Whitewashing the Democratic Party’s History
fullscreen
Senator Robert Byrd
Share article on Facebook
share
Tweet article
tweet
Plus one article on Google Plus
+1
Print Article
Email article
Adjust font size AA
by Mona Charen June 26, 2015 12:00 AM
@monachareneppc
The less racist the South gets, the more Republican it becomes.
Here’s what the former president of the United States had to say when he
eulogized his mentor, an Arkansas senator:
We come to celebrate and give thanks for the remarkable life of J.
William Fulbright, a life that changed our country and our world forever
and for the better. . . . In the work he did, the words he spoke and
the life he lived, Bill Fulbright stood against the 20th century’s most
destructive forces and fought to advance its brightest hopes.
So spoke President William J. Clinton in 1995 of a man was among the 99
Democrats in Congress to sign the “Southern Manifesto” in 1956. (Two
Republicans also signed it.) The Southern Manifesto declared the
signatories’ opposition to the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v.
Board of Education and their commitment to segregation forever.
Fulbright was also among those who filibustered the Civil Rights Act of
1964. That filibuster continued for 83 days.
Speaking of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, let’s review (since they don’t
teach this in schools): The percentage of House Democrats who supported
the legislation? 61 percent. House Republicans? 80 percent. In the
Senate, 69 percent of Democrats voted yes, compared with 82 percent of
Republicans. (Barry Goldwater, a supporter of the NAACP, voted no
because he thought it was unconstitutional.)
When he was running for president in 2000, Vice President Al Gore told
the NAACP that his father, Senator Al Gore Sr., had lost his Senate seat
because he voted for the Civil Rights Act. Uplifting story — except
it’s false. Gore Sr. voted against the Civil Rights Act. He lost in 1970
in a race that focused on prayer in public schools, the Vietnam War,
and the Supreme Court.
Al Gore’s reframing of the relevant history is the story of the
Democratic party in microcosm. The party’s history is pockmarked with
racism and terror. The Democrats were the party of slavery, black codes,
Jim Crow, and that miserable terrorist excrescence, the Ku Klux Klan.
Republicans were the party of Lincoln, Reconstruction, anti-lynching
laws, and the civil rights acts of 1875, 1957, 1960, and 1964. Were all
Republicans models of rectitude on racial matters? Hardly. Were they a
heck of a lot better than the Democrats? Without question.
As recently as 2010, the Senate’s president pro tempore was former Ku
Klux Klan Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd (D., W.Va.). Rather than
acknowledge their sorry history, modern Democrats have rewritten it.
ADVERTISING
The Democrats have been sedulously rewriting history for decades.
You may recall that when MSNBC was commemorating the 50th anniversary of
segregationist George Wallace’s “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door” stunt
to prevent the integration of the University of Alabama, the network
identified Wallace as “R., Alabama.”
The Democrats have been sedulously rewriting history for decades. Their
preferred version pretends that all the Democratic racists and
segregationists left their party and became Republicans starting in the
1960s. How convenient. If it were true that the South began to turn
Republican due to Lyndon Johnson’s passage of the Civil Rights Act, you
would expect that the Deep South, the states most associated with
racism, would have been the first to move. That’s not what happened. The
first southern states to trend Republican were on the periphery: North
Carolina, Virginia, Texas, Tennessee, and Florida. (George Wallace lost
these voters in his 1968 bid.) The voters who first migrated to the
Republican party were suburban, prosperous New South types. The more
Republican the South has become, the less racist.
Is it unforgivable that Bill Clinton praised a former segregationist?
No. Fulbright renounced his racist past, as did Robert Byrd and Al Gore
Sr. It would be immoral and unjust to misrepresent the history.
What is unforgivable is the way Democrats are still using race to foment
hatred. Remember what happened to Trent Lott when he uttered a few dumb
words about former segregationist Strom Thurmond? He didn’t get the
kind of pass Bill Clinton did when praising Fulbright. Earlier this
month, Hillary Clinton told a mostly black audience that “what is
happening is a sweeping effort to disempower and disenfranchise people
of color, poor people and young people from one end of our country to
another. . . . Today Republicans are systematically and deliberately
trying to stop millions of American citizens from voting.” She was
presumably referring to voter-ID laws, which, by the way, 51 percent of
black Americans support.
Racism has an ugly past in the Democratic party. The accusation of
racism has an ugly present.
— Mona Charen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
© 2015 Creators.com
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420321/democratic-party-racist-history-mona-charen
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420321/democratic-party-racist-history-mona-charen
No comments:
Post a Comment