StripersOnline › SurfTalk › Community Forums › Political Graffiti › Great Moments in History. June 10 1964
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Great Moments in History. June 10 1964

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 

From Gateway:

 

Quote:

June 10, 1964, was a dramatic day in the United States Senate. For the first time in its history, cloture was invoked on a civil rights bill, ending a record-breaking filibuster by Democrats that had consumed fifty-seven working days. The hero of the hour was minority leader Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen (R-Ill.).

On June 10, 1964, Democrats filibustered the Civil Rights Act.
Grand Old Partisan reported, via DANEgerus:

On this day in 1964, Everett Dirksen (R-IL), the Republican Leader in the U.S. Senate, condemned the Democrats’ 57-day filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Leading the Democrats in their opposition to civil rights for African-Americans was Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV). Byrd, who got into politics as a recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan, spoke against the bill for fourteen straight hours. Democrats still call Robert Byrd “the conscience of the Senate.”

In his speech, Senator Dirksen called on the Democrats to end their filibuster and accept racial equality.

Michael Zak wrote about this in his book Back to Basics for the Republican Party and reminds us that Democrats, the party of Slavery, Secession, Segregation and the KKK… fought against equality.

post #2 of 25
"Democrats, the party of Slavery, Secession, Segregation and the KKK… fought against equality."


Would that Jim Crow Laws and Plessy never were; they are an indelible stain on American jurisprudence.



Some of Justice Harlan's dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896):

The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. And so it is, in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth, and in power. So, I doubt not, it will continue to be for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage, and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty.

But in view of the constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful.

The law regards man as man, and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when his civil rights as guarantied by the supreme law of the land are involved. It is therefore to be regretted that this high tribunal, the final expositor of the fundamental law of the land, has reached the conclusion that it is competent for a state to regulate the enjoyment by citizens of their civil rights solely upon the basis of race.


I am of opinion that the state of Louisiana is inconsistent with the personal liberty of citizens, white and black, in that state, and hostile to both the spirit and letter of the constitution of the United States. If laws of like character should be enacted in the several states of the Union, the effect would be in the highest degree mischievous.

Slavery, as an institution tolerated by law, would, it is true, have disappeared from our country; but there would remain a power in the states, by sinister legislation, to interfere with the full enjoyment of the blessings of freedom, to regulate civil rights, common to all citizens, upon the basis of race, and to place in a condition of legal inferiority a large body of American citizens, now constituting a part of the political community, called the 'People of the United States,' for whom, and by whom through representatives, our government is administered.

Such a system is inconsistent with the guaranty given by the constitution to each state of a republican form of government, and may be stricken down by congressional action, or by the courts in the discharge of their solemn duty to maintain the supreme law of the land, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Edited by lichum - 6/10/12 at 10:59pm
post #3 of 25
Thread Starter 

1861.jpg

post #4 of 25
Oh brother. Here we go again.

By looking at the final vote totals of the 1964 Civil Rights along party and regional lines below, we can get a pretty clear picture of the reality of the overall situation, and I think it is safe to guess which democrats maintained the filibuster.

Indeed, democrats in both regions outperformed republicans in both houses of Congress in voting for The Civil Rights Act of 1964

Seriously, do you people ever tire of having your soothing anecdotes trampled by the facts? Yes, Byrd was a tool. But that isn't the big picture story.

Next.

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#By_party_and_region
post #5 of 25
Thread Starter 

So some democrats count, but some don't.  Otayy Buh-weet.

post #6 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little View Post

So some democrats count, but some don't.  Otayy Buh-weet.

So no republicans count at all, right? Even though by region they voted against the Act at a higher rate than dems.

It merely points out that region was a far greater determining factor in how the vote went than party affiliation, Southern Man.
post #7 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little View Post

From Gateway:


On this day in 1964, Everett Dirksen (R-IL), the Republican Leader in the U.S. Senate, condemned the Democrats’ 57-day filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Leading the Democrats in their opposition to civil rights for African-Americans was Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV). Byrd, who got into politics as a recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan, spoke against the bill for fourteen straight hours. Democrats still call Robert Byrd “the conscience of the Senate.”

Here are a couple things some prominent republicans said about Robert "KKK" Byrd:

"It is a high point in my public career that I had the honor to serve with Robert C. Byrd," Howard Baker, Tennessee

"...the thing that we all need to remember about Senator Byrd is that all of us are choosing to judge him by his complete career. And history will judge him by his complete career, not one moment in time." - Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
post #8 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little View Post

504x360px-LL-838c2368_1861.jpeg


"Yes massah."
post #9 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonbat View Post

Oh brother. Here we go again.
By looking at the final vote totals of the 1964 Civil Rights along party and regional lines below, we can get a pretty clear picture of the reality of the overall situation, and I think it is safe to guess which democrats maintained the filibuster.
Indeed, democrats in both regions outperformed republicans in both houses of Congress in voting for The Civil Rights Act of 1964

 

 

Actually we are making sweeping generalizations again .... research is key not spin doctoring...  

 

There would not have been a civil rights act of 1964 had it not been for republicans It was passed only by a bi partisan effort of NORTHERN DEMOCRATS and REPUBLICANS... 

 

 

 

Quote:

House Debate and Passage

The House of Representatives debated the bill for nine days and rejected nearly one hundred amendments designed to weaken the bill before passing H.R .7152 on February 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11. A bipartisan coalition of Republicans and northern Democrats was the key to the bill's success. This same arrangement would prove crucial later to the Senate's approval of the bill.

 

 

Further more the civil right acts of 1866 , 1871, 1875, 1957 and 1960 were all authored , sponsored and passed largely by Republicans with next to no Democrat support. Republicans are rightly and honestly the party of civil rights. In fact the civil rights act of 1960 is considered to be the most contentious legislation in the history of congress with filibusters that lasted 125 hours. Without the civil rights act of 1957 and 1960 as well as the as the other civil rights acts that preceded  them there would not have been a foundation for the passage of the civil rights act of 1964 or the voting rights act of 1965.  

 

Please feel free to thank EIsenhower and the Republicans as well as the radical Republicans who ran congress after civil war. During periods of democratic control there was not civil rights legislation to speak of. 

post #10 of 25
I remember the days when republicans used to the party of individual rights and small government.
post #11 of 25
Thread Starter 

The Democrats invented the Kloo Klux after the war to scare black folks into voting for them.  Checkmate

post #12 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little View Post

The Democrats invented the Kloo Klux after the war to scare black folks into voting for them.  Checkmate

only in your world of ignoring the laws of time to make partisan arguments.
post #13 of 25
142


+


131


=



146
post #14 of 25
ding ding ding we have a winner
post #15 of 25
Moonbat,

Al Gore's Daddy led the fillerbuster by the southern democrate Senators. so It's not just about Byrd of W. VA. And A. Lincoln was a Republican which caused the south to go solid Democrat for years and years.

I see a democrat member of congress has decided to leave the Jackass Party and become a republican. Hmmmm. early retirements, not running again so's ah can spend more time with my family, and exit by shear embarassment of the current Administration is thinning the ranks of the tightly controlled by threats and bribes democrat at many levels (Booker of Newark, who is now dead to those in the whitehouse is an example) are looking to distance themselves from the ragged and tattered failue that is the Obama Administration.

We hope you have someone left to vote for come November.The dem leasdership is making it easy for a revival of a group of southerners to vote for the Republican choice. Will we see a shift in the party and especially in the middle class democrat ranks as they become Romney Democrats ala the Reagan Dems of yore?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Graffiti
StripersOnline › SurfTalk › Community Forums › Political Graffiti › Great Moments in History. June 10 1964