precisely, why are blacks democrats?
2006-08-28 04:37:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sharon C 2
·
3⤊
1⤋
We went through this once before. Republicans always support the rich, Democrats always the poor. Now at the time of the KKK forming, the Democrats were representing the poor Southerners (poor compared to the North) against the Rich north represented by the Republicans. This continued until around 1948, when the blacks had just finished showing what they could do in WWII (with the Tuskegee Airmen and continued advances in both army and navy). The blacks felt if they could die for this country, they should have a real hand in how it is run.
So they fought for their right to vote, in secret at first in 1945 and beyond, and later out in the open in the 60's. When they looked at the two parties and realized the Democrats were for supporting bigger federal government (which more often sided with the blacks on their rights than the states did), they chose to support the Democrats while those against the civil rights movement supported the Republicans (who supported more the state governments, which usually went against the civil rights movements). So the Democrat party that created the KKK no longer existed. It had become the Republican party.
Today, the Republican party is no longer the racist party it once was, nor is the Democrat party. to be racist now is political suicide anyway, every race has too much influence now to push any of them away. So the party that created the KKK, and the party that came to support the KKK later, neither exist anymore. The KKK is a fringe organization now with no real political support in any real government.
2006-08-28 04:43:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
the two the Dem's' and re pubs' can hardly agree on something even while they elect the comparable ingredient. till you bypass to c-span you will no longer see plenty insurance of one/3 social gathering applicants. super companies make extensive contributions to applicants they help,you're constrained in how plenty you may donate to a candidate individually. companies set up committees and communities to assist and fund applicants. the latest financial disaster rules have been written by the banking marketplace for congress to make into regulation and it bit them interior the butt. the different project is that some human beings vote for a million social gathering continually,the two because of the fact they help that social gathering continually and have self assurance that's the only social gathering to do whats suitable,or they are disappointed with the different social gathering for some reason. the two events elect it their way and could compromise some to get their way. If what I examine on the internet final evening is even a million/2 real,this election won't count number besides. If we've yet another attack like 9/11 or a substantial disaster earlier the elections F.E.M.A . will take administration and George Bush will develop into the real potential of government. If it happens after the elections and earlier the hot president takes place of work,i do no longer understand what's going to take place. G.W. signed an government order for the continuity of government and F.E.M.A. will take over and droop the form and the President stands out as the cohesion government. Congress and the final courtroom will nonetheless exist yet could have little or no voice,the President has the main suitable say in all concerns. there develop into additionally yet another internet site speaking regarding the formation of the North American Union (Canada,U.S. and Mexico forming a union like the E.U. and the U.S. shape would be long previous.
2016-12-11 16:41:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, kkk byrd was a member and hasn't renounced them. The kkk wasn't created by the Demos, but the kkk attracted them only, by a common vision. Also, we see the muslims (covert by the sword) attract islamo racists and europe via Germany and france in the hitlarian genocide cult. We DO have a pattern here, because of the alliance between them as currently seen as the demos have now expanded.
2006-08-28 05:16:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by ?Bob?NYC? 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes
However GEN. Nathan Bedford Forrest deserves the credit, not the Jackass party. Let be historically correct here. As for The Senator. He is a ex-member of the KKK. (for whatever thats worth). The party was inline with their views and after reconstruction helped push Jim Crow laws. The history of the group is far more complicated than your question portrays.
2006-08-28 05:33:20
·
answer #5
·
answered by lana_sands 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
another one of your "big lies".
Hitler wrote in his 1925 autobiography Mein Kampf (James Murphy translation, page 134):
All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes. ...
2006-08-28 05:38:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Bad M 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
YES!!! In the '20s and 30's was hey day of the KKK and the majority were DimocRATS!!!
2006-08-28 04:35:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by Vagabond5879 7
·
4⤊
2⤋
Yes, I knew it but all the libtards that I asked about it said that Bush was the reason they had to do it.
2006-08-28 05:09:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Didn't you ask this useless question before? If I not mistaken Sean Hannity made the same statement which means that your a plagiarist without any original thought.
2006-08-28 04:37:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by Charlooch 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
As a club for men
2006-08-28 05:01:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by ggraves1724 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yep, I've been well aware of that lil' tid' bit & I was not Surprised one bit.
The Hypocrits that preach tolerance, acceptance, diversity, understanding... ect. & say they are for the poor opressed people of color... LOL what a joke!...
They say all that ONLY to clear their guilty consience
The do what I say not what I do crowd...LOL
Hypocrits they Definatly are.
God Bless
2006-08-28 04:44:05
·
answer #11
·
answered by Joeysol'lady 3
·
2⤊
2⤋