U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-20-2012, 09:43 AM
 
42,727 posts, read 27,454,340 times
Reputation: 14312

Advertisements

To the OP,

Your very first cite is incorrect. Pacheco was not California's governor in 1863. He was serving in the Union army. And in 1863 Pacheco was not a Republican.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-20-2012, 09:45 AM
 
12,230 posts, read 12,291,932 times
Reputation: 10263
I'm still waiting for the "complete the record" timeline from 1964 to the present which shows the great racially progressive policies and strategies the GOP championed in this era. Surely they did more than just build a few girls schools in a remote region as a PR stunt, right?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 09:46 AM
 
12,230 posts, read 12,291,932 times
Reputation: 10263
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
To the OP,

Your very first cite is incorrect. Pacheco was not California's governor in 1863. He was serving in the Union army. And in 1863 Pacheco was not a Republican.
Good work, DC. I forget one should never take RNC "facts" at face value. They must always be fact-checked.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 09:55 AM
 
3,347 posts, read 2,882,431 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Yes. The Republican Party used to be the liberal progressives and the Democratic part used to be the conservative reactionaries.

But that's pretty much ancient history at this point.
Yup, ancient history

Dems, Liberals USED to try and fix real injustices

Reps USED to be about the economy

Now both are full of self serving idiots and don't care about anybody but the Wall St clowns, celebs, corporations and other assorted scumbags
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 09:58 AM
 
Location: South Fla
9,643 posts, read 9,246,674 times
Reputation: 1942
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
To the OP,

Your very first cite is incorrect. Pacheco was not California's governor in 1863. He was serving in the Union army. And in 1863 Pacheco was not a Republican.
Are you sure he wasnt a republican because these sites state he was

Romualdo Pacheco

Political Party: Republican
Governors of California

If that doesnt work for you maybe this site will. Hopefully the library of congress will work.
United States Representative
Republican of California


Hispanic Americans in Congress -- Pacheco
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 09:59 AM
 
42,727 posts, read 27,454,340 times
Reputation: 14312
To the OP,

Your #2 assertion is incorrect. A Democrat was one of the three people involved in the writing of the 13th Amendment. For a fairly comprehensive analysis of the 13th Amendment origin and ratification process:

13th Amendment Site
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Alameda, CA
7,595 posts, read 4,468,497 times
Reputation: 1426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
More republicans voted for civil rights then did democrats by a decent percentage, and nixon fully funded LBJ's great society programs which he easily could have put the breaks on if he wanted to.
Here is the vote on the 64 Civil Rights Act.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Senate version:[13]

Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:[13]

Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)

The difference was regional. The Northern politicians supported and the Southern politicians opposed it.

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%)

The ramifications afterward was that the Democratic Party lost its hold on Southern Democrats, many of whom switched to the Republican Party, led by people like Strom Thrumond and Jesse Helms.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 10:00 AM
 
Location: South Fla
9,643 posts, read 9,246,674 times
Reputation: 1942
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
Good work, DC. I forget one should never take RNC "facts" at face value. They must always be fact-checked.
This might be embarrassing for you but I have provided links, one even from the library of congress stating he was a republican.

So guess you should take the RNC at face value and as a fact
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 10:01 AM
 
1,743 posts, read 2,028,705 times
Reputation: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by rikoshaprl View Post
Liberals try to rewrite history but the truth is out there if one takes the time to research and avoid the BS like you just provided.
Liberals MAKE history, not rewrite it. Conservatives live in the past.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 10:05 AM
 
42,727 posts, read 27,454,340 times
Reputation: 14312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadex View Post
Are you sure he wasnt a republican because these sites state he was

Romualdo Pacheco

Political Party: Republican
Governors of California

If that doesnt work for you maybe this site will. Hopefully the library of congress will work.
United States Representative
Republican of California


Hispanic Americans in Congress -- Pacheco
I didn't state he wasn't a Republican governor. I stated that in 1863 he wasn't a Republican. Because, he wasn't. He started out his political career as a Democrat. In the 1860's he was switching around with small minor parties. The Republican Party didn't come into existence until after 1850 in any part of the United States, and when Lincoln was elected, it was an Eastern US political party, and did not have much traction in California until after the Civil War, whereupon it began to grow in prominence. However, it's growth was linked to PROGRESSIVE policies, and attracted people whose politics at that time were considered LIBERAL.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top