Cenk Uygur (Huff Post): What Fox News Would Have Done to Rosa Parks

[Jack Rabbit]

From The Huffington Post
Dated Friday August 12

What Fox News Channel Would Have Done to Rosa Parks
By Cenk Uygur

Cindy Sheehan – in case you’ve been living in a box or you only watch the mainstream media – is the mom of slain Iraq War veteran Casey Sheehan. She is protesting in front of George Bush’s Crawford ranch this month. This grieving mom has been characterized as a flip-flopper, accused of putting on a public circus, lambasted as a publicity seeking grandstander and criticized for not truly speaking for her family since an aunt and a godmother Matt Drudge found somewhere in the Sheehan family disagrees with her. The conservative attack machine is in high gear in the efforts to tear this woman down.

That made me think of how it would have been in the Civil Rights era if Fox News Channel, Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge and the rest of the gang were around back then.

O’Reilly: “Rosa Parks claims she speaks for all of the African-Americans in the South, but in fact, we have found two African-Americans who say they disagree with her. They say she’s just trying to gain publicity and doesn’t speak for anyone in her race. They would know, they’re black” . . . .

Drudge: “We have found three members of the Parks family who say that Rosa doesn’t speak for them. That, in fact, they are very happy with the government of the state of Alabama. The uncle, step-brother-in-law and niece three-times removed all agree that the better route is a dignified, respectful silent deference to authority. Developing …”

Read more.

Something for those of us critical of the "librul media".

[keta11]

1. How true n/t

[susu369]

2. Deserves a big kick

:kick:

[KoKo]

3. Actually, if one reads accounts of that time...that's exactly what many in

the South did say about Rosa Parks. They haven't changed, the angry racists of the Repug party. They use the same tricks that have worked for them in the past...even the tricks that failed for them in the past are used. These tricks transcend party lines. They can be used by Dems or Repugs...it's the kind of person who stoops so low to villify anyone who disagrees with them. George Wallace (before his conversion) and many others were vile and vicious. And, the Southern newspapers were the Drudge and Faux of their time.

[Jack Rabbit]

4. Historical point

EDITED for typing

In 1955, almost all White Southerners were Democrats. The GOP in those days was still the party of Lincoln. Of course, most Southern Blacks weren't even registered to vote. Formal and informal obstacles were erected to prevent Southern Blacks from voting.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed over the objections of Southern segregationist Democrats like James Eastland and Strom Thurmond; most Republicans voted in favor of the bill. There was even talk of citing it as the Humphrey-Dirksen Act, since Democratic whip Hubert Humphrey and Republican leader Everett Dirksen led the charge in its favor in the Senate. Senator Barry Goldwater, who was neither a segregationist nor a Southerner and whose concerns about the act were strictly constitutional, was one of the few Republicans to vote against it. The aforementioned Senator Thurmond switched parties as a result of Democratic support for the act. This marked the beginning of the defection of Southern segregationists to the GOP.

Concerning George Wallace, the man was such a political animal that it's difficult to ascertain at any point in his life what he really thought; his instinct was to appeal to voters. In 1963, when he stood at the door of the University of Alabama to block the entrance of black students, he was appealing to voters who were mostly White supremacists; twenty years later, when he last ran for governor, he courted and received the Black vote.

[KoKo]

5. As I said the "dirty tricks" transcend Party Lines.

Your point of history is correct of course, thanks for posting. But, there were racists in both the Republican and Democratic Party in the South. No one party could take credit for Civil Rights Legislation. It was Lyndon Johnson's defiance that got the legislation through. And the Democratic party did get credit for it because of Johnson and members from the Northeast who came down and participated in the Civil Rights marches. Lots of Dems involved in those.

That's not to say that there were not "angels" in both parties who knew that it was time for the South to change. But the angry voices at that time were heard loudly and in much the same way that Cindy is being villified by always find one or two people who will say she's a traitor or questioning patriotism or "status quo."

The dirty tricks will always be there, sadly. It's just finding effective ways to deal with them. We Dems haven't been very good at that for awhile now, but I think Cindy all on her own has shown that "one person" standing can accomplish so much and move public opinion.

[Jack Rabbit]

6. Response

(T)here were racists in both the Republican and Democratic Party in the South.

My point was that at the time of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, there effectively was no Republican Party in the South.

If the Democrats got credit for it, it's because the Republicans let them have it. Goldwater may have voted against the bill for perfectly honorable (if still wrongheaded) reasons, but he still voted against it and his reward was carrying five Southern states in the presidential election later that year. No Republican had done anywhere near that well in the South since the end of Reconstruction. The GOP took the hint and started appealing to disaffected Southern Whites.

Your point about dirty tricks knowing no ideology is, I believe, a self-evident truth.

[KoKo]

7. Beg to differ but at that time there definitely was a Republican Party in

the South and it was vibrant and it was the party who was against labor organizing and allowing the schools to tak federal funds for education, That policy alone (not accepting Fed funds) kept Southern students behind those graduating in the Northeastern schools for decades. Southern public schools still haven't caught up because of Repug policies for States Rights and keeping the Government out. However, the South has always had DINO Dems like Zell Miller. Without the Civil Rights movement it would have been hard to tell the difference. :shrug:

But, whatever....I was focused on Cindy and the "dirty tricks" and not so interested in getting off into discussion of the push for Civil Rights Era. :hi:

Peace...

[Jack Rabbit]

8. Can you enlighten me on this?

I'm 53 years old and have been, so I think, a good student of American history.

The GOP thought it was making inroads into the solid South in 1928, when Hoover actually carried a few Southern states; this success probably owed itself to the fact that the Democratic candidate that year, New York Governor Al Smith, was a Roman Catholic.

In presidential politics, Florida, Texas, Virginia and Tennessee started voting GOP in 1952, but otherwise the South remained solidly Democratic. There wasn't even a Republican candidate for Governor of Mississippi until 1963.