"Obama" plants KKK caller on radio show

[Ragedaug]

Blacker? Really? Was Steele not black enough for you? Not Powell? Not Rice? You need to set a fucking color scale? Volume isn't enough

You ask if they are black enough? I would reply that I require no level of blackness. IMO, the color of someone's skin is irrelevant for what matters to me. For your questions though, seems like Powell and Rice would be very similar levels of "Blackness" to Obama...and you know what? Extreme Right Wing Republicans love them too. Steele...ehh...may be blacker. not sure. Funny how you have all the ignorant "Republicans hate black folks" talk out there when Steele is the chairman of the Republican National Committee. Yeah, not sure how those facts work out together, not to mention Bush appointing black folks to some of the highest offices in the country. yeah, try to figure that one out.

[Templar 331]

Pretty much. But that's all the plan anyway. The funny part is people will say I'm making up crazy conspiracy stuff, when it's all very well documented and very easy to research. A far right wing of republicans labeled themselves as being "radical" (see Radical Republicans) in the 1800's for thinking people shouldn't own other people. Crazy right wingers!!..what where they thinking??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

I think you need to read this.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Honestly, anyone so facile as to think they can categorically brand an entire party as racist is intellectually disqualified. From, like, life. That's not just American political parties, that's anywhere. It's like taking out a banner ad announcing that one is too lazy or dim to comprehend actual issue politics and/or political philosophy.

Pretending that you aren't going to be judged by the majority of people based on what somebody else in your political party says is worse.

[Crissi]

I think it's a shameless and bald-faced fabrication and that there is not a single shred of empirical data by which one can demonstrate when this "southern democrats magically became republicans" thing happened. All that happened is that the Democrat party in general realized it could secure lasting political power by rebranding itself as the party of the minority and did so starting with the Great Society despite having had to get dragged kicking and screaming into the Civil Rights Act just a couple years earlier.

Great thing? My position can be disproven easily, if facts existed to substantiate this urban myth that southern Democrats magically polymorphed into Republicans without anybody ever bothering to actually change party, they wouldn't be hard to find.

Considering that's exactly what the Whigs and Know Nothings did when the Republican party formed, and several Republicans of the 1860's still considered themselves whigs, its perfectly reasonble to think the Dixiecrats did the same. Consider themselves Democrats in name only, but are ideologically Republicans.

[Stormdash]

So basically... it happened. Look, it just happened, allright?!

That's what I'm getting here. It's a convenient fraud, basically. Never been a grain of truth to the "southern Democrats are really Republicans" myth. Robert Byrd, the only actual KKK alum in the Senate I can think of, was a Democrat then and til the day he died. Al Gore, Sr, as well.

[Ragedaug]

I think it's a shameless and bald-faced fabrication and that there is not a single shred of empirical data by which one can demonstrate when this "southern democrats magically became republicans" thing happened. All that happened is that the Democrat party in general realized it could secure lasting political power by rebranding itself as the party of the minority and did so starting with the Great Society despite having had to get dragged kicking and screaming into the Civil Rights Act just a couple years earlier.

Great thing? My position can be disproven easily, if facts existed to substantiate this urban myth that southern Democrats magically polymorphed into Republicans without anybody ever bothering to actually change party, they wouldn't be hard to find.

Wait, wait, wait, wait....you can't ask for facts in an MMO-Champ forum. How can they spread the propaganda if they are forced to deal with facts?

[chrisberb]

Pretty much. But that's all the plan anyway. The funny part is people will say I'm making up crazy conspiracy stuff, when it's all very well documented and very easy to research. A far right wing of republicans labeled themselves as being "radical" (see Radical Republicans) in the 1800's for thinking people shouldn't own other people. Crazy right wingers!!..what where they thinking??

Did the US turn into a shaken etch-a-sketch or something? Did all of these anti-slavery republicans all decide to move to the pro-slavery south after slavery was abolished? Seems a bit strange that Republicans are dominate in the South, and Democrats in the North...almost as if something changed...like platforms? Or is it more plausible that they all geographically relocated?

[Crissi]

So basically... it happened. Look, it just happened, allright?!

That's what I'm getting here. It's a convenient fraud, basically. Never been a grain of truth to the "southern Democrats are really Republicans" myth. Robert Byrd, the only actual KKK alum in the Senate I can think of, was a Democrat then and til the day he died. Al Gore, Sr, as well.

You clearly dont get that what someone labels themselves is can be different if their actions and words dont match up. Being a democrat has no menaings if one's positions match the Republicans. Edward Bates considered himself Whig until he retired from the Cabinet. Doesn't change the fact he was technically a republican.

So as Long as I call myself a Republican, but hold Democratic views and actions, Im still a republican?

and Templar already linked you the Southern Stratagy which happened, unless you dont care to believe Nixon.

[Templar 331]

Wait, wait, wait, wait....you can't ask for facts in an MMO-Champ forum. How can they spread the propaganda if they are forced to deal with facts?

So you didn't read the link I posted. You know, the one with facts in it.

[Ragedaug]

Did the US turn into a shaken etch-a-sketch or something? Did all of these anti-slavery republicans all decide to move to the pro-slavery south after slavery was abolished? Seems a bit strange that Republicans are dominate in the South, and Democrats in the North...almost as if something changed...like platforms? Or is it more plausible that they all geographically relocated?

