The filibuster has been used historically by the minority party, which can't win with a vote count. Democrats have opposed the filibuster before — in the 1960s, they accused Republicans of using it to block civil rights legislation.
According to the Senate Historical Office, the record for the longest individual speech is held by the late Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, who filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957. To keep the floor, he read some of his wife's recipes and passages from novels out loud.
Not historical perspective, historical revisionism. In 1957 Strom Thurmond was a Democrat. Robert Byrd was at the forefront in pushing for the defeat of the Civil Rights act.
The Republicans joined with northern and western democrats to overcome the attempt of Southern Democrats to defeat this legislation through use of the filibuster . Some notable Democrats spearheading this effort: Al Gore Sr, William Fulbright, Robert Byrd and Strom Thurmond. It was Minority Leader Everett Dirksen, who had enlisted the Republican votes that made cloture a realistic option.....
Don't be misled by the MSM. It WAS NOT the Republicans who invoked the filibuster to stymie civil rights, it was a regional fight with for the most part Southern Democrats the driving force behind it's usage.
Has it ever crossed their mind to be truthful and accurate the FIRST time.
1
The MSM would deceive us??? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell you!
/sarc
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at May 19, 2005 01:49 PM (xkIHW)
2
"Don't be misled by the MSM. It WAS NOT the Republicans who invoked the filibuster to stymie civil rights, it was a regional fight with for the most part Southern Democrats the driving force behind it's usage."
Yes, and those Southern Democrats showed their true colors. They are now Republicans for the most part.
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 01:55 PM (/+dAV)
3
What? The American media isn't getting facts straight? Noooooo...can't be! But FOX 'News' MUST be accurate. I believe EVERYTHING they say...
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 19, 2005 02:15 PM (WfZ6a)
4
Besides Thurmond, name one
Posted by: traderrob at May 19, 2005 02:33 PM (3al54)
5
John Connally, of Texas
(now dead, calling Strom, calling Senator Strom Thurmond, Please pick up the White Courtesy Phone, God Calling).
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 02:38 PM (/+dAV)
6
Greg, please name the former Dixiecrats who became Republicans beside Strom Thurmond. If you can't name another one, then shut the fuck up you little piece of shit.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 19, 2005 02:56 PM (0yYS2)
7
"Yes, and those Southern Democrats showed their true colors. They are now Republicans for the most part."
"John Connally, of Texas"
Neat trick considering John Connally never held a Senate seat, he was a Governor of Texas once.Connally served as secretary of the navy in 1961 in the cabinet of Democrat President John F. Kennedy. He was known as "Lyndons boy" , LBJ is considered to have done more for civil rights than any Pres since Lincoln.
So if your intent was to undercut your own argument, you did a masterful job.
Posted by: traderrob at May 19, 2005 03:01 PM (3al54)
8
Osamabeenthere, what is it with you moonbats and your fascination with Fox? It's rarely mentioned on any conservative blog, but you leftards are like Pavlov's dogs. Why don't you do the world a favor and kill yourself. Of course, if you don't have the balls to do it, I would be glad to help, just need your address...
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 19, 2005 03:05 PM (0yYS2)
9
Improbulus Maximus: label away at me, but the facts remain that FOX reports as biased as you are. I'm too strong to kill myself, and if your tiny balls have the courage to come to my place to die, be my guest. I'm too mean to kill you though...I'd rather Clockwork Orange your ass to a infinite loop of Michael Moore movies while playing recordings of Bush speeches backwards. I think a few hundred doses of LSD might be in order as well...
Posted by: Osamabeenvotin' at May 19, 2005 03:15 PM (WfZ6a)
10
"Greg, please name the former Dixiecrats who became Republicans beside Strom Thurmond. If you can't name another one, then shut the fuck up you little piece of shit."-Gluteus Maximus
Fuck you, you little dick, I already gave you one - John Connally
Can't you read you fucking idiot.
Traderrob,
I didn't know you wanted a senator. How about Jesse Helms?
Connally may have been "lyndon's boy" at one time but he broke ranks after the Civil Rights Act.
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 03:27 PM (/+dAV)
11
I grew up in Texas. There's no doubt that Southern Democrats tended to be for segregation from about 1948 until the mid 60's. This makes historical sense since theSouth was Democratic during the Civil War and still resented the "carpet bagger" Republicans 100 years later. But when Johnson lobbied for the Civil Rights Act he roiled many Southern Democrats. Those who held on to a racist philosophy turned Republican.
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 03:33 PM (/+dAV)
12
I know you've heard of the "Southern Strategy".
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 03:45 PM (/+dAV)
13
Jesse Helms was elected to the Seante as a Republican and had no input into the civil rights act of 1957. You stated that the Southern Senators who were involved in the filibuster to block the 1957 Civil Rights act in the Senate had switched or "are now Republicans". That's just blatantly false.
Posted by: traderrob at May 19, 2005 03:57 PM (3al54)
14
What I meant to convey is that the "Racist Party" was at one time the Democratic Party. The "Racist Party " then morphed into Republicans as a direct consequence of the Southern Strategy.
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 04:03 PM (/+dAV)
15
Sorry, wrong again. The driving force for any southern Democrats that "switched" to the Republican party has far more to do with the power of centralized government as they see it and states rights than all other motivations combined. Zell Miller is a perfect example. Even though he never switched party affiliations, he is the embodiment of southern Democrat thought. He also is far from a racist and garnered 90% of the black vote when he ran for Governor of Georgia.
Posted by: traderrob at May 19, 2005 04:14 PM (3al54)
16
"He also is far from a racist and garnered 90% of the black vote when he ran for Governor of Georgia."-ttraderrob
Of course he did. Blacks tend to vote Democratic. And at the time Zell was a Democrat. But not anymore.
