Question for the Senator
December 8th, 2009 at 10:31 am by MicheleSenator Reid,
If Republicans are as bigoted and obstructionist to the causes of ending racism as sexism as you implied this week, and if Democrats are so plainly the party of human mercy, then why at every turn are Republicans so eager to expound on their civil rights history, while Democrats must always obfuscate their historical role by deflection, propaganda, and outright lies?
Example: Today’s Democrats claim Thomas Jefferson as their founder. He formed the Democratic-Republican Party based upon strong republican principles, namely opposition to large government and a national bank. That party no longer exists, but closely resembles the conservative and libertarian parties of today. For today’s Democrat party, which embraces different rules for different groups, and strong governmental control of people’s lives, to seek to own him as a symbol shows a shocking level of intellectual dishonesty, and willful historical ignorance.
Be honest. Which party is the one that has historically stood in the way of positive progress? Which party stood in the doorways of public schools and tried to keep the blacks and whites separate but failed? Which party is so keen on creating artificial divisions in order to maintain control? Check out the Democrat’s website, under “People” there are several categories. I guess some folks are people, and some folks need to be convinced that they are disabled by their color, religion, sexuality, class or creed and need a special designation so they can get a special ramp to personhood provided by the Democrat party?
While being surrounded by the ugly facts, it must feel good to have a conservative dressed as a monster to use as a human shield, but what I can’t understand is why he lets you get away with it.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
No, no, no! All those Democraps who were for slavery and segregation BECAME Republicans.
Just like when Al Gore, Sr. voted against the Civil Rights Act. When it passed he became and Republican and then his son went on to be Vice President of the US when he ran as Republican VP on the Clinton ticket.
Oh, wait.
December 11th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Of course, it’s just as easy to see that the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln was far more liberal than anything that today’s conservative Republicans could ever endorse. After all, those Republicans were against stricter immigration laws, were federal unionists, and were all about spending the big federal bucks on railroads and harbors.
In truth, political parties and people are products of their own time. Generally speaking, efforts to project modern positions on those of the past or to predict how historical figures would respond to current issues is really just an exercise in selective memory and self-serving speculation.
Even the most brilliant and noble among us form their opinions and make their decisions based on their own contemporary observations and experiences. If you could go and pluck Thomas Jefferson or Abraham Lincoln from their times and bring them to ours, you would have no way to reliably predict how they would respond to current issues, especially if you gave them a little time to orient themselves and catch up on modern history.
Likewise, the predominant political ideologies that have historically taken shelter within one political party or another are not necessarily predictive of the current partisan ideologies. Frankly, the conservative southern Democrats of fifty years ago are far more akin to the southern conservative Republicans of the present. Certainly history is replete with important lessons, but to proudly affiliate oneself with a noble historical figure simply because of a shared partisan label is to gloss over and ignore much of that history.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
He says, “efforts to project modern positions on those of the past or to predict how historical figures would respond to current issues is really just an exercise in selective memory and self-serving speculation”
And then he says: “Frankly, the conservative southern Democrats of fifty years ago are far more akin to the southern conservative Republicans of the present.”
Every southern Democrat who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is now a conservative Republican like Al Gore in their lily white, old Democrat money, and all white Belle Meade country club. Still Democrats and still voting straight Democrat.
I believe if William Faulkner were here he would have a drink and say , “Eat me you fucking douche knuckle”.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:34 am
I agree with you here in principle TF, which is why I pointed out that it’s absurd for the Democrats to try to own Thomas Jefferson as their party’s founding father. An honest liberal of today would be consistent and ridicule Thomas Jefferson by refering to him as a teabagger.
The gist of what I’m saying is that the Republicans have a proud civil rights legacy that they have no problem today sharing with any who would hear. A racist/sexist wouldn’t be proud to announce all of those accomplishments, and would not want to ally himself with the party who championed civil rights. The party who stood in the way of that kind of progress might want to obscure some facts though.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
It would be an interesting study to see who was fiscally “conservative” throughout American history. All I want from government is to keep the peace, enforce contracts and stay out of the way. I’m not well-read enough to tell you if that was the Whigs, Federalists or pre-Civil Rights era Democrats.