Republicans are more "racist" but... (Condi Rice, Colin Powell, vote)

[Sonrise]

Originally Posted by miamiman

Absurd drivel.

Why were many Democrats at the forefront of the Civil Rights Movements if you claim they were socially intolerant?

The last thing socially intolerant people do is fight for change, which is what Democrats have long done.

Wanna go back and check your history books? It was the republicans who were at the forefront of the civil rights movement.

[World Citizen]

In general, Republicans are not racist. They are conservative. There's a big difference. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.

[delusianne]

Originally Posted by Sonrise

Wanna go back and check your history books? It was the republicans who were at the forefront of the civil rights movement.

Ever wonder why this information doesnt ever get traction out in the real world? Because it's Republican propaganda aimed at conning the, um, less-educated vote.

Im not going to waste time on this, except to point the curious to this link:

Civil Rights, Brought To You By... Republicans? | AlterNet

[World Citizen]

You can point them to any link on the internet. Ever heard of Urban Legends?

The more educated take African American History in College... I did.

Here's another link

Republicans and Civil Rights

[delusianne]

Originally Posted by World Citizen

In general, Republicans are not racist. They are conservative. There's a big difference. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.

Economic conservatism maintains racism as the status quo.

Lincoln would be sickened by the neocon remnants that are the Republican party today.

[World Citizen]

yada...yada...yada

[delusianne]

you tell 'em

[World Citizen]

" As a matter of fact, the record shows that since 1933 Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes..."

[See CongressLink - A Resource for Teachers Providing Information About the U.S. Congress and 82.03.04: An Analysis of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Legislated Response to Racial Discrimination in the U. S..]

For the complete article go to this link Republicans and Civil Rights

[k350]

Considering everyones civil rights hereo lincoln was a republican which the party had strong roots in the anti-slavery movement, and the KKK arose from the democratic ranks, I would venture to say democrats have historically shown more racism than republicans.

Forward to modern day and since most of the dems base is poor people, and though poor people consist of all races, it claims a big share of minorities. It is dem policies that keep the circle of poverty going with their ill thought out social systems. So in effect, the dems continue to inflict discrimination even though I think it is more class based now days than outright racism.

But the whole thing is pointless, to give such broad definition to the parties is ridiculous.

The parties do not even have a solid base anymore, now days many are in the party not because of what the party stands for but because the parties have such a huge grip on American politics, there is no way to get into politics without the party's help. Plus Americans are all but brainwashed to beleive that they must only vote for one of the two parties, nevermind another one or an independent.

[delusianne]

Originally Posted by World Citizen

" As a matter of fact, the record shows that since 1933 Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes..."

Are you on about the Dixiecrats? They're Republican now in case you didnt know. Their sons and grandsons.

"Republicans and Civil Rights," published by that famously nonpartisan house of truth, Newsmax?

The Newsmax article's points are addressed in the link I provided. From that link, "Barry Goldwater, the 1964 Republican presidential nominee, won five Deep South states because of his opposition to the Civil Rights Act.... Republican George H.W. Bush opposed the Civil Rights Act in his 1964 run for the U.S. Senate. (Bush lost to Democrat Ralph Yarborough, who was the only Southern senator to vote for the Civil Rights Act.)....Ronald Reagan, in his 1966 campaign to become governor of California, endorsed repeal of California’s Fair Housing Act, saying, 'If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house, it is his right to do so.'"

OTOH the other link looks sincere and interesting and Im off to read that now.