L.A. Times Doesn’t Know Much About Civil Rights History…

The L.A. Times gets a big fat “F” in 20th century American Civil Rights history for this ignorant statement:

Since Democrats led the passage of civil rights legislation that marchers pushed for in 1963, Republicans have struggled to recover with black voters, leaving a stark racial divide in American politics.

Fortunately, Larry Elders sets them straight:

Only 64 percent of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80 percent of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, 6 against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.

So, exactly which party led the passage of the legislation in Congress?  Last time I checked my math, 80% was greater than 64%.  That would indicate to me that it was the Republicans leading the way.  Without their overwhelming support, despite Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate, this legislation would not have passed since Democrats were far, far short of the 218 they needed in the House (65 votes to be precise) and four votes short of 50 in the Senate despite commanding 67 seats.


15 thoughts on “L.A. Times Doesn’t Know Much About Civil Rights History…

  1. History has nothing to do with it. In the bizarro world of the LA Times Democrats=Good, always. Republicans=Bad. always. These idiots would tell you with a straight face that Lincoln was a Democrat. They know they are lying, but the narrative must go on!

  2. Great analysis Jim……….BUT,, and especially Robert, it is common knowledge that LBJ and many liberal-leaning Republicans from the North carried the vote. Also, with LBJs sweeping electoral victory in 1064, he had amassed sufficient political strength to get his way. And one more thing, Robert, you know today, that Republicans are not the party they were even 50 yars ago….they keep moving further and further to the right in desperation for an identity and they keep ending up in quicksand……..

    1. Swim, I am waiting for your analysis of the Democrats moving further and further to the left. The Republicans have not moved further to the right. Look at the stance on various issues – from spending to social issues. Not the Democrat talking points.

  3. Riley, you’re a good friend, but this spectacularly misses the point.
    The Democrats’ nominee for President (LBJ) was the incumbent who signed the bill into law. The Republican nominee (Senator Goldwater) opposed it.
    That’s the story. Full Stop.

    1. Goldwater was a disaster on a couple fronts, this being a big one, although he did pave the way for Reagan and conservatism. He still would have lost even if he had supported this legislation.

      Mediocre support from the Democratic Party after a century of their party oppressing blacks doesn’t begin to make up for those sins. And the damage that LBJ’s Great Society policies have done to the black family is unforgivable.

    2. Damage to BLACK families?????? Your comment is unforgiveable!! Black families are incredibly more successful financially and academically since the beginning of the Great Society………….All ships have risen…………but much, much more to go!!!!

  4. Ken, have you looked at the out of wedlock birth rate? The black unemployment rate? The black high school graduation rate? The black on black crime rate? These have all gotten worse since the Great Society’s policies were put in place and marriage was discouraged by government economic incentives.

    1. And you blame these factors on the Great Society??? These factors are very sad…..but i think one needs to think a little harder before pinning those on the Great Society….i really doubt there were any valid statistics when we had a multitude of slums and ghettoes in all cities……….just for one small example, i went to Catholic HS and college in upstate NY citiy in the 50s. One black in the HS and one in 4 yrs of college……..today, i am sure those numbers are totally different

    2. After the start of the great society the out of wedlock birth rate shot through the roof. Furthermore in states where the LBJ programs were most generously supplemented by the local & state coffers – the impact was the greatest. The families most thoroughly destroyed by removing the need for a father are the in African American community.

      The great society was supposed to end poverty. The poverty rate today is just as high as it was prior to the creation of this misbegotten program. Considering how many trillions we have spent on building this highway to hell, maybe it is time to rethink the maxim of ‘throw money at the problem’, and return to the prior maxim “The U. S. Constitution doesn’t guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself.”

    3. I worked downtown in every major city in the US in the mid-sixties from SF to Boston and Minn to Dallas……..and saw for myself both ilving conditions and the burning of cities (i used to sit in bars on saturday nights of of main streets and watch the burnings on the 11 pm news at night!!). I have seen poverty in person in the times of which you discuss!!

    4. “I worked downtown in every major city in the US in the mid-sixties from SF to Boston and Minn to Dallas……..and saw for myself both ilving conditions and the burning of cities …I have seen poverty in person in the times of which you discuss!!”
      So you are now claiming to be the all seeing all knowing? Really? Like the rest of us have not seen the poverty?

      Delivered 2nd hand refrigerators and ovens into the projects in Brooklyn and Harlem. Worked as a cab driver and have covered every inch of NY along the way. I lived in NYC & Buffalo and have been to most the the cities on the East coast and CA. Plus more than few in the mid-west. But not everywhere. What I have seen is in a lot of places thing have gotten worse and in some it has gotten better. I do not claim to have been everywhere in every city. But I think I have seen enough oh omniscient one.

      ‘The Better’ typically happened when the local mayor was business friendly, like NYC as opposed to business unfriendly, like Philadelphia.

      The constant is the great society programs. when one adjusts for women entering the workforce, the end result is an adult workforce participation rate that is lower than ever, especially in the 20-35 bracket.

      The biggest impact of the great society has been on the culture. I remember as a kid many would prefer to work a second job before accepting a handout. This is called ‘a work ethic’. Nowadays we talk about ‘jobs Americans won’t do’ – this is called the destruction of the work ethic. That is the fruit of the poison tree we call great society.

    5. Thank you for recognizing my awesome background Robert. Sounds like you’ve been around the block yourself………I too have lived in Buffalo – for 10 years and NYC…………..one month a year for several years…..i try to be onmiscient!!! And thank you for noticing……but i do not claim to be all seeing and all knowing. Thank you too explaining your isolated view of the work ethic!!!

Comments are closed.