Why do Democrats claim the moral high ground on civil rights?

Question

Civil Rights Act of 1964 vote by party:

The original House version:
Democratic Party: 153-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-22 (68%-32%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%

As you can see a much higher percentage of Republicans voted for the bill.

Please don't give me the lame comment about racists moving to the Republican party. As long as you've got a former officer of the KKK in the senate, in Robert Byrd D-WV, that argument doesn't fly.

Lies and misinformation are the Decmocrat Party.

Answer 1

It's part of their scheme: Why tell the truth when a perfectly good lie will do?

Answer 2

With the passage of the civil rights bill of 1964, LBJ lost the Dixiecrats of the southern states who joined the GOP soon after that vote. People like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, Phil Gramm of Texas, were all Dixiecrats and advocates of Segregation and they became GOP. There are still conservative dems in the party but they are called Blue Dog Democrats and most of them are from the south. If you can't accept that as historical fact, then why should anyone answer your question because it's based on a false premise. The fact remains that neither party, the Dems or the GOP are anything like they used to be. The GOP certainly is not the party of Lincoln anymore. And, the Democratic party certainly is not dominated by the South or the Segregationists anymore. Ask Trent Lott and Haley Barber what white supremicist organization they do fund raisers for and speeches for, and then come back and ask that question.
Here's a hint: They are an elitist group that is much like the KKK. They are called Council of Conservative Citizens.

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/CCCitizens.asp?xpicked=3&item=12
http://www.sptimes.com/2002/12/22/Columns/LeRoy_Collins__Trent_.shtml

Answer 3

As you can see, more Democrats voted FOR the bills in each case than voted against it.

Or you can look at the fact that 153 of the 291 (or 53% in the House) and 46 of the 73 (or 63% in the Senate) of those who voted for the bill were Democrats.

You can spin the numbers any way you want.

You can also look at who sponsored the bill, and who drafted the bill. Or the fact that the people in office 40+ years ago had a different political make-up than the people in office now -- even though the names of the parties have not changed.

Those statistics don't prove anything about the current situation, and can be read many different ways about the past situation.

Answer 4

You have got to be kidding , I know you hate to see Hillary Clinton become President , but that is exactly what your going to see. The African Americans will tell you that Bill Clinton was in their estimation, the first Black President. I just don't get you Republicans , before you speak badly about any President Elect or party just take a look at what you have in the White House at this time. The worst President ever the party that is so against the Black and dig up all this numbers that you can't prove. Went to all this trouble just trying to be prove a point that you have failed badly doing.

Robert Byrd is very older man with a brilliant mind, he lived in the days of KKK but I have never heard him say one word against the black. Trent Lott your former leader that lost his seat as head of the Republican Senate is the one that went all over the TV apologizing for using bad language on Black People, tell it like it is sometimes instead of all these untrue figures.

Answer 5

I will give you the comment about racists moving to the Republicans, because it's the truth. And I'd take a FORMER Klansman like Byrd, who repented his past, over Trent Lott, who STILL thinks the nation would have been better off with segregationist Strom Thurmond as President instead of Harry Truman. Byrd hasn't thought like that for decades, Lott still does. And as long as people like Lott are still in GOP leadership positions, the Democrats will continue to have the moral high ground on civil rights.

Answer 6

The two major parties today are MUCH different than they were in the 1960s. The differences between the parties were, in actuality, much less than they are today.

If you think about it, from a fiscal Republican point of view (which the GOP does not represent anymore), encouraging the civil rights act was more cost efficient in the long run when it came to infrastructure and the lack of pointless laws to have to be enforced.

Answer 7

Southern Dems at the time were only Dems because they associated Lincoln and the GOP with the War Between the States. They were much more conservative then. However, LBJ, who was also a Southerner, pushed for civil rights and the war on poverty, thus associating dems with the civil rights movement.

Answer 8

Because they care about their image, not because they care about the issue. i.e., drivers of Prius reasons #1 answer:

The firm's research concluded that more customers pick the Prius over alternatives like the hybrid version of the Honda Civic precisely because the Prius is exclusively -- and identifiably -- a hybrid. While just 36 percent cited fuel economy as a prime motivator for buying a Prius, 57 percent said their main reason was that "it makes a statement about me."

Answer 9

The democratic party always starts the fights for civil and human rights. They stand for the working class and they try to make it better for the people who live poorly. They've raised the minimum wage and have worked for same sex marriages. They open the eyes to the democratic party who always stands for the status quo.

Answer 10

In case you missed it, it's 2007, and Republicans are responsible for the lies that led to countless needless deaths in Iraq.....want to point the finger at who's lying and misleading? Look in the mirror! You're just mad your party is a dying breed!

Answer 11

And let's not forget that George "Segregation Forever!" Wallace never left the Democrat party, either.