Yeah it's crazy. If I didn't know any better I would have suspected people can move. For the record, urban areas tend to be liberal, rural tends to conservatism. There's no north/south anymore to define party lines. hasn't been for a while.

[Crissi]

Yeah it's crazy. If I didn't know any better I would have suspected people can move. For the record, urban areas tend to be liberal, rural tends to conservatism. There's no north/south anymore to define party lines. hasn't been for a while.

There was migration toward the North after the Civil War to escape the segregation that was widespread, but after that there wasnt nearly as much migration to effect party geography that much.

[Mormolyce]

The U.S.'s "right" or conservative party has historically been anti-slavery, pro-integration, and pro-civil rights. The "left" or liberal wing has historically been racist, see slavery and segregation - all Democrat party platforms.

Key word "historically".

The South used to vote Democrat, now it votes Republican. The parties today are nothing like what they were a hundred years ago, in many respects they've swapped.

[Ragedaug]

There was migration toward the North after the Civil War to escape the segregation that was widespread, but after that there wasnt nearly as much migration to effect party geography that much.

There's constant migration. I live in the south but grew up in New York. Maybe 5-10% of the people I know and work with were born in the state we're in.

[Crissi]

There's constant migration. I live in the south but grew up in New York. Maybe 5-10% of the people I know and work with were born in the state we're in.

I currently live in the SOuth to, but I've been here all my life. SO have my parents, and my grandparents, and my great grandparents... ect.

Migration does not make that much change in 20 years. Hell, even with the flood of latinos into Texas every year, the soonest Texas will be a battleground state is 2020. That is still 30+ years of constant migration. The Southern Stratagy was over a decade, and the Dixiecrats stopped supporting mainstream Democrats in 1948. Thats also ignoring there was more migrating toward the north because of segregation than were moving south.

[Mormolyce]

Yeah it's crazy. If I didn't know any better I would have suspected people can move. For the record, urban areas tend to be liberal, rural tends to conservatism. There's no north/south anymore to define party lines. hasn't been for a while.

People tend to use "South" and "rural" interchangeably.

In reality, the political situation was considerably different at the time - the Republicans mostly represented the interests of northern/big city industries (not reliant on slave labour), and the Democrats represented southern/agrarian industries (to a large extent reliant on slave labour).

But then the middle class became a thing, and the Democrats became the party that represented them. The Republicans altered their strategy to court the agrarian vote as well, making them the party of all industry, north and south, versus the party of the labour force. Because 20th century politics.

And then especially following Reagan in the 1980s, the Republicans started courting social conservatives as well (typically more rural). Which brings us to our current situation with this strange uncomfortable alliance of social conservatives and economic liberals that characterises modern "right wing" politics.

[Ragedaug]

I currently live in the SOuth to, but I've been here all my life. SO have my parents, and my grandparents, and my great grandparents... ect.

Migration does not make that much change in 20 years. Hell, even with the flood of latinos into Texas every year, the soonest Texas will be a battleground state is 2020. That is still 30+ years of constant migration. The Southern Stratagy was over a decade, and the Dixiecrats stopped supporting mainstream Democrats in 1948. Thats also ignoring there was more migrating toward the north because of segregation than were moving south.

Migrating north is way in the past. It's too cold up there and we have air conditioning down here. From W. VA north, every town I pass when I drive back to NY is dying including the one I grew up in. There is literally no one I graduated with still living in town. That's not to say there aren't a lot of people still there that lived there back in the day, I'm just saying many people have moved away. You can't draw a line down the country and say "this side is left, and this side is right". It doesn't work that way. Urban areas tend left, rural areas tend right. It's very straight forward and doesn't require a specific latitude as a prerequisite. States with a higher urban population tend blue, states with a bigger rural population tend red.

[chrisberb]

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/1979...-civil-rights/

This is a pretty interesting and entertaining read on the history of it all.
Because, anyone who can say with a straight face that the Republican/Democrat party of 100 years ago is the same party as today..is a great friggin actor.

[Crissi]

Migrating north is way in the past. It's too cold up there and we have air conditioning down here. From W. VA north, every town I pass when I drive back to NY is dying including the one I grew up in. There is literally no one I graduated with still living in town. That's not to say there aren't a lot of people still there that lived there back in the day, I'm just saying many people have moved away. You can't draw a line down the country and say "this side is left, and this side is right". It doesn't work that way. Urban areas tend left, rural areas tend right. It's very straight forward and doesn't require a specific latitude as a prerequisite. States with a higher urban population tend blue, states with a bigger rural population tend red.

and now you're talking about how it is now, vs how it was then. Why, as a minority, would you want to live in the segregated south instead of moving north? Why would a minority want to move to the segregated South? Why would northerners who are opposed to segregation move to the South?

[Ragedaug]

and now you're talking about how it is now, vs how it was then. Why, as a minority, would you want to live in the segregated south instead of moving north? Why would a minority want to move to the segregated South? Why would northerners who are opposed to segregation move to the South?

I don't know what you are talking about, but I'm pretty sure it's not what I'm talking about. so...sure. whatevs.

[Crissi]

I don't know what you are talking about, but I'm pretty sure it's not what I'm talking about. so...sure. whatevs.

Weren't you the one arguing that the change in party in the SOuth came from migration or an argument similar to that?