Via Hotair.
How long are left wing crazies like Olbermann going to be allowed to continue to rehash the canard that the civil rights legislation of the LBJ years prompted a "white supremacist flight" to the welcoming arms of the southern (ie, racist) GOP?
In 1964, the Civil Rights Act passed by a significant majority in both chambers of Congress. To hear Olby tell the tale, this must have been due to the valiant, tireless efforts of those stalwart defenders of liberty, namely, the Democrats to defeat those vicious, craven, racist Republicans--who, don't you know, actually wore their white sheets to Capital Hill in those days.
Sounds reasonable enough. I mean, something made all those Dixie hicks switch parties.
But the trouble for Olbermann's premise is that someone forgot to burn the vote tallies after the law was enacted. From Wikipedia:
Vote totals
Totals are in "Yea-Nay" format:
The original House version: 290-130 (69%-31%)
Cloture in the Senate: 71-29 (71%-29%)
The Senate version: 73-27 (73%-27%)
The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%-30%)
By party
The original House version:
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
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%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure
Now, these numbers don't show that all Republicans supported the bill, nor that all Democrats opposed it. In fact, what they show is that northerners tended to support it, and southerners opposed it. Much of that southern opposition, across party lines, was owing to racism (in the case of Bobby Byrd this was undoubtedly the case; however, there were a few oddballs like Goldwater--generally a civil rights champion, and who later regretted casting "nay"--who opposed it on ideological reasons other than racism).
But what is undeniable is that this bill was supported by the vast majority of Republicans. In any vote taken in either chamber, GOP support was never lower than 80% of the total party vote. In fact, if the Republicans were the racist caricatures that Olbermann portrays, they could have killed the bill in the House from the outset. Now, Southern Republicans to a man voted nay. But might the fact that the GOP was a virtual non-entity in the south at that point somewhat elucidate which party in total more embodied the views and interests of the South in 1964? And since the vast majority of Republicans supported this legislation, might that not tell us something about how popular or "mainstream" southern racist Republicans were within their own party?
It just doesn't follow that hordes of southern voters, furious over the outcome of these proceedings, would eschew the party that in large measure voted exactly the way that the voters wanted them to; nor does it make sense that the disenchanted would then hie their little hate-filled fannies into the party that, a) supported the bill by a greater internal percentage than the Democrats, and b) would likely continue to support, at least at the national level, candidates who would embrace the equal rights platform. Maybe I'm completely wrong, and a total of eight Southern Democrats (in both chambers combined) voting in favor of the bill was enough to drive southern voters temporarily insane.
Or maybe, just some of them, just a handful, switched because they were disgusted with the hatred and meanness of Southern Democrats like Bull Connor, Bobby Byrd, and yes, Strom Thurmond, and had had enough.
Who knows. All I can say for certain is that Olbermann's premise makes utterly no sense. Man, who knew THAT could happen?
UPDATE:
I suppose it would have been asking too much to expect Stewart to avoid at least one shameless dig at a conservative (namely the Maha-Rushie), but it's worth it to watch Stewart utterly destroy Olby:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-21-2010/special-comment---keith-olbermann-s-name-calling'>Special Comment - Keith Olbermann's Name-Calling | ||||
| ||||
No comments:
Post a Comment