Conscience of a Majority (Lessons from Barry Goldwater on renewing the energy of the GOP)

via Ron Paul's forum and Amazon Books: "Conscience of a Majority" ^ | 1971 | Barry Goldwater

[FlingWingFlyer]

For the Communist/DemocRAT party to survive, it needs the GOP “boogeyman” as a tool to scare it’s sheep with and keep them in the flock. IMHO, the best thing that could happen right now is for the GOP to collapse. The communists would then own this mess entirely. We just cannot continue going the way that we are going.

[RIghtwardHo]

Proud to say my first vote ever was for Goldwater.

[RIghtwardHo]

Gotta say, I agree. As long as the current GOP survives, we won’t.

[cripplecreek]

He was well before my time but truly a man after my conservative heart despite the lies of idiots like Ann Coulter.

[KC_Lion]

Don't forget what she said about Goldwater's "principled" vote against the 1964 Civil Rights act that cost him the election.

It was his "principles" that done him in, I guess that explains her support for Romney since he has none.

[VitacoreVision]

Thomas Sowell comments about the Civil Rights Act of 1964.


The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Which Only Wicked Oppressors Could Oppose, and For No Good Reason)


Tom Woods.com
May 21st, 2010


In light of the hysteria in recent days, here’s some valuable information from Thomas Sowell, from his indispensable book Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?


Thomas Sowell




Sowell notes that champions of the Official Version of History ignore already existing trends in black employment, well under way long before the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, from which we are taught all blessings flowed. Writes Sowell: “In the period from 1954 to 1964, for example, the number of blacks in professional, technical, and similar high-level positions more than doubled. In other kinds of occupations, the advance of blacks was even greater during the 1940s — when there was little or no civil rights policy — than during the 1950s when the civil rights revolution was in its heyday.

“The rise in the number of blacks in professional and technical occupations in the two years from 1964 to 1966 (after the Civil Rights Act) was in fact less than in the one year from 1961 to 1962 (before the Civil Rights Act). If one takes into account the growing black population by looking at percentages instead of absolute numbers, it becomes even clearer that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 represented no acceleration in trends that had been going on for many years. The percentage of employed blacks who were managers and administrators was the same in 1967 as in 1964 — and 1960. Nor did the institution of ‘goals and timetables’ at the end of 1971 mark any acceleration in the long trend of rising black representation in these occupations. True, there was an appreciable increase in the percentage of blacks in professional and technical fields from 1971 to 1972, but almost entirely offset by a reduction in the percentage of blacks who were managers and administrators.”

Sowell further notes that Asians and Hispanics show similar long-term upward trends that had begun years before the passage of the 1964 Act, and which were not accelerated either by the Act itself or by the “affirmative action” programs that (inevitably) followed. Mexican-Americans’ incomes rose in relation to those of whites between 1959 and 1969, but not at a greater rate than between 1949 and 1959. Chinese and Japanese-American households had matched their white counterparts in income by 1959 (in spite of the fact that Japanese-Americans had been interned in concentration camps less than two decades before, and countless Americans blamed Japan for the loss of their sons).


SOURCE:
http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/the-civil-rights-act-of-1964-which-only-wicked-oppressors-could-oppose-and-for-no-good-reason/

[AlmaKing]

Remind me. Goldwater got destroyed in the election, right?

[VitacoreVision]

The Leftist Rockefeller Republicans when into full attack mode through the media to destroy Barry Goldwater’s campaign.

Yes.

[cripplecreek]

His principled vote against the 64 civil rights act was absolutely correct due to its far overreaching nature. After all he favored earlier versions of the civil rights act.

Just look at the restrictions and requirements placed on private businesses today.

[cripplecreek]

[KC_Lion]

After all he favored earlier versions of the civil rights act

Which, if I recall correctly were all stopped and filibustered in the Senate with the help of Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson.

Ain't History Grand?

[cripplecreek]

The earlier versions of the civil rights act didn’t place restrictions on private individuals or businesses.

Today we have courts ruling that photographers MUST photograph gay wedding parties.

[VitacoreVision]

Fox News: "Without Goldwater there would not have been a Ronald Reagan."

What Would Barry Goldwater Do?

Fox News | August 09, 2011

===

[Video] Ronald Reagan Support of Barry Goldwater (10/27/1964) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPuSomZXmtU

[AlmaKing]

Where are we today after the Reagan revolution? Are we on a long term path following constitutional principles?

[KC_Lion]

Hmmm...It's almost like that was all part of the plan.

Grow and empower the Federal Government.

What did Johnson say again?

Oh Yes, “I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years"

[RightLady]

The Reagan Revolution ended with Geo. H W Bush (it was his turn) kinder gentler nation

[WilliamofCarmichael]

.. and don't think that the hell that conservatives are catching today from liberals, progressives, RINOs, et al is new. No it sure ain't. I voted for Goldwater.

I remember. The emerging modern conservative movement was blamed for a "climate of hate" and violence that led to the assassination of JFK.. we were blamed for lots more than that -- and no Internet plus the "Fairness Doctrine" made it risky for radio to air conservative responses -- we were the silenced generation.

New Biography of CBS Newsman Walter Cronkite Dents His Halo

"Barry Goldwater distrusted him from the start, and with good reason. On the day of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, Cronkite nodded his head in thinly veiled contempt when handed a note on air that the Arizona senator had said “no comment.” Goldwater was attending his mother-in-law’s funeral that day.

"'Whether or not Senator Goldwater wins the nomination,' Cronkite told viewers another day, 'he is going places, the first place being Germany.' Although Goldwater had merely accepted an invitation to visit a U.S. Army facility there, correspondent Daniel Schorr said he was launching his campaign in 'the center of Germany’s right wing.' During Goldwater’s speech at the 1964 convention, some conservatives fed up with the networks gave Cronkite the finger."

I remember that.. other accounts had Cronkite reporting on his evening news show the item about Goldwater's remark. I did not remember that but I do remember Cronkite on 22 November 1963 and I remember Schorr's report on the evening CBS "news."

If only the liberals, progressives, and RINOs would come up with something new.. it's always screams of "RACIST!" "HATE!" "NAZIS!" -- though Mitt Romney's father and other Rockefeller Republicans did come up with yelling "purveyors of hate" at us. That was kind of neat.. also I remember the photo of Nelson Rockefeller at the podium (San Francisco convention 1964) giving the finger to the Goldwater delegates. Wish I could find that photo.

[lonestar]

My first vote and first door knocked on was for Goldwater. I still have my elephant pen with black glasses.

[ez]

It’s past time for a grass roots GOP candidate to arise. The 2016 version is not yet on the horizon. Any known quantity (Rubio, Palin, Jindal) can be defined and marginalized. The GOP needs a wildcard in 2016...one from the pop culture, not the culture of Washington. Clint Eastwood please pick up the red courtesy phone...