States rights are integrally related to racism going all the way back to the Ciivil War.
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 04:19 PM (/+dAV)
17
Are you insinuating that the blacks vote Democrat because they are to ignorant to know better....I hope that's not what you just said.
Posted by: traderrob at May 19, 2005 04:23 PM (3al54)
18
Of course not.
Got to run.
Greg out.
Posted by: greg at May 19, 2005 04:46 PM (/+dAV)
19
So, osamabeenthere, how often do you watch Fox? I'm guessing never. If you had, you would know that nearly every single topic of discussion has a representative from both sides of the issue at hand. All the rest (of which are few)that have only one view, are split down the middle. Half have the conservative view. Half have the liberal view. And you have obviously missed Fox's love affair with Barrack Obama. They are obviously doing something correct since their ratings are higher than the other cable channels combined. Just because they actually show the conservative side as well as the liberal side, you typically read bias into that. So, please get your facts straight. And by the way, that last drug-induced-sounding diatribe of yours is typical of a person who no longer has an intelligent argument to make. Sort of like the moonbats who call me a Nazi because I happen to vote for the party that has their hands in my pocket less than the other. I know I've won my argument when that happens.
Greg, surely you don't believe that the Southern Democrats are now Republicans because they are/were racist. That's the most ridiculous arguement I've ever heard. They became Republicans because of the(continuing) move to the left of the party. Unless your leadership comes to their senses and realizes this, they will continue their march toward the cliff. Like it or not, most people don't share the views and lack of values of the Hollywood crowd. I still don't understand the fascination with the 'Hillary is our savior' crowd. Yes, play into our hands and nominate another northeast liberal who just happens to be the most polarizing figure in politics.
Also, I'm sure I'm not the only one that hasn't missed the 800 pound gorilla in the living room. You conveniently left Robert Byrd out of your discussion. Let's do a quick party count of all the KKK members in each party in Congress. Regardless, neither party has a monopoly on racism or lack there of. Too many like to scream racism where there isn't any and that has already become like the boy who cried wolf too often and so legitimate cases are not being given credence thanks to the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
'Out', indeed.
Posted by: slug at May 19, 2005 08:59 PM (7AsbT)
20
Slug:
Fox is hardly down the middle representing right and left. Further more, ass-hats like O'Riley and Hannity don't let anyone speak if they don't like what they are saying, therefore resulting in a childish shouting match. Ratings don't equal truth, so it doesn't mean they are doing anything 'right' unless you are referring to their bias. I didn't call you a Nazi, and will never tell you how to vote. You are entitled to your views and have every right in the world to voice them. If you're dissing my response to Maximus Crapus up there, you'll see that he never had an argument to start with, just crap...which was handed back to him double-fold. If you ask if I watch FOX News, I tell you I've seen enough. I simply don't trust that network, CNN or MSNBC. Either way, I'm all for having civilized debate and intelligent conversation about any topic you like...but rarely does that happen in here. Most posts quickly dissolve into name calling. Sometimes, I love razzing people, but end up getting bored coming up with creative ways to verbally abuse dick-heads. You sound a bit above that though, so hats off to you.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 19, 2005 11:10 PM (WfZ6a)
21
There's a reason democrats do not have the majority in the house, senate, nor the presidency. They embrace far left (out of the mainstream) policies, and are unwilling to moderate their stance. They are also incredibly rude to anyone who doesn't agree with them 100%. Why would I want to vote for a party whose constituents continually tell me that I am stupid for voting for President Bush, that I am a bigot for believing in traditional family values and opposing gay marriage, and that I'm a "fristian" or a far right whacko because I'm a Christian. I'll never agree with democrats OR republicans on 100% of their policies, and that's OK. But why would I vote for a party that has insulted me on almost a daily basis. IÂ’m not the only person who has seen how the democrats are acting and have been repelled. You can call it a power grab, but itÂ’s nothing more than the majority ruling as it is meant to be. If the democrats had anything to offer they wouldnÂ’t be in the minority.
Posted by: sue at May 20, 2005 01:33 AM (Zt0aG)
22
Sorry, the previous comment was put in the wrong post.
Posted by: sue at May 20, 2005 01:40 AM (Zt0aG)
23
"FOX NEWS RATINGS IN "FREE FALL""
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/fncs_2554_prime_downward_spiral_20939.asp
FNC's month-by-month weekday primetime averages in the 25-54 demographic: Oct. 04: 1,074,000 / Nov. 04: 891,000 / Dec. 04: 568,000 / Jan. 05: 564,000 / Feb. 05: 520,000 / March 05: 498,000 / April 05: 445,000
NOBODY LIKES A LIAR!
Posted by: greg at May 20, 2005 08:23 AM (/+dAV)
24
Sue:
Being incredibly rude to anyone who doesn't agree with you 100% is neither Republican or Democrat...it's merely human! People all over the world are like this! I don't think you are stupid for voting for Bush (certainly not without hearing WHY you did in the first place). You are not a wacko because you are Christian, or any other faith. On the point about gay marriage, I care less about regulating other people's happiness. On that note, I've seen gay people have much more respect for the principles of marriage than straight people who divorce at an alarming rate. I barely know anyone who hasn't divorced or grown up in step-families. Either way, I think there are much more important issues in the world to deal with than worrying about what gay people want to do, especially if they aren't hurting anyone. I think leftists freak out about rights because they feel as if the conservatives intrude on their lives when they should mind their own business.
to quote you: "IÂ’m not the only person who has seen how the democrats are acting and have been repelled." It is the same on the other side of the fence as well. The difference between you and I is that I don't think either party is offering much that is good for our country and that I would vote for someone based on who they are, rather than party affiliation.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 20, 2005 10:57 AM (ZR8xw)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment