Monday, January 17th, is MLK Day

You know that the democrats will try to get some traction on Monday. They will lie and blame everyone except the democrat party of the 60s. It was the democrat party who beat the Freedom marchers, it was the democrat party who put the dogs on the Freedom marchers, it was the democrat party who used water hoses on Americans wanting voting rights guaranteed, and it was the democrat party who tried to stop the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

You have completely lost all credibility. This photo happens to show a Democrat President with MLK on the signing of the civil rights act.

For a self proclaimed university history prof, he has a seriously sophomoric perspective on history.

Suppose he thinks everybody else is as ignorant as his “students.”

200 years ago, Republicans didn’t believe in electricity.

More education for barley






June 11 1963
Kennedy televised speech on civil rights




Good evening my fellow citizens:


This afternoon, following a series of threats and defiant statements, the presence of Alabama National Guardsmen was required on the University of Alabama to carry out the final and unequivocal order of the United States District Court of the Northern District of Alabama. That order called for the admission of two clearly qualified young Alabama residents who happened to have been born Negro.


That they were admitted peacefully on the campus is due in good measure to the conduct of the students of the University of Alabama, who met their responsibilities in a constructive way.


I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.


Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. And when Americans are sent to Viet-Nam or West Berlin, we do not ask for whites only. It ought to be possible, therefore, for American students of any color to attend any public institution they select without having to be backed up by troops.


It ought to be possible for American consumers of any color to receive equal service in places of public accommodation, such as hotels and restaurants and theaters and retail stores, without being forced to resort to demonstrations in the street, and it ought to be possible for American citizens of any color to register to vote in a free election without interference or fear of reprisal.


It ought to be possible, in short, for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color. In short, every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated. But this is not the case.


The Negro baby born in America today, regardless of the section of the Nation in which he is born, has about one-half as much chance of completing a high school as a white baby born in the same place on the same day, one-third as much chance of completing college, one-third as much chance of becoming a professional man, twice as much chance of becoming unemployed, about one-seventh as much chance of earning $10,000 a year, a life expectancy which is 7 years shorter, and the prospects of earning only half as much.


This is not a sectional issue. Difficulties over segregation and discrimination exist in every city, in every State of the Union, producing in many cities a rising tide of discontent that threatens the public safety. Nor is this a partisan issue. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics. This is not even a legal or legislative issue alone. It is better to settle these matters in the courts than on the streets, and new laws are needed at every level, but law alone cannot make men see right.


We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution.


The heart of the question is whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities, whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated. If an American, because his skin is dark, cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public, if he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if he cannot vote for the public officials who will represent him, if, in short, he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, then who among us would be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place? Who among us would then be content with the counsels of patience and delay?


One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free. They are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. They are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. And this Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free.


We preach freedom around the world, and we mean it, and we cherish our freedom here at home, but are we to say to the world, and much more importantly, to each other that this is the land of the free except for the Negroes; that we have no second-class citizens except Negroes; that we have no class or caste system, no ghettoes, no master race except with respect to Negroes?


Now the time has come for this Nation to fulfill its promise. The events in Birmingham and elsewhere have so increased the cries for equality that no city or State or legislative body can prudently choose to ignore them.


The fires of frustration and discord are burning in every city, North and South, where legal remedies are not at hand. Redress is sought in the streets, in demonstrations, parades, and protests which create tensions and threaten violence and threaten lives.


We face, therefore, a moral crisis as a country and as a people. It cannot be met by repressive police action. It cannot be left to increased demonstrations in the streets. It cannot be quieted by token moves or talk. It is time to act in the Congress, in your State and local legislative body and, above all, in all of our daily lives.


It is not enough to pin the blame on others, to say this is a problem of one section of the country or another, or deplore the fact that we face. A great change is at hand, and our task, our obligation, is to make that revolution, that change, peaceful and constructive for all.


Those who do nothing are inviting shame as well as violence. Those who act boldly are recognizing right as well as reality.


Next week I shall ask the Congress of the United States to act, to make a commitment it has not fully made in this century to the proposition that race has no place in American life or law. The Federal judiciary has upheld that proposition in a series of forthright cases. The executive branch has adopted that proposition in the conduct of its affairs, including the employment of Federal personnel, the use of Federal facilities, and the sale of federally financed housing.


