Democrat Party Still Racist After All These Years

Democrat Party Still Racist After All These Years

The Democrat party has subtly changed the wording, but after all these years it is still crooning the same old racist tunes; updated and syncopated for 2014, of course. The Democrat party “plantation” is the dependence class, with the new harvest being minority voter turnout. The Democrat party can reliably count on minority votes, because they have been telling minorities for the past 45 years that only Democrats “truly care.”

In light of data available through the Census Bureau, the Democrat party’s insistence that they care is shown to be a hollow statement. African-American adults living at or below the poverty level grew from 19.8 percent back in 2007, to 23 percent by the end of 2010. It is even worse for African-American children; their numbers in poverty rose from 34.5 in 2007, to a dismal and disappointing 39.1 percent by 2010.

The median income of African-American households under President Bush – while Bush enjoyed Republican majorities in the House and Senate – during 2005, was $12,124. Sadly, by 2009 – after only three years of Democrat party majorities in both houses and Obama’s first year in office – that number plummeted 53 percent to $5,677 according to the Pew Research Center. One might be forced to wonder what, exactly, the Democrat party truly cares for.

Furthermore, a look at jobs data shows that the plight of American minorities under the gentle guidance Democrat party, becomes even worse: Total numbers of employment aged African-Americans in the workforce, slid from 58.6 percent in June 2007, to 52.8 percent by August 2012. Fewer than 50 percent of young African-American males have full-time employment, today.

However, even in the face of all those irrefutable facts, 90 percent of African-Americans who did vote, gave their votes to the architects of their economic demise. Under the guise of Progressivism and misguided Liberalism, the Democrat party has been leading minorities – and everyone else – down the gilded path to an economic and social dystopia.

Back in 2010, the DNC website read “Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws.” [Emphasis added.] Those words have since been removed from the site. Did the Democrat party change it when too many people realized that they are still, even after all these years, as racist as they have ever been?

Perhaps it was supposed to read “back before supposedly liberal Republicans magically became Democrats” they were passing those laws. Because that seems to be the argument, of late. Somehow, the deeply reviled, obviously evil Nixon was conniving enough to make every Senator and Congressman serving, to spontaneously switch parties.

All but the redoubtable Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, the Southern Democrat who managed to stay Democrat for well over 40 years; despite all the mythical ship-jumping which is supposed to have occurred. All of the modern liberal Democrats who adored him, like Bill Clinton, Barrack Obama and Al Gore, must not have been told Byrd was a Grand Klegal in the KKK before he ran for the Senate as a Democrat. Byrd was a celebrated member of the Democrat party up til his death, in 2010. So it is not as if the discussion of his affiliations is somehow ancient history.

The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had no illusions as to of which party and political ideology he was marching against, and he voted Republican. In honor of Reverend King’s legacy, perhaps it is best to judge the Democrat party on the content of its character.

What follows is merely a limited recitation of Democrat party offenses against civil rights, with a few corresponding Republican accomplishments which were gained in spite of tremendous resistance. This list will trace the two party’s actions back just for the past 100 years or so.

May 23, 2003, Republican Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduced a bill establishing the National Museum of African American History & Culture.

August 20, 1996, in the “Republican Contract With America” election platform – thoroughly denounced by the Democrat party – Representative Susan Molinari (R-NY) wrote and sponsored legislation which prohibited discrimination by race of adoptive parents.

November 21, 1991, the Civil Rights Act of 1991 is signed into law by President George H. W. Bush, which further strengthened civil rights laws passed by Republicans overwhelmingly in 1965.

August 10, 1988, the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 is signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, which compensated Japanese-Americans who had been deprived of property and liberty when Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt drafted Executive Order 9066. That order forced Japanese-Americans into internment camps during WWII.

February 19, 1976, Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 is formally rescinded by Republican President Gerald Ford.

August 6, 1965, the Republican Voting Rights Act becomes signed into law. The Act served to abolish the unscrupulous “literacy tests” and other impediments devised by the Democrat party, to inhibit African-American votes.

August 4, 1965, in the face of several Democrat party impediments imposed on the Voting Rights Act, Republicans vote 94 percent For, while Democrats vote 27 percent Apposed.

