SubscribeHillary: LBJ, Not MLK Passed Civil Rights Act
From Fox News, via DailyMotion:
“Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964… It took a president to get it done.”
The DNC’s New York Times provides further details:
Clinton’s Civil Rights Lesson
By Sarah Wheaton
DOVER, N.H. — As they barnstorm through New Hampshire, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband are often introduced by supporters who once backed another candidate but converted to her cause.
Today, in Dover, Francine Torge, a former John Edwards supporter, said this while introducing Mrs. Clinton: “Some people compare one of the other candidates to John F. Kennedy. But he was assassinated. And Lyndon Baines Johnson was the one who actually” passed the civil rights legislation.
The comment, an apparent reference to Senator Barack Obama, is particularly striking given documented fears among blacks that Mr. Obama will be assassinated if elected…
Mrs. Clinton’s expression did not change noticeably when Ms. Torge made the comment.
Only a few hours later, she brought up the civil rights legislation herself in remarks to a Fox News correspondent.
Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama have been in a running feud arising from her suggestion at Saturday’s debate that he was raising “false hope.”
Mr. Obama responded that Mr. Kennedy did not decide going to the moon was a false hope and that Martin Luther King, Jr. did not see ending segregation as such.
“Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act,” Mrs. Clinton said when asked about Mr. Obama’s rejoinder by Fox’s Major Garrett after her speech in Dover. “It took a president to get it done.” …
Later, during an appearance in Salem, Mrs. Clinton refined her remarks on Fox:
“You know, today Senator Obama used President John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to criticize me. He basically compared himself to our greatest heroes because they gave great speeches.
“President Kennedy was in Congress for 14 years. He was a war hero. He was a man of great accomplishments and readiness to be president. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led a movement. He was gassed. He was beaten. He was jailed. And he gave a speech that was one of the most beautifully, profoundly important speeches ever written in America, the “I have a dream” speech.
“And then he worked with President Johnson to get the civil rights laws passed, because the dream couldn’t be realized until finally it was legally permissible for people of all colors and backgrounds and races and ethnicities to be accepted as citizens.
“I’m running for president because I believe that there is not a contradiction between experience and change.”
Some might say that Mrs. Clinton was belittling Mr. King’s role with her remarks. Perhaps she was. It is a muddled statement anyway, since if Mr. Obama wins, he will be President.
However, it is interesting to recall that at the time of the voting rights act, the young Diane Rodham was an adamant “Goldwater girl.” And lest we forget, Mr. Goldwater was one of the few Republicans to actually oppose said Civil Rights Act.
Indeed, Ms Rodham actually increased her campaign work for candidate Goldwater after having heard Mr. King speak, which she now describes as a life-changing experience.
Of course Diane Hillary can blame this on youthful indiscretion. But still, there it is.
Apart from all of this, who knows what to make of this bizarre line:
The comment, an apparent reference to Senator Barack Obama, is particularly striking given documented fears among blacks that Mr. Obama will be assassinated if elected.
One suspects it’s another way for our moral betters at The Times to suggest we Americans are all a bunch of murderous racists who would kill the first black man who had the temerity to be elected President.
(Thanks to YoungJim for the heads up.)
10 Responses to “Hillary: LBJ, Not MLK Passed Civil Rights Act”
Leave a Reply
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.
January 8th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
One suspects it’s another way for our moral betters at The Times to suggest we Americans are all a bunch of murderous racists who would kill the first black man who had the temerity to be elected President.
No, it’s a blatant attempt to shill for Shrillary by suggesting that a vote for Obama is a vote for a dead man walking. The Times wants you to believe, after all, that outside NYC the country is full of bile-spewing crackers, rope-chewing rednecks, howling Klansmen and ‘bacca-chewing sharpshooters with mighty itchy trigger-fingers jes’ a-hankering to murder unblack black presidents. So play it safe and vote for a (literally) “viable” candidate. Of course, if there’s actual racism at work here, it’s in the NYT ’s editorial offices.
January 8th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Excuse me wasn’t Hillary a GOLDWATER gal during this time period?!?! Talk about rewriting history. The smartest woman in the world being outsmarted by a stinky, snory Barack Obama. LOL
January 8th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Oh the NYT is right on the assassination but it won’t be at the hands of the drooling, inbred racists who live in the flyover states - it is going to be from Jihad Joe who is po’d that a murtadd (apostate) is sitting in the American White House. BO can say whatever he wants, but he was born from a Muslim father (who also ‘abandoned’ the faith), had a Muslim step-father and attended mosque while growing up (even if it was sporadically) - who now ‘claims’ to be Christian. To a radical islamic terrorist - BO is actually the epitome of what he hates most - a rich, educated, powerful American who turned his life away from the Muslim heritage that was his. . .That is a time bomb that never, ever should be allowed to tick at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
However, leave it to fiberal NYTs to imply that white Americans are the real racists in America.