But there are other necessary measures which only the Congress can provide, and they must be provided at this session. The old code of equity law under which we live commands for every wrong a remedy, but in too many communities, in too many parts of the country, wrongs are inflicted on Negro citizens and there are no remedies at law. Unless the Congress acts, their only remedy is in the street.


I am, therefore, asking the Congress to enact legislation giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public--hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments.


This seems to me to be an elementary right. Its denial is an arbitrary indignity that no American in 1963 should have to endure, but many do.


I have recently met with scores of business leaders urging them to take voluntary action to end this discrimination and I have been encouraged by their response, and in the last 2 weeks over 75 cities have seen progress made in desegregating these kinds of facilities. But many are unwilling to act alone, and for this reason, nationwide legislation is needed if we are to move this problem from the streets to the courts.


I am also asking the Congress to authorize the Federal Government to participate more fully in lawsuits designed to end segregation in public education. We have succeeded in persuading many districts to desegregate voluntarily. Dozens have admitted Negroes without violence. Today a Negro is attending a State-supported institution in every one of our 50 States, but the pace is very slow.


Too many Negro children entering segregated grade schools at the time of the Supreme Court's decision 9 years ago will enter segregated high schools this fall, having suffered a loss which can never be restored. The lack of an adequate education denies the Negro a chance to get a decent job.


The orderly implementation of the Supreme Court decision, therefore, cannot be left solely to those who may not have the economic resources to carry the legal action or who may be subject to harassment.


Other features will also be requested, including greater protection for the right to vote. But legislation, I repeat, cannot solve this problem alone. It must be solved in the homes of every American in every community across our country.


In this respect I want to pay tribute to those citizens North and South who have been working in their communities to make life better for all. They are acting not out of a sense of legal duty but out of a sense of human decency.


Like our soldiers and sailors in all parts of the world they are meeting freedom's challenge on the firing line, and I salute them for their honor and their courage.


My fellow Americans, this is a problem which faces us all--in every city of the North as well as the South. Today there are Negroes unemployed, two or three times as many compared to whites, inadequate in education, moving into the large cities, unable to find work, young people particularly out of work without hope, denied equal rights, denied the opportunity to eat at a restaurant or lunch counter or go to a movie theater, denied the right to a decent education, denied almost today the right to attend a State university even though qualified. It seems to me that these are matters which concern us all, not merely Presidents or Congressmen or Governors, but every citizen of the United States.


This is one country. It has become one country because all of us and all the people who came here had an equal chance to develop their talents.


We cannot say to 10 percent of the population that you can't have that right; that your children cannot have the chance to develop whatever talents they have; that the only way that they are going to get their rights is to go into the streets and demonstrate. I think we owe them and we owe ourselves a better country than that.


Therefore, I am asking for your help in making it easier for us to move ahead and to provide the kind of equality of treatment which we would want ourselves; to give a chance for every child to be educated to the limit of his talents.


As I have said before, not every child has an equal talent or an equal ability or an equal motivation, but they should have an equal right to develop their talent and their ability and their motivation, to make something of themselves.


We have a right to expect that the Negro community will be responsible, will uphold the law, but they have a right to expect that the law will be fair, that the Constitution will be color blind, as Justice Harlan said at the turn of the century.


This is what we are talking about and this is a matter which concerns this country and what it stands for, and in meeting it I ask the support of all our citizens.


Thank you very much.

Wouldn't the Trump rally on January 16 be just as important ?
Or the Trump January 6 press conference (got cancelled).
Or the Trump debate (didn't happen).
Or the Trump statement (at least 1 per week).


Except he is an ex President who can't stand to be left out and won't go away.
All of these are completely irrelevant. Originally Posted by VitaMan

BRANDON should go away...it would help to lower the "misery index"...I give BRANDON credit for putting in on steriods!!

A non post


BYEDON 2020

You have completely lost all credibility. This photo happens to show a Democrat President with MLK on the signing of the civil rights act.




Originally Posted by VitaMan

Whiff! and a miss! LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This is after he said (and I can't repeat it word for word), if we pass this (the Civil Rights Act), those N......s will be voting for us the next 200 years. That democrat?
The important take away (watch out, there is math involved), a greater percentage of republicans voted for the act then did democrats. In fact, Johnson gave credit to Illinois republican Senator Everett Dirksen for getting the votes to pass the act. It was notable democrats like Robert KKK Byrd (a personal favorite of Bill and Hillary and Joe) who tried to filibuster the bill.