June 20, 1964, the black owned newspaper Chicago Defender, heaps praise on Senate Republican Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for championing the Civil Rights Act.

Democrat Party: Still Racist After All These Years

June 9, 1964, the Republicans officially protest the filibuster of the Civil Rights Act by Democrat Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) which lasted 14 hours. The Act was crafted and supported by a vast number of Republicans in the Senate, while being strictly opposed by southern Democrat Senators. Many of those Senators called themselves “proud segregationists,” most notably Al Gore Sr.

May 2, 1963, the sheriff of Birmingham, AL. a Democrat party member, orders the arrest of over 2,000 black children who were only guilty of the crime of marching for civil rights.

May 6, 1960, the Civil Rights Act of 1960 is signed into law by President Dwight Eisenhower. Thereby ending a 125-hour filibuster engaged in by 18 Democrat party Senators.

September 24, 1957, President Eisenhower defies demands and derision from Senior Democrat party Senators like Lyndon Johnson and John Kennedy, and sends the 82nd Airborne to Little Rock, AR. The troops were necessary, as a means of forcing Governor Orval Faubus, a Democrat, to integrate Arkansas’ public schools.

November 6, 1956, celebrated civil rights leaders MLK Jr. and his long-time friend Ralph Abernathy, publicly announce they both voted for Republican President Dwight Eisenhower.

March 12, 1956, Brown vs. Board of Education is condemned by 97 Democrats in Congress, who vow to enforce segregation.

September 30, 1953, California’s three-term Republican Governor, Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren, writes the landmark decision Brown v. Board of Education.

August 17, 1937, former Klansman Democrat Senator Hugo Black is appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by FDR. Republicans protest in stark opposition, because Black’s Klan membership had been lied about until well after his confirmation.

October 3, 1924, three-time Democrat party presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan is formally denounced by Republicans, because of his defense of the Ku Klux Klan during the 1924 Democrat National Convention.

January 26, 1922, a bill written by U.S. Representative Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) is passed in Congress, making lynching a federal crime. The Democrat party Senators had filibustered in order to block it.

February 12, 1909, black Republican “Suffragettes” Ida Wells and Mary Terrell, on the 100 year anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birthday, co-found the NAACP.

In light of just this past century of overt racism, covert racism and political posturing, how is it possible for the Democrat party to claim they are not still possessed of a racist mentality, after all these years? When confronted with this rather abbreviated list of historical sins, most Democrats will parrot back the three words believed to have changed reality: “Nixon’s Southern Strategy.” Few Democrats can expound further on that theory than knowing the name, and those who do know a little more seem to be in possession of a rather inventive set of “facts.”

The Democrat party narrative goes something like this: By 1965, Nixon and a few close advisers had decided they needed the South to vote Republican, if they were expected to win National elections. To that extent, the narrative is probably true. However, in the Democrat version, Nixon is an evil racist who wants the cause of racism to flourish, so he makes a pact with all of the obviously white supremacist southerners to join the Republican party. Which Democrats will swear happened, despite no evidence to back that claim up. There are no massive party affiliation shifts during the late 60s or early 70s. There are occasional single fence jumpers, but that is hardly unique to the era.

The idea that conservatives populate the racist end of the political spectrum can only be held to today, if it can somehow be shown to hold true in the past. Therefore, racist KKK Democrats at every level of the party are now called “conservatives,” so that the Republicans of the past almost two centuries can be adopted as the “true” ancestors of the modern liberal Democrat party. Interestingly enough, there is a simple litmus test for that theory, which few Democrats are willing to subject themselves to:

Democrat Party: Still Racist After All These Years
Margaret Sanger is still a celebrated hero of the Democrat party, despite her well documented racist views.

In that virtually all Democrat party leaders – even through the 1960s and 1970s – can be demonstrated to be as racist a bunch as ever took a fire-hose to innocent Americans, which Republican President or significant party leader of the past century does any Democrat hold in singularly high regard? In truth, Democrats only honor their own historical figures, even when they are forced to completely gloss over those old racist bigot’s opinions.

