Play games all you like, schoolyard retard. How do you know he was a din-otard (whatever that is) when he died? How do you know anything besides calling people names and cutting and pasting shit that you think supports your name calling agenda?
Fact is, your argument, like most of them, is irrelevant to the topic. Another opportunity to display your superior vocabulary.
My point is valid. Political parties --OK, asshole-- 40 years ago are not the same as they are today. It's ancient history, and arguing if over who was what in -OK asshole- 1972, is irrelevant as it pertains to the OP, which is the shootings by that Neo-Nazi crackpot in Overland Park KS, and, more importantly, the stream of douchenozzles who stampeded to politicize the tragedy.
Please try and answer with relevance.
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider
Wallace likely died a Democrat (yikes, I just sided with IBS on something) and he was a Dem in his last term as governor it appears, but it is irrelevant as Yssup says...
"In the 1982 Alabama gubernatorial Democratic primary, Wallace's main opponents were Lieutenant Governor
George McMillan and Alabama House Speaker
Joe McCorquodale. In the primary, McCorquodale was eliminated, and the vote went to a runoff, with Wallace holding a slight edge over McMillan. Wallace won the Democratic nomination by a margin of 51 to 49 percent. In the general election, his opponent was Montgomery Republican Mayor
Emory Folmar. Polling experts at first thought the 1982 election was the best chance since Reconstruction for a Republican to be elected as governor of Alabama. Ultimately, though, it was Wallace, not Folmar, who made the victory speech on election night."
Because he did repent his racism.
"In the late 1970s, Wallace announced that he was a
born-again Christian and apologized to black civil rights leaders for his past actions as a segregationist. He said that while he had once sought power and glory, he realized he needed to seek love and forgiveness. In 1979, Wallace said of his stand in the schoolhouse door: "I was wrong. Those days are over, and they ought to be over." "
IMHO Wallace was right at least once in his life (about like a broken clock). These arguments over which party is racist and which is not are stupid because parties change and people change. The proof is in the actions (and speech behind closed doors sometimes too). Wallace's actions support the contention that is disavowal of racism was genuine.
"Wallace's final term as governor (1983–1987) saw a record number of black appointments to state positions,
[54] including, for the first time, two black members in the same cabinet, a number that has been equaled but never surpassed."
Bottom line, LBJ passed civil rights legislation in 1964 & 65 which started a big migration of Dixiecrats to the Republican party (OK, not all, but most), then the Republicans instituted the Southern strategy and ever since Republicans have traded on being the party of Lincoln and civil rights from 1865 to 1965 and used
transference to try to avoid the "racist" label ever since.
Transference = Republicans accuse Democrats of being racist (or Nazis, socialists, communists, KKK, etc...) to divert attention from their own party (and its policies and actions since 1965). It's like a spouse that is having an affair and accusing their mate of having one first just to get over on the argument.
Now you can talk all you want about welfare really being racist (but there are more poor white people than black people - though not by %) or affirmative action, but then you have to defend doing nothing after 400+ years of overt and institutional racism as being the right approach to right the wrongs of the past. Just like the "repeal and replace" propaganda over PPACA, Republicans want to get rid of welfare and affirmative action but "do nothing" is their replacement plan to right any wrongs (translation, they don't want to fix anything, status quo is what they want).
In the end it should come down to a discussion of philosophy and policy over whether we should attempt to right past wrongs to make a better society (in a possibly wrong way and certainly make mistakes along the way), do nothing, or work covertly to reverse things where possible which is what it appears those labeled conservatives (who in my estimation are really reactionaries much of the time) are really trying to do.