Criminal history of the Democratic Party

[_bcspace]

The entire history of the Democratic Party is one of crime and corruption, according to former Time magazine associate editor Michael Walsh.

In a radio interview with WND's Greg Corombos, Walsh provides a detailed analysis of the party's dark past – from Aaron Burr's building of Tammany Hall and how Democrats tried to defeat Abraham Lincoln's re-election bid to Franklin Roosevelt's rise to the presidency and the Chicago machine connected to the Obama administration.

"What distinguishes them is a real desire to win," he explained. "They're the oldest party in the country obviously. ...

"They've stayed because they know how to win, and they're willing to change at the drop of a hat. They're willing to change their policies. They've gone from being the party of slavery and segregation to now claiming to be the party of civil rights laws passed in '64 and '65, when, in fact, those were passed with greater Republican support than Democrat support. But they're always mutating and trying to grab the moral high ground. And it seems to me they don't have any moral high ground."

......................

"But the party has always been in bed with this sort of criminal element, and sometimes a seditious criminal element. That was also true in the Roosevelt administration, where a number of Roosevelt administration officials turned out, subsequently, to have been Soviet agents of influence. Again, it's not a pretty sight."

......................
"There's always this sub current running underneath the Democratic presidents," Walsh said. "The party got seized in 1968 in the streets of Chicago during the riots … and is now basically turned into the McGovern-Alinsky group that runs the country today."

In his book, "The People v. the Democratic Party," Walsh writes, "With Obama in office, all Washington is a skating rink on which characters like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd turn triple-Lutzes while their media cronies applaud like the Harvard-trained seals that many of them are."

In the WND interview, Walsh indicted his former colleagues in the mainstream media for doing little more than carrying water for their preferred candidates and issues.

"What's left of the mainstream media is a pretty hard-core group of leftists whose life's work and ambition is to promote their agenda," he said. "And they're doing a good job of it. It's just that they're losing their influence, and I think they'll continue to lose it as the public realizes they're not playing straight with them anymore."

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/ex-time-editor-dem-party-criminal-organization/

Can you say "Gaddianton Robbers"?

[Guest]

The entire history of the Democratic Party is one of crime and corruption, according to former Time magazine associate editor Michael Walsh.

When Mr. Walsh was at Time, he was a associate editor for music, so I guess that's what him as a political analyst.

"They've stayed because they know how to win, and they're willing to change at the drop of a hat. They're willing to change their policies. They've gone from being the party of slavery and segregation to now claiming to be the party of civil rights laws passed in '64 and '65, when, in fact, those were passed with greater Republican support than Democrat support.

So changing 'at the drop of a hat' means reversing on Civil Rights and segregation in less than a century. That hat sure takes a long time to drop!

Yes. a greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act, but the Civil Rights Act would not have passed without Lyndon Johnson's support. Johnson knew that this would be the end of the Democratic coalition built by Roosevelt. When he signed the act into law, he famously told an aide "we've lost the South for a generation". Later that night he told Bill Moyers "We just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time."

Hardly an act of political expediency.

It's also interesting to note that the 1964 Republican nominee, Barry Goldwater, father of the modern Republican Conservative movement, voted against the Civil Rights Act.

I'm just always amazed to hear the same people who say America is the greatest country in the world, a shining city on a hill and a light and beacon for all humanity at the same time say that we've had 14 Presidents that have been members of a secret criminal society. How can we be such a great country if 14 of our Presidents have belonged to such an evil organization?

So it goes if you live in a binary nation, where half of America is evil. I don't know why we even bother with elections. We should just have a Republican primary.

Can you say "Gaddianton Robbers"?

Yup. I can spell it, too.

[_palerobber]

i didn't read your OP, bcspace, but i was just wondering:
are you one of these republicans that shows up at political rallies of the opposite party and acts like a dick in the hopes that someone will steal your sign or pour a drink on your head and then you can run cry about it to the wingnut blogs?

[_Droopy]

Yes. a greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act, but the Civil Rights Act would not have passed without Lyndon Johnson's support.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed at all without the Republican party of the era. That's the reality.

Johnson knew that this would be the end of the Democratic coalition built by Roosevelt. When he signed the act into law, he famously told an aide "we've lost the South for a generation". Later that night he told Bill Moyers "We just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time."

Hardly an act of political expediency.

Hardly matters, as they came to utterly dominate the large urban areas in the big states along the Atlantic coast, west coast, and the industrial Great Lakes states where all the population and electoral votes are. They also tend to dominate in the big farm belt states, where they have a lock on much of the population through various farm subsidies and gratuities.

It's also interesting to note that the 1964 Republican nominee, Barry Goldwater, father of the modern Republican Conservative movement, voted against the Civil Rights Act.

