Andrew Sullivan: Racist Romney Voters Like 'The Old Confederacy'

In a discussion of the "racial gap" in this year's election, Sullivan declared all southerners to be racists and are sliding back into the civil war. "If Virginia and Florida go back to the Republicans, it's the Confederacy, entirely. You put the map of the civil war over this electoral map you got the civil war," he said.

George Will correctly dismissed Sullivan's ranting as poppycock. Will noted that Democrats have been steadily losing the white vote since 1964 and that it has nothing to do with Barack Obama being black.

Will didn't mention it, but one of the interesting tidbits of information from the 2008 election is that Obama won the largest share of any Democrat running for president since 1976 -- not just any black Democrat, but any Democrat. If the country was so racist, how did that happen? He won 43 percent of the white vote in 2008.

But Sullivan persisted in his claim of racism repeatedly calling the southern states "the Confederates" and claiming that every southern state but Florida and Virginia voted as a block against Obama in 2008.

From the lead article this thread.

In a discussion of the "racial gap" in this year's election, Sullivan declared all southerners to be racists and are sliding back into the civil war. "If Virginia and Florida go back to the Republicans, it's the Confederacy, entirely. You put the map of the civil war over this electoral map you got the civil war," he said.

I'm not sure you understand the premise I was objecting to in Sullivan's comments here.

His premise is that because the South is Republican, it's sliding back into the civil war. And if Virginia and Florida go back to the Republicans, it's the Confederacy all over again?

I doubt rather stridently that you agree with that. I don't.

There are facets of the Confederacy and the Civil War that do not comform with this model at all.

That's what I was addressing. There is a mem these days that Republicans are the big racists. That's not true. I object to the statement, and I will try to set the record straight when I get the opportunity.

If this offends you, I honestly don't know why.

Do you want the idea that Republicans are racists reinforced, and to stand without objection?

Do you want the idea that the Republicans were the movers and shakers of the Confederacy and Southern Racism to stand without objection?

Why would it offend you for me to mention Wallace, Faubus, and Senator Byrd's actions? All three of these men have participated in some rather disgusting behaviors. And yet, Sullivan tries to rewrite history and blame racism on Republicans.

I'm not buying into that. I am actually shocked to know you took offense to my comments objecting to this jackass and his premise.

If I worded some of this indelicately, and it offends you, then explain what your problem with it is, and quit glossing over the parts that bother you to make generalizations.

If you have valid points to make, I'd like to hear them. Perhaps I do have something to learn here, but that's certainly not going to happen if you can't be specific.

This is going to be long. I apologize. I didn’t want there to be any ambiguity in my comments.

Okay, thank you. I’m sure from your perspective, you did see a different angle than what was conveyed in the media. Does that mean that your angle was the only angle, and that none of what was portrayed in the media was true?

I’m not sure of your precise age at the time. As a young person you may or may not have been able to discern if your school was on a par with other schools. I’m not entirely sure what evaluations were made at the time. Were you aware of them in real time? I’m not trying to be insulting, but I’m not sure kids really do understand the nuances of situations like what existed in those days.

It would seem to me that you and your friends were probably happy in your classes. I’m sure it did seem like an unnecessary inconvenience for kids to be moved to another school. I’m sure it did seem like a lot of commotion over nothing. On the other hand, if ten schools were integrated and there were three that weren’t, does that make it okay for the three to be segregated?

I don’t doubt that some kids were somewhat bewildered by what was going on. None the less, there was a problem. Schools were ordered to allow all local students access. Two separate governors refused to allow it.

That being the case, there was going to be push-back.

At the time, these schools weren’t the only facilities with problems. Civil rights were being denied throughout the region. It needed to be addressed.

As far as presidential politics had gone, the South was a solid lock for the Democrats in these days.

It was and still is my premise that Senator Byrd was an organizer and chapter leader of the Klu Klux Klan. From his earliest political days, he was a Democrat.

Is that something that wasn’t about race or politics?

I don’t want to bother looking up Faubus’ actions in Little Rock too, but I do know what the case was with Wallace and his attempts to block Black kids access to White schools.

Wallace was a firm believer in segregation. Whatever your experiences were in school, or what you thought all Black kids wanted or didn’t want to do, Black kids did want to attend the school Wallace sought to block them from entering. I suspect kids wanted to enter the segregated school in Little Rock too. If there weren’t other problems in the region, perhaps this wouldn’t have been addressed with the fervor it was.

Yes, it certainly was John F. Kennedy and his Attorney General Robert Kennedy, who forced Wallace to allow those kids to enter that school. And while the Kennedy’s were obviously Democrats, the two men that stood up to stop Black kids in the South from entering two schools, were obviously not Republicans. In 1957, it was Dwight Eisenhower(R) who used the National Guard to force Faubus to allow Black students in.

And lest we miss the point of Wallace’s intent, here is what he said twenty years after the event.

“Change of positions”

“In the late 1970s, Wallace announced that he was a born-again Christian and apologized to black civil rights leaders for his past actions as a segregationist. He said that while he had once sought power and glory, he realized he needed to seek love and forgiveness. In 1979, Wallace said of his stand in the schoolhouse door: “I was wrong. Those days are over, and they ought to be over.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace#cite_note-over-3

Wiki isn’t the best reference, but this is a fairly well known quote. It has been out there for decades. In Wallace’s later years, he mellowed considerably. In fact, I believe he was favorable to seeing Blacks treated fairly.

Okay, Wallace says his actions were as a result of being a Segregationist. Doesn’t that reveal to you that in the instance involving Wallace at least, there was a problem?

If the children in classes with you didn’t want to change schools because they already had established friendships, does that mean there wasn’t a problem? I don’t believe it does.

The media probably did make it look like most schools in the region were refusing to integrate. I can certainly see why that would tweak you. I don’t blame you. My comments being overly broad, probably did upset you too. For that I am sorry. I may even be saying things in this post that seem insensitive to you. I’m not trying to tweak you.

During the day, there were segregated businesses, restrooms, schools..., and blacks were being demanded to ride in the back of the bus. Access for Blacks was clearly inferior.

In the late 1960s, I returned to Southern California. At the time, Blacks were essentially treated like anyone else. I’m not going to say there weren’t any problems, but the problems in the South weren’t present there in anything like the same level.

The North East, the North, and the West were different than the South in that respect. That’s not just my take on things.

Does that mean that every person in the South treated Blacks terribly? I don’t think so at all. I do think a lot of people looked the other way though.

If you still believe these are unfair characterizations, I would like to hear your thoughts on it.

I am particularly interested in how old you were at the time, and whether you feel that you were old enough to understand all the nuances of what was taking place.

Sorry to make this long of a post on the subject.

Take care.

Yes...that is a very long reply, with quite a bit of innuendo and a lot of assumptions.

First and foremost,

“In the late 1960s, I returned to Southern California.”

Returned...from where?

“The North East, the North, and the West were different than the South in that respect. That’s not just my take on things.”

You’re right about that! Just look at Boston, for example.

I wasn’t in a “big city”. I was in a small city.

When I said that the black population was repulsed by the feds, it had to do with the fact that we already had integrated schools. We had Freedom of Choice. There were black families who didn’t want their kids in the desegregated school system.

Unannounced, during the Christmas break in ‘69, the feds closed the black school system...then and there. There was a lot of anger in the black community, and I don’t blame them whatsoever.