Today, Democrat party racism is a far more subtle, nuanced thing; minorities are held down by the insidious racism of diminished expectations. Dependence and “victim status” are the only aspirations being tolerated by Democrat party leaders, these days.

It is worth mentioning that slavery is best defined as “induced dependence.” Slaves are kept in a constant state of dependence upon their masters for food, shelter, healthcare and all their other material needs. In return for which, the slave must obey and behave, lest those meager comforts be reduced or removed. Deplorable behavior and treatment by the master must never be questioned and always be tolerated.

Over the past 5000 years or more, mankind has domesticated thousands of wild animal species by inducing exactly that level of dependence. The practice has been thoroughly vetted; proven to be 99.99 percent effective, every time it is applied. Which is why tourists at many state parks are admonished to not allow the wild animals to become dependent on free food, given to them by humans. To survive, thrive and succeed, independent living creatures must have the knowledge and the will to provide for themselves.

The Democrat party wants to create and maintain that level of dependence in their fellow American citizens, so they can enjoy societal and economic mastery over them. They claim they are “helping” minorities, when all they are actually doing is making them more and more dependent. After all of these “progressive” years, the Democrat party is still just as racist as it has ever been, it has simply become more sophisticated in how it exercises that racism.

Editorial By Ben Gaul


Liberty Voice      Western Center for Journalism       Free Republic

Click Here if you think YOU could write for the Liberty Voice

17 Responses to "Democrat Party Still Racist After All These Years"

  1. Continued   February 21, 2019 at 4:31 am

    Your logic should be accepted without question.

  2. corbett park   February 17, 2018 at 2:40 am

    My analysis suggests that there would be little to be gained—it’s not the 1980s anymore. Democrats trying to tack to the center or right on race will end up alienating not only people of color in their base but also whites, who hold increasingly racially liberal views. And unlike in the past, there aren’t a lot of voters who are up for grabs, who swing between the two parties. Rather, Republicans have moved right, along with their voters. Much like the GOP couldn’t “out-segregate” Eastland, Democrats won’t be able “out-MS-13” Republicans, and they shouldn’t bother trying. Instead of investing in the squishy (and mythological center), Democrats should invest in turning out their base. It’s still early, but there’s evidence that Gillespie’s racist campaign has bolstered Latino turnout. The future of Democratic party is building a coalition to defeat racism at the ballot box, not pander to it.

  3. Josef   February 5, 2015 at 6:40 am

    Still a Democrat? Let the truth set you free.

  4. Matthew Guess   May 25, 2014 at 2:20 am

    Also, I believe slaves only ate if and when their masters fed them. I would think that would make them DEPENDENT on their masters, You Morons! You’re racists and you don’t even know it. It’s ingrained in your Democratic DNA. Divide and Conquer. Keeping people in their places. The poor black folks aren’t smart enough to take care of themselves. The very racist, and progressive hero Woodrow Wilson thought this way. He was from the south and he was a progressive, which means liberal today. Unfortunately, for you poor fools, you think your helping but you’re hurting. I’m not saying you Libs are consciously racist like Wilson, but you still are preaching his White supremacist based policies of keeping minorities in place and here’s that word again, dependent .

  5. Matthew Guess   May 25, 2014 at 1:55 am

    Ben, I love it how you shut them the f..k up. I really wanted to read their follow ups, but surprise surprise… They didn’t have any. They used up all their twisted knowledge in one post.

  6. Ben Garrett   April 24, 2014 at 9:01 am

    You are picking out individual situations and labelling the entire Democratic Party as being racist. As a British teenager looking in, this article is pathetic, and panders to the low-IQ conservative, Tea Party lover. The people you highlight are conservative in ideology, oddly enough the same ideology of the Republican Party, but then again Abraham Lincoln (who should be regarded in high esteem for what he did), represents the face of the entire party, even to this day.

    George Wallace was a Democrat yes, a racist Democrat yes, but ran for president in 1968 as an Independent candidate. The main party base rejected him and he protested. Nixon’s Southern Strategy was born out of the idea of wooing Wallace-voters, mainly white, evangelical idiots. Which is what the Republican Party has been taken over by, hopefully you have half a brain cell to not support the Tea Party.