And do you know why? Nice tactic to just make a statement like that without context or elucidation.

I'm just always amazed to hear the same people who say America is the greatest country in the world, a shining city on a hill and a light and beacon for all humanity at the same time say that we've had 14 Presidents that have been members of a secret criminal society. How can we be such a great country if 14 of our Presidents have belonged to such an evil organization?

No party is the Declaration or the Constitution, nor the bulk of the American people, who are the core of that shining city, not government.

So it goes if you live in a binary nation, where half of America is evil. I don't know why we even bother with elections. We should just have a Republican primary.

No, that would be a one party state - the kind of state the Democrats have been pining after for generations. That's not conservative's cup of tea, being who they are.

[_moksha]

Yes. a greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act, but the Civil Rights Act would not have passed without Lyndon Johnson's support.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed at all without the Republican party of the era. That's the reality.

That set in motion the all Democrat south converting to the Republican party, because they resented the northerners of Democratic Party for pushing this law from start to finish. Fortunately the Utah Republican delegation remained true and voted against that "communist" inspired Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Bill was originally called for by President Kennedy. President Lyndon Johnson used his congressional judo abilities to keep it on track with the help of Senate Democratic Whip Hubert Humphrey who acted as the major sponsor for this legislation.

With the conversion of the Dixiecrats, the Republican Party was able to rise again.

by the way, all those voting Republicans would have been targeted for elimination by today's Tea Party.

[_MeDotOrg]

Yes. a greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act, but the Civil Rights Act would not have passed without Lyndon Johnson's support.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed at all without the Republican party of the era. That's the reality.

Vote totals
Totals are in "Yea–Nay" format:
The original House version: 290–130 (69–31%).
Cloture in the Senate: 71–29 (71–29%).
The Senate version: 73–27 (73–27%).
The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289–126 (70–30%).

By party
The original House version:[16]
Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)
Cloture in the Senate:[17]
Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
The Senate version:[16]
Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[16]
Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)

Can we agree that BOTH parties were needed?

Johnson knew that this would be the end of the Democratic coalition built by Roosevelt. When he signed the act into law, he famously told an aide "we've lost the South for a generation". Later that night he told Bill Moyers "We just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time."

Hardly an act of political expediency.

Hardly matters, as they came to utterly dominate the large urban areas in the big states along the Atlantic coast, west coast, and the industrial Great Lakes states where all the population and electoral votes are.

Hardly matters? Look at the electoral Maps from every Presidential election since 1872. Even when the Democrats lost in a landslide, they still carried the Deep South. The Deep South was the CORE of the party. Since 1872, no Republican carried the Deep South until Barry Goldwater in 1964. Do a google search for "Republican Southern Strategy'. Look at the electoral maps of Presidential elections since 1964 and tell me it 'hardly matters'.

They also tend to dominate in the big farm belt states, where they have a lock on much of the population through various farm subsidies and gratuities.

From 1995 through 2009, seven states received 42% of agricultural subsidies:

Texas - 9.4%
Iowa - 8.5%
Illinois - 7.1%
Minnesota - 5.8%
Nebraska - 5.7%
Kansas - 5.5%
North Dakota - 4.7%

Four of those states are Republican. Agriculture is AgriBUSINESS. If you want to stop a farm subsidy, it's not the private farmer you worry about. It's Archer Daniels Midland, Con Agra or General Mills.

It's also interesting to note that the 1964 Republican nominee, Barry Goldwater, father of the modern Republican Conservative movement,voted against the Civil Rights Act.

And do you know why? Nice tactic to just make a statement like that without context or elucidation.

The context was that article paints the Republican party as being the long-time proponent of Civil Rights, while at the same time ignoring that 1964 Presidential nominee was against the Civil Rights Act. Since 1872, no Republican candidate won the Deep South until Barry Goldwater in 1964, That's a heck of a lot of context.

I'm just always amazed to hear the same people who say America is the greatest country in the world, a shining city on a hill and a light and beacon for all humanity at the same time say that we've had 14 Presidents that have been members of a secret criminal society. How can we be such a great country if 14 of our Presidents have belonged to such an evil organization?

No party is the Declaration or the Constitution, nor the bulk of the American people, who are the core of that shining city, not government.

Interesting answers, but they dance around the point: At one time or another, a 'bulk' of Americans have thought of themselves as being either Democrat or Reppublican. Saying that 'no party is the Declaration or the Constituion' who are the core of that shining city, not government' is ignoring the fact that the government is the statutory expression of the will of the people. So if the majority of people in 14 Presidential elections have voted for a "party of crime and corruption', how can we considered a great nation?

[_bcspace]

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/obama%E2%80%99s-college-classmate-the-obama-scandal-is-at-columbia/