimous pledge of both Houses of Congress to prosecute the war exclusively for the maintenance of the government and the preservation of the Union under the Constitution, it has repeatedly violated that most sacred pledge, under which alone was rallied that noble volunteer army which carried our flag to victory. Instead of restoring the Union, it has, so far as in its power, dissolved it, and subjected ten States, in time of profound peace, to military despotism and negro supremacy.

That was only 144 years ago.

I could go back to 1840, that’s not quite 200 years ago, but it’s close enough.

Resolved, That congress has no power, under the constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states, and that such states are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts by abolitionists or others, made to induce congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences

But at least the Democratic Party always supported the rights of immigrants. Just take a look at their Chicago party platform in 1896.

We hold that the most efficient way of protecting American labor is to prevent the importation of foreign pauper labor to compete with it in the home market, and that the value of the home market to our American farmers and artisans is greatly reduced by a vicious monetary system, which depresses the prices of their products below the cost of production, and thus deprives them of the means of purchasing the products of our home manufacturers, and, as labor creates the wealth of the country, we demand the passage of such laws as may be necessary to protect in all its rights.

200 years, folks. 200 years. And if they control the educational system for another forty, no one will be able to read any of this except the apparatchiks of the party.

  • Judahlevi

    The Democratic party supported slavery and formed the KKK as a militant arm of the party to intimidate freed blacks. The Republican party, with Abraham Lincoln as our first president, freed the slaves and tried to help them become registered voters in the South. The Democrats created Jim Crow laws to try to prevent freed slaves from voting and from registering as Republicans. Underneath all of those white robes of the KKK were Democratic party members.

    The Democratic party, from the end of the Civil War in 1865 until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, blocked any civil rights legislation because they did not want equal rights for blacks. For almost a hundred years the Democrats refused to pass civil rights legislation that would overturn Jim Crow laws. Even in 1964, Republicans voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Civil Rights Act and Democrats finally voted in favor but by lower majorities than Republicans.

    There is no question which party has the most favorable record when it comes to civil rights – it is Republicans.

  • harrylies

    The Republicans nominated Barry Goldwater, who voted against the Civil Rights Act. If you want to go back, remeber the Founding Fathers held their noses and allowed slavery.

    • thatsitivehadenough

      "Although majorities in both parties voted for the bill, there were notable exceptions. Republican senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona voted against the bill, remarking, "You can't legislate morality." Goldwater had supported previous attempts to pass Civil Rights legislation in 1957 and 1960 as well as the 24th Amendment outlawing the poll tax. He stated that the reason for his opposition to the 1964 bill was Title II, which in his opinion violated individual liberty and states rights. Civil rights supporters dismissed Goldwater's individual liberty argument by noting that he expressed no opposition to segregation laws forcing business owners to operate on a segregated basis. Most Democrats from the Southern states opposed the bill and led an unsuccessful 83-day filibuster, including Senators Albert Gore, Sr. (D-TN), J. William Fulbright (D-AR), and Robert Byrd (D-WV), who personally filibustered for 14 hours straight. http://bit.ly/P2YDwe

      • John

        And yet Goldwater had no problem with the South's laws enforcing segregation. I guess individual liberty only matters when you're on the wrong side. What you idiots are missing here is that the party isn't what matters. It's the ideology. Goldwater, Gore, Fulbright, and Bryd were Southern conservatives. Which party is made up of Southern conservatives today? Which party is made up of Northern progressives today? It is precisely because of Republicans like Goldwater that the Republican party won over the Southern conservatives and it precisely because of the years following 1964 that the Democratic party won over the Northern progressives. Your revisionist history is disgusting. You should be ashamed.

    • Omar

      And besides, despite owning slaves themselves, the Founding Fathers were against slavery and led America on a path to the gradual abolition of slavery. Benjamin Franklin helped found an abolitionist organization in Pennsylvania. George Washington freed his slaves when he died. Thomas Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration of Independence stated that people were equal regardless of race too, but he had to edit that out in order to get southern colonists to join the fight against the British. In addition, when Jefferson was president, he banned the importation of slaves from the Transatlantic slave trade. In any case, when you have a coalition of members whose ideas are different from your own, compromises and tactic are going to be necessary. Without them, everyone loses and the bad consequence prevails. As for Barry Goldwater, he desegregated the Arizona National Guard before Harry Truman desegregated the U.S. Armed Forces. Goldwater also supported civil rights legislation during the Eisenhower years. He voted against the '64 CRA law mainly for individual rights purposes.

  • kingofdisco

    what's with that tim burton lincoln the vampire slayer film? i thought burton was barry's personal white house party organizer. can we put all rights related democratic party policy in modern times down to white man's guilt? sounds like they were far worse than the colonials they so openly despise. at least the colonials committed long term to the countries they civilized. perhaps barry toady burton is experiencing contrition, and the vampires in the film are old democratic skeletons he'd like to exorcise from his foggy conscience. like the truth. next, barry will be trumpeting lincoln as a closet democrat, a man after his own heart. which needs a stake driving through it, if you ask me.