    I am glad I came across this article however, I needed something to make me laugh today.

    • Ben Gaul   April 25, 2014 at 5:42 pm

      Thank you for the comment, Ben. I am going to go out on a limb now, and accuse you of not reading more than 10 percent of my article.

      In order to test your theories about the “Nixon Southern Strategy,” and the ever popular (among liberals) theory that all of the BAD Democrat racists must have been conservatives, allow me to ask you some pertinent questions.

      First, can you name for me any other attributes of those racist Democrats which would mark them out as identical to modern Conservative Republicans? Those southern Democrats were by no means Evangelical, since most of the South is still either Catholic or Baptist. Both of which have a long history of antislavery, very often being departure points for the underground railroad. So, other than your heartfelt desire that conservatism = racism, what else have you got? Conservatism is about freedom, both of thought and deed, for all men, at all times, in all nations.

      If you truly believe conservatives are the ones telling people how to live, ask yourself who passed antismoking laws, who made the incandescent light bulb impossible to find, who demands people adhere to stupid dietary rules, who believes in government control of everything… I promise, you will find a liberal Democrat behind every “we will FORCE you to live as we decree” Bill that has ever been passed into law. Even more importantly, when those liberal laws are put to the public for a vote, they almost always fail. When the people of America reject Socialism, individual leftist judges overruled them.

      Then you need to tell me the names of the Republican leadership over the past 100 years, who you and your ilk have held up as excellent examples for modern liberal Democrats to emulate. Surely, someone has historically literate as you, can produce hundreds of articles and citations written by modern liberal Democrats PRAISING all those Republicans who championed civil rights. We already know they were Republicans, so where is all the fulsome praise?

      Next, explain to me why leftist Democrats still love and admire their old racist leadership. You can name TWO Republicans with KKK ties. I can name 200 Democrats. Most of whom ran on racist platforms, and only three of which said they renounced their KKK background. Unless you are prepared to accuse Sen. Robert “Sheets” Byrd of South Virginia of being a conservative, you haven’t got a leg to stand on.

  7. Jonathon Roley   February 25, 2014 at 5:56 pm

    “Dependence” is in no way a prerequisite for slavery, or even related.

    In fact, you make it sound like Slavery perpetuated by the South, which thanks to the Southern Strategy are intimately bound to the Modern Republican Party, was a situation in which these African Americans needed food and shelter, so had no choice but to work on a plantation, forsaking their own ability to grow food and build their own Shelters.

    If you can’t see how terribly prejudiced and racist such a sentiment is – that slaves were “dependent” it comes as no surprise you wrote this article which patently ignores all of the political upheavals of the 20th century to make your only real point:

    you think “Democrat” party is syntactically correct. I don’t have patience to debunk the rest, because i can’t get past the idea you think African Americans were “Dependent” on their “owners”.

    I am deeply offended by this sentiment and whitewashing of history.

    • Ben Gaul   March 27, 2014 at 1:49 pm

      Please then Jonathon, can you illuminate us on all of the “independence” which all the black slaves in America enjoyed? Self determination, perhaps? Freedom of movement, economic choices, social mobility… Hell, even the right to choose their own mates?? If you can show me where black slaves in America enjoyed those hallmark attributes of independence, I’ll concede you the win and write an entire column on your doubtless countless examples.

      I’ll be deeply offended if you cannot produce several dozen (there should be thousands, if your claims are correct) examples of “independent” slaves, to justify your attack on history.

      I find it interesting that you had no challenge whatsoever on my point that the Democrat party is indeed fostering absolute dependence in modern american minority populations. Are you trying to say that because YOU don’t believe dependence is a necessary condition for slavery, induced dependence must be perfectly OK?

  8. joey   February 22, 2014 at 4:46 pm

    what about strom thurmond and jesse helms? They were formerly democrats before switching parties, and they were racist.

  9. stuart levee   January 30, 2014 at 1:10 pm

    I find the word the use of the word “democrat” as used in the title to be disingenuous . Conservative ideology would be more appropriate The policies most attractive to us underrepresented are attributed when liberal ideology is implemented by either political party. Policies which include the directions promoted by Lincoln, the Roosevelt s and the social policies of LBJ. The “dog whistle” descriptions of Obama, the creation of of non existent voter fraud, the dismissing of patriotism shown to the unemployed – the poor -the undocumented and the obvious proclivity of all branches of government regardless of party pursuing corporate approval ($) is not in the interest of the overwhelming majority of the citizenry regardless of color. The current group of republicans displayed by their words and behavior is not attractive to not only me but most anyone who is not white or Christian currently living in the U.S.

    You did watch the republican primaries?

    • Ben Gaul   March 27, 2014 at 2:15 pm

      Stuart? Reading your comment here, it becomes patently obvious that you only read the title of my article before you made this comment.

      How very knee-jerk Socialist Liberal Democrat — not to mention completely disingenuous — of you.

      Can you name for us please all of the “liberal” Republican leaders of just the past century which you personally hold in only the highest esteem, please? The “movers and shakers” of the Republican push for Civil Rights and social equality whom you have personally, repeatedly held up as excellent examples of the kind of political leadership to which modern liberal Democrats should aspire?

      I’m sure that you’ve written extensively about those fine Republicans for the past few decades, and can post links here to your historic record of praise for liberal Republican leaders. Right?

      And if not you, then certainly there must be countless other liberal Democrats over the past 40 years who you CAN quote. Right?

      I only ask because if you cannot, you are admitting publicly that the current liberal Democrat arguments that “conservatives” are racist, are a complete fabrication designed to whitewash historical and ongoing DEMOCRAT racism.

  10. Dave Lee   January 29, 2014 at 11:52 am

    Woah, “Slavery is best defined as ‘induced dependence'”? No. Slavery is best defined as “forced labor” — Do you really think most American slaves in 1850 would have, given the choice, picked being a slave over even conditional freedom? They didn’t stick around for “all their other material needs,” which were nowhere near being met, they stuck around (when they did) because of the threat of death and dismemberment.

    And it doesn’t really help your argument to then compare African-American slaves to domesticated animals. That is, actually, a much clearer example of racism than anything you provided.

    Look, I don’t disagree that plenty of Democrats are racist. But the pre-Johnson era examples are red herrings (nearly *all* political leaders were overtly racist then), and your other examples don’t support your argument. (For example, your economic figures are cherry-picked to compare the height of the real estate bubble to the nadir of the bust, but in now way make any case for how or why the bust — parts of which certainly started under Democratic leadership but spun out of control thanks the lax financial industry regulation in the Bush era — has anything to do with racism. You made an argument — and a bad one, at that — for effect; you didn’t even offer an argument about cause.)

    If you really want to make a point, you should instead identify specific Democratic policies and legislation that covertly undermine the rights and status of racial minorities in America. There’s no shortage — look at the ajbect failure to come up with meaningful immigration reform, the wholesale violation of Arab Americans’ civil rights, shoddy housing policies, our deplorable drug laws, etc. There’s very little “ban Black people” stuff anymore, but that’s the thing about racism today — it’s complicated. You can’t just point to facile surface arguments to make your point.

    • Ben Gaul   January 29, 2014 at 12:21 pm

      David, thanks for the comment.

      I think it’s fair to say you’re falling into the very trap you’ve accused me of getting stuck in.

      Before I get into that, it is important to note that while dependence is not always the singular condition necessary to slavery, it is a large and absolutely necessary condition.

      You said that “nearly *all* political leaders were overtly racist then…”

      Really? How do we explain all of the Republican fights for civil rights I posted? Do you actually mean to say there were no “leaders” of the Republican party who were anything BUT racist? When the first blacks elected to Congress were all Republicans, was that also overtly racist of leadership? Perhaps the black owned newspaper Chicago Defender was mistaken about Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL), when they praised him for championing the Civil Rights Act.

      Well, that, or perhaps your view of Republicans suffers from the constant media barrage about RACIST GOP which is implicit in the whole article. One or the other.

      Nor can I let you get away with saying Bush is somehow responsible for the Housing bubble, or anything happening currently under the Obama Administration. See Barney Frank and Chris Dodd for the feet to lay that argument at.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.