Hey, state rights then.
It’s Rick Snyder’s state I believe, maybe he was counting the minorities for future shipment to the camps, being a Tea Partier and all.
What, did you see him appear in FOX news and they pasted a “D” next to his name? :)
On a more serious note, please remember that it was you who said that they would be sent to camps by the Republican, we do not want to hear claims elsewhere that a mean opponent insulted you in the thread.
My opinion was based on anecdotal data- that is, many people I know don’t want to be part of something close to a “whites only” club, which is how the Republican party appears to many. The reverse doesn’t apply, because no one (or no one I know of) thinks of the Democratic party as a “non-whites only” club. Maybe that will change in the future, though I don’t believe it will.
I wasn’t making some ground breaking claim- just my opinion. I, and many others like me, I believe, have an intrinsic distrust of any organization that has significantly less minority membership than the population at large (or the local population, for local organizations).
They’re not the “racist party” (at least, not in my opinion), but they are the party that used coded language (and non-coded language, for some like Jesse Helms) to appeal to and win the vote of racist white southern voters. The Democrats used to do that too, but they stopped doing it on a national scale long before the Republicans stopped… and I’m still not sure the Republicans have stopped.
The Southern Strategy was real, it worked for the Republican party for many decades, and now there are signs that it’s hurting the party.
There is one caveat to all this of course; yesterday’s “liberals” would be considered today’s “right wing nut cases” by leftist standards of today.
And “he helped defend many blacks”? Welcome to the GOP of the early 60s, Einstein.
I think there’s something to that, but I also think that in the end most people vote their interests and beliefs, rather than looking at the club they are a member of. Progressives proudly called themselves Democrats when the party had a large racist element, because they believed in certain things that the Democrats supported, like Social Security. And nothing has really changed. The current big civil rights battle, gay rights, has seen the same dynamic. Robert Byrd was one of the most vociferously anti-gay politicians in the Senate. Yet the progressive Daily Kos site happily ran his internet ads referring to him as a “Progressive Champion”. Apparently, even in 2006, haters were tolerated so long as they didn’t want to privatize Social Security.
The Southern Strategy was real, but liberal portrayals of that strategy are caricatures of what it actually was.
Republicans opposed Jim Crow. but they also opposed things like racial quotas and busing. In addition, they were pro-law enforcement. When Jim Crow was put to rest by the Civil Rights Act and the Supreme Court, those secondary issues, which did have a big racial aspect, moved to the front burner and Republicans were the ones who were more attractive to white southerners on those issues. But first, not only didn’t Republicans change to become more attractive to racists, they were RIGHT on those issues! Racial quotas, busing, and the liberal approach to law enforcement were all mostly or completely discredited by the 1990s. Those are concrete examples of liberals getting it wrong and now being more aligned with Republicans. Yet Republicans were racist for being right?
adaher, I’m curious. Does reality scream when you twist it like that or do you drug it first to deaden the pain?
160 years ago, “The blacks shouldn’t be slaves, but of course they can’t vote or hold public office” was a pretty progressive view with respect to race. Are you saying that the Republicans haven’t changed from that point of view?
I’m saying that the republicans don’t believe in discriminating on the basis of race.
Are you suggesting that if Einstein was alive today he’d be a Republican?
By today’s standards, he likely be considered staunchly conservative.
Re: Hillsdale College - Hillsdale College remains independent of the federal government’s lure of ‘funding’ so as to maintain control of who teaches what. That, my friend, speaks volumes and is the only way to advance ‘critical thinking’ in this country.
Or, can equally used to teach creation ‘science’.
Fail.
Surprise! Times change! What our conservative friends here don’t understand is that you can be super progressively liberal 150 years ago, but that same action would be seen as horribly racist today. The people who change along with the times, those are the liberals. The people who think their change need only progress up to the point at which they feel comfortable, and not further, are the racists.
I think you’re giving them too much credit. These people don’t feel comfortable with any change at all and they wouldn’t make any progress if they were left to their own devices. The only reason conservatives ever make progress is because they’re getting dragged along by liberals. Liberals seek change and the conservatives fight it. If the liberals win and the change occurs, the conservatives will eventually get used to the change a few decades after it occurs and it becomes the new reality that conservatives refuse to change.
Actually school vouchers have been popular among many African-Americans who’d rather send their children to private schools, particularly many Catholic urban schools because they think the schools are safer and more demanding.
Moreover, not all Catholic urban schools are “Lilly-white”. Many are actually predominantly minority.
IIRC, he actually was a supporter of Senator Jacob Javiits, who was a Republican.
Of course that was back when there were lots of genuinely liberal Republicans and genuinely conservative democrats where one party wasn’t considered “the Conservative party” and the other “The liberal party”.
FTR, I think vouchers are a terrible idea for a number of reasons.