But with a statement like “Rep. Foxx is only the most recent Republican to push what is at best a distortion of the truth about which political party is responsible for getting civil rights laws like the Voting Rights Act of 1965 through Congress.”, you should see why I may have thought that you meant that Republicans did not have a hand in the Civil Rights Act of 1965.

You said, “which political party is responsible”….
That infers that you agree that Democrats are “responsible” for it.

It's your writing. I'm not a “loyal” democrat, Kat. I know both parties have good people in them. I also know that most on both sides are corrupt, self-serving, jerks.

That's not what Foxx said. She did not say that “BOTH parties Republican and Democrat had a share in the civil rights movement and the ensuing legislation.” She said that “we [Republicans] were the ones who passed the civil rights bills back in the sixties without very much help from our colleagues across the aisle, they love to engage in revisionist history.”

Are you trying to tell me that you know that Republicans voted for civil rights legislation for political reasons only, and the omnipotent Democratic Party did it just because it was the right thing to do?

No — huh? and lol. I am saying that the Republican Party, during the Nixon and then during the Reagan campaigns for the Presidency, devised a strategy now called the “Southern strategy,” which was intended to draw, or lure, Southern white Democrats (Dixiecrats) into the Republican Party by appealing to their racist feeling and their anger at the civil rights gains that black Americans had made as a result of the civil rights movement. It worked. The Southern Democrats (Dixiecrats) all (or mostly) became Republicans.

The Southern Strategy happened AFTER the civil rights movement and all the historic legislation had been passed, JD. After. Understand?

I'm going to switch gears now, leave my comments about the Southern Strategy, and go back to the civil rights era now — so this part that I'm about to say is not about the Southern Strategy, it's about before that, during the civil rights era, when the civil rights legislation was being passed:

Talking about the sixties, and the passage of civil rights legislation now, I did not say that Republicans “voted for civil rights legislation for political reasons only and the omnipotent Democratic Party did it just because it was the right thing to do.” Here is what I said, and here is what I will say again: Republican support for historic civil rights legislation came from Republicans in Northern states. Those were almost all Northern Republicans who voted FOR civil rights legislation. They did not vote that way for political reasons; they voted that way because they believed in civil rights. But they were *Northern Republicans.* They were also part of a segment of the Republican Party that doesn't exist anymore: moderate Republicans.

In the South, most Southern whites were Democrats (and those were the Democrats who later left the Democratic Party for the Republican Party because the Republican Party positioned itself as the party of disaffected white Southern racists) but there were some white Republicans too, and in the South most white lawmakers, both Democrats AND Republicans, voted AGAINST civil rights legislation.

I've tried to make this as clear as possible, so that there is no possibility of misunderstanding, and so that you can disagree with what I actually said and not with what I did not say. I hope it works, but I'm not very optimistic at this point.

Which is why Virginia Foxx had a point in that BOTH parties Republican and Democrat had a share in the civil rights movement and the ensuing legislation. You are the one dogging her for being a revisionist. That's simply not the case. Thus, your assertion is false.

“They did so in response to a political decision made by Nixon and, after him, Reagan, to appeal to Southern white racism “

Are you trying to tell me that you know that Republicans voted for civil rights legislation for political reasons only, and the omnipotent Democratic Party did it just because it was the right thing to do?
Come on, Kat.

Obviously, I know that Southern Dixiecrats became Republicans, since I'm the one who said in this post.They did so in response to a political decision made by Nixon and, after him, Reagan, to appeal Southern white racism and position themselves as the party where Southern white anger at civil rights legislation and the end of Jim Crow segregation could find a sympathetic hearing.

Southern Dixiecrats took their white supremacist racism with them into the Republican Party, and although that racism has mellowed and gotten a lot subtler for the most part, it still significantly governs and underlies Republican thinking and Republican philosophy and policies.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a registered Republican.
This is important because Kathy, with her rant against Republican Virginia Foxx, supports that the Democratic Party is the primary player in the history of civil rights.

The only Republicans who stood against civil rights (for the most part) were the democrats that switched to the GOP after the democrats announced support. Prior to that moment, both parties supported civil rights. Abraham Lincoln (another “worthless” Republican) is another example of an early Republican civil rights leader.

I stated that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican who happened to be the BIGGEST CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER IN US HISTORY!.

“And likewise for me, of course. But if you ever decide you prefer contemporary humanistic Democratic values to the Southern Dixiecrat values of the pre-civil rights Old South, you will be welcomed.”

Southern “Dixiecrats” became Republicans, Kathy. Meanwhile, the rest of the Democratic party in the 60's were still God-fearing people who thought that running the country was “for the people”. YOUR people hijacked the party shortly thereafter with a complete agenda to:

1). Promote homosexuality.
2). Remove God from ever fiber of American culture.
3). Make pagan/humanist living the “norm”.
4). Revise Constitutional intent and legislate through the courts.

We ORIGINAL democrats believe in serving the person and not the corporation (as it should be).
We ORIGINAL democrats believe in God, and in His guidance of our nation.
We ORGINAL democrats believe in helping out those that cannot help themselves.

Your brand of Democrat is a Godless and visionless herd of humanists.

No thanks.

Apparently, that little detail doesn't interest you in reference to the subject of this post.

When was that? Give me the date range.

JD: “Thank goodness for that! If my beliefs were as humanistic as those of Pelosi and Reid, I'd have to go ahead and swallow a bullet. We 'Southern democrats' are actually proud that we aren't like the scumbag 'democrats of today' in DC.”

KK: Self-awareness is a beautiful thing. As contradictory as it may seem, though, it's possible to be self-aware and truthful, and not be aware of the implications of one's own self-awareness or truthfulness at the same time. You are living proof.

JD: “That's the nicest thing you've said, Kathy.”

And likewise for me, of course. But if you ever decide you prefer contemporary humanistic Democratic values to the Southern Dixiecrat values of the pre-civil rights Old South, you will be welcomed.

Really, JD. I do have to remember that. Maybe I'll say that in a post someday.

Even Martin Luther King Jr. was Republican.

MLK, Jr. supported the presidencies of JFK and LBJ. I don't know what it is you're talking about here, but that's nothing new.

“Then we should by all means be talking about the parties in power during the Civil War (and its lead up), as well.” **

The problem with these statements is the assumption that because Republicans (at least Foxx — but I've seen it many times) are trying to paint themselves as the now and forever torch-bearers of civil rights that Democrats are trying to do the same. Criticizing the statement made by Foxx in no way implies anything about what Democrats have been historically. At least those of us who know enough history to rebutt Foxx also know that having a D in front of your name has, at many times in American history, meant fighting *against* civil rights.

It would certainly, however, be fair to say that *today's* Democratic Party is much more focused on upholding civil rights than the *today's* Republican Party.

**Polimom — Perhaps I'm misinterpreting your statement; if so, my apologies.