And yes, the Hildabeast was a Goldwater Gal and got it all wrong - LBJ was forced to accept the civil rights - he did not go quietly to that end.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
It seems everyone has this history wrong. Truman issued an executive order integrating the US military and Ike nationalized the Arkansas National Guard to force desegregation in Little Rock schools. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was the culmination of a long struggle. Ironically, up to that point black Americans were making great progress socially, culturally, economically and politically. After 1964, it all started going down hill fast, e.g. illegitimacy rates were basically the same across races, now black have a rate of nearly 70%. Many black-owned businesses flourished, but after the Civil Rights Act, their loyal customer base abandoned them. These days you don’t find many African American owned businesses any more. Once there were black newspapers with excellent writers and good reporting catering to an urbane, literate audience of African Americans. They’re gone now for the most part. In their place we have gangster rap and a depraved street culture. To read, write, and otherwise excel at school is to sell out to the Man; to be an Uncle Tom.
Today more than 90% of African Americans vote Democratic. You get the government you elect.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Technically, Hillary is right. MLK had neither the power or the position to enact the CRA. Only an elected official, such as those in Congress and the Senate, had the ability to write the bill and only the President (LBJ, another elected official) had the right to sign it into law. MLK could march, petition, demand, and bring to light the bill but he had no “technical” ability to pass it into law.
Wardmama is right. Obama, born of a Muslim father, is considered an apostate. What a coup that would be for the jihadist to be able to show the world that apostacy will not be tolerated, not even by the leader of the free world.
Here is what I am predicting: Hillary will lose to Obama and after the conventions, we will learn what an empty suit Obama really is. No record, no acheivements, nada. By then, it will be too late. Not one article about Obama will surface that shows him in a bad light because it will be considered “racist” to question the records, history and extended family of a [half] black man that gives no credit to the white grandparents that raised him. He will carry the minority vote simply because of his color, not his record. And we will wish we had Hillary back (since she could be defeated by a good Repubican who would be willling to put her feet in the fire during debates) since Obama remains just left of Marx.
I am warning all of you; while I understand your desire to be done with the Clinton’s, be careful what you wish for. The alternative is worse.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
If I understand the facts, Republicans in Congress “passed” the Civil Rights Act.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
05–
Being careful of what you wish for cuts many ways. I, for one, would rather be absolutely certain that Billary never makes it to the White House. Suppose your “good Republican” isn’t quite good enough?
January 8th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Eva - I agree with the points you made re the black community and Civil Rights - which makes me wonder why anyone would vote for any Democrat law/bill/scam/scheme/idea - as all it does is raise taxes through the roof and cause 10 times the problems it was meant to correct.
I also have to wonder - if the Muslims of America aren’t possibly pushing Obama just to create the ‘circumstances’ that would allow a jihad in America?
I truly wonder at any who would vote for Obama simply because he is ‘black’ or Clinton simply because she is supposedly a woman - it demeans politics and the POTUS to immature and stupid levels - I guess that is why the msm promotes those two ideas frequently.
January 8th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
U NO HOO, yes, it was with the help of Replicans that LBJ got the CRA passed. Almost to a man, southern Democrats voted against it, except for one, Ralph Yarborough of Texas.
6th Column: I think the Republicans actually have a chance to beat Hillary. Obama is a train that cannot be stopped. The one thing I have hear Democrats say in Iowa and N.H. is that, while they may like Hillary, they think Obama is “electable”. Now, to me, who has been involved in elections and politics for more years than I care to admit to, that means that they think Obama a) doesn’t have the baggage Hillary has (pretty hard to fight when his records from Illinois were never saved) and b) he can talk his way right to the Oval Office.
Don’t be fooled. Democrats are pretty clueless to the issues if you get beyond sound bites. Just talk to a liberal friend and see if you get offered facts or talking points. My guess is the latter. Democrats are basically emotion. Who promises them the most stuff for free (i.e. free health care, free this, free that)0 without ever thinking that it is the TAXPAYER who pays the bills and soon or later that will mean them.
Perception is 90% of the Democratic vote. And Obama is perceived to be the person to bring them closer to their “all Americans are [financially] equal” goals.
I hope I am wrong in my predictions. But I don’t think I am. I predicted to many friends that the election in ‘04 would wind up contested, in courts and with the Democrats screaming how it was stolen if Bush won re-election. I was right. Let’s hope this time I am wrong.
January 9th, 2008 at 1:32 am
wm4 - As many who vote on identity politics, i.e. race, gender or religion, or in this case an African American, a woman, a Baptist minister, or a Mormon, there will be an equal number who will vote against for this very same reason. A candidate ultimately must stand on issues, which is why I’m not worried about this election.