"From the beginning, before the bill was even introduced in the House, Kennedy, and then Johnson, realized the success or failure of the bill rested upon the shoulders of one man, Everett McKinley Dirksen. Ironically, two Democratic presidents relied upon a Republican senator because they could not count on the support of Southern Democratic senators, most of whom supported segregation. Dirksen could deliver enough Republican votes to invoke cloture, thus limiting debate and vastly improving the chances of the bill's passage. In fact, if a senator was willing to vote for cloture he would also, in all probability, vote for the civil rights bill."

"The gallery was packed on June 10, 1964, as all one hundred senators were present for the climactic moment of the longest filibuster in Senate history. Late in the morning Everett Dirksen rose from his seat to address the Senate. In poor health, drained from working fourteen-, fifteen-, and sixteen-hour days, his words came quietly. "There are many reasons why cloture should be invoked and a good civil rights measure enacted. It is said that on the night he died, Victor Hugo wrote in his diary substantially this sentiment, 'Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come.' The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing of government, in education, and in employment. It must not be stayed or denied." After Dirksen spoke for fifteen minutes the motion for a roll call vote for cloture was heard. As each name was read, members of the press and spectators in the gallery kept tally. At 11:15 a.m., Senator John Williams of Delaware replied "aye" to the question. It was the sixty-seventh vote; cloture had passed, opening the way for the Civil Rights bill to be passed. After successfully defeating the eighty-three-day filibuster, Dirksen, when asked how he had become a crusader in this cause, replied, "I am involved in mankind, and whatever the skin, we are all included in mankind." Somewhat anticlimactically, the bill was signed into law by President Johnson on July 2, 1964."

From Illinois Periodicals Online https://www.lib.niu.edu/index.html

39% of democrats oppposed the bill in the House
20% of republicans opposed the bill in the House

31% of democrats opposed the bill in the Senate
18% of republicans opposed the bill in the Senate

Signed into law on July 2, 1964 eight months after the murder of JFK.

Go home little boy. You can't beat me at history.

This is 2022. Not 1962. Or 1865.

You can’t “beat” anybody at truth.

It’s gotta be after 5 where you are. Bottoms up!

This sounds like revisionist history. Better go back to your original post that started this issue. Are you still proud of that ? Probably should go back to the 1963 speech while you are at it.

You lost. Get used to failure. Joe has.

Here again is the photo of the signing of the Civil Rights Act.

That is a Democrat President signing it. That is MLK in the photo.
72 pens were used, since you like to delve into the minutia.


It would be good to see your comments on the comments you made that started this.
Instead, you start talking about...... Joe Biden ?

You have completely lost all credibility. This photo happens to show a Democrat President with MLK on the signing of the civil rights act.




Originally Posted by VitaMan

As that great Civil Rights Advocate Lyndon Johnson said…….”we will have those N…… voting Democrat for the next 100 years”

That's a photo of the Democrat President handing MLK one of the 72 pens used to sign the Civil Rights Act.


The impetus came from the previous Democrat President with his spellbinding televised speech of 1963 discussing civil rights.



Probably got a lot of voters to vote for Democrats too.

You do realize that there is no photo. You're just saying that there is one.

By the way, here's your ass. I found it over there.

There is a photo. I am looking at it right now.
It just is not showing up on your equipment. Maybe you are using a mobile phone.
It is a historical photo. You can easily find it elsewhere too.
A "historical" photo.
A photo is worth 1000 words. How many words is a "historical" photo worth ?


Barry Goldwater was the Republican nominee for President in 1964.
He opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
He lost to LBJ in the 1964 election by one of the largest margins in history.
On July 2 1964 the Civil Rights Act was signed into law.


Would you like to talk about your ass now ?

There is a photo. I am looking at it right now.
It just is not showing up on your equipment. Maybe you are using a mobile phone.
It is a historical photo. You can easily find it elsewhere too.
A "historical" photo.
A photo is worth 1000 words. How many words is a "historical" photo worth ?


Barry Goldwater was the Republican nominee for President in 1964.
He opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
He lost to LBJ in the 1964 election by one of the largest margins in history.
On July 2 1964 the Civil Rights Act was signed into law.


Would you like to talk about your ass now ? Originally Posted by VitaMan

so Goldwater is a racist for opposing the Civil Right Act?

you sure about that?

you defending the Deomcratic party for Civil Rights is laughable. the Democrats formed the KKK and Jim Crow. they are why segregation existed for 100 years in the US.

the Democratic party is more racist than Hitler and the NAZI party.