Comments on: As Republicans court Latinos, they can learn from LBJ’s Great Society Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: Zo0tie Fri, 23 Nov 2012 19:20:48 +0000 As a native born Hispanic with a college education why would I EVER trust the Republican Party. I have a wonderful strategy for the Republican party to get the vote of people like me. First, kick out all of the racist, xenophobic, bible thumping ignorant TeaBaggers and tell them to go back to the American Nazi Party, the Libertarian Party, or the Klan where they belong. Then go to the FAR Left of the Democratic party. At present it’s practically unoccupied territory. Support gay marriage, universal health care, public education into college, public WPA type infrastructure programs, repeal Taft_Hartly, promote green technology, access to abortion, birth control rights. Cut military funding and withdraw our troops from the world and change NAFTA to include union rights. If they continue this for 20 years maybe I’ll vote for them.

By: matthewslyman Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:10:59 +0000 @Bob9999: Whatever LBJ did for welfare, I find it hard to forget that he boosted “employment” in large degree by massively escalating the Vietnam War — killing and maiming hundreds of thousands of Americans, Vietnamese, Australians etc. with a war started on a false pretext and waged needlessly. Pure communism is inherently unstable and would have fallen of its own accord — but given an external enemy (American military interventionism) its evils are only sustained for longer through unity against the invaders.

The cause of civil rights was just, but Johnson’s belligerent methods had a darker side. LBJ wholly failed to follow up Kennedy’s lead in rapprochement with the Soviets through common endeavors in the space race (a common moon mission), and instead, murdered a million people through his hard war on communism. In this context, it’s hard for me to understand his taking of credit for Eisenhower’s first moves in the civil rights arena for anything other than a deft political maneuver.

“It seems to me that, for the nation as for the individual, what is most important is to insist on the vital need of combining certain sets of qualities, which separately are common enough, and, alas, useless enough. Practical efficiency is common, and lofty idealism not uncommon; it is the combination which is necessary, and the combination is rare. Love of peace is common among weak, short-sighted, timid, and lazy persons; and on the other hand courage is found among many men of evil temper and bad character. Neither quality shall by itself avail.”
— Theodore Roosevelt, 1913.

Similarly, while FDR rebranded welfare in his time as “New Deal”, his policies had their roots in initiatives started on a smaller scale by Hoover. Hoover and Eisenhower have been short-changed and cheated by Democrat-leaning revisionists. ohnson#Senate_Democratic_leader _Johnson_and_Richard_Russell.jpg

— Can a man like this seriously be the font of good-will in the field of civil rights?

By: Bob9999 Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:22:07 +0000 I think this piece is unfair to the legacy of Lyndon Johnson. It should not be overlooked that President Lyndon Johnson believed strongly in the civil rights legislation that became the hallmark of his presidency. He twisted every arm in the U.S. Capitol building to get it passed, and he did not do so for political reasons. In fact, Johnson knew while he was getting this legislation passed that it would mean losing the so-called Dixiecrat contingent of the Democratic party. When Richard Nixon beat Hubert Humphrey in 1968, it was because pro-segregationist white voters (mostly in Southern states) had left the Democratic party because of LBJ’s civil rights legislation.

Johnson served in both the House and the Senate prior to becoming Vice President (and then President), and he may have been the canniest Senate majority leader of all time. There is a story about Johnson, that a freshman legislator once came to him to ask for his help on a bill. “Sure,” Johnson is said to have replied. “Now, do you want me to for you or against you?”

If LBJ has viewed the civil rights legislation in purely political terms, it would not have been passed or it would have been passed only in a watered-down form. If the motives were purely political, the canniest thing to do would have been to introduce the legislation and then to allow the pro-segregationist forces to defeat it or to amend it to reduce its impact substantially. If that had happened, the Democrats would have kept the Dixiecrats while acquiring a claim on the moral high ground. That would have been the purely political approach, but that is not what Johnson did.

Contrast Johnson’s civil rights accomplishments with how Kennedy treated Sammmy Davis, Jr. Davis had campaigned tirelessly for Kennedy and was a substantial factor in Kennedy’s 1960 election. The day before inauguration day, however, Davis was disinvited to all of the inaugural events because the incoming team from Boston was concerned about offending the Dixiecrats by inviting a black man to attend a social event as a guest. (Davis would have understood completely. As a top entertainer, he was familiar with the many venues that featured black artists on stage but did not allow them in the audience.) Davis was a victim of politics, and it was that experience that led him to become a member of the Republican party about four years before the Dixiecrats.

By: PseudoTurtle Tue, 20 Nov 2012 17:07:41 +0000 You mean the same LBJ’s Great Society that was never funded by Congress, and is the main reason Social Security is now broke?

Great idea!

By: AlkalineState Mon, 19 Nov 2012 21:10:23 +0000 One of the biggest hurdles for the GOP is basic education on this. They’ve got people like Sarah Palin (one of the self-proclaimed conservative leaders)…. who think Africa is a country. They have their foxnews pundits blowing their dog whistles about ‘inner city’ threats to upright living; and Obama’s ‘welfare voters.’ You remember the line. It was only 2 weeks ago.

All of this ignorance and paranoia within the current GOP alienates voters nationally.

By: Fishrl Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:20:25 +0000 This is way off the mark. You have made no mention of the Nixon Southern Strategy, which turned white segregationists overwhelmingly to the Republican party. That drove black voters away for good. The Republican Party has the same problem with Hispanic voters that it does with black voters.

It was a successful strategy in 1972, but now the chickens have come home to roost. The Republicans cannot appeal to Hispanics and other people of color until they repudiate racism through action. Messaging isn’t enough.

By: AlkalineState Mon, 19 Nov 2012 06:31:11 +0000 Republicans tailor message to reach Latinos:

“Corporations are people too, mi amigo. Corporations are people too!”

Good times. Good God. Good riddance.

By: goforward Sun, 18 Nov 2012 23:18:51 +0000 How can the republicans begin the long, hard work of establishing and nurturing a deeper, meaningful relationship with Hispanics if the GOP base is racist and despise Hispanics in general illegal or not?? They can not cater to the KKK and Hispanics at the same time. I think the GOP is going to lie better and hide their true feelings and intentions (racism and hate) as they always do. And Hispanics are not going to buy it.

By: DeSwiss Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:15:36 +0000 There will be NO courtship as long as TeaBaggers and Faux News have anything to do with it. And there ”Latino Outreach” could use some work. A LOT of work:

By: 2educated Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:05:31 +0000 After all the rhetoric against people of color, the 47%, the takers…It will be very, very entertaining to watch the GOP court Mexicans, etc without losing their “base” of racist, angry white men and women. Wow, this is going to be hilarious!
I’m sure they don’t have a chance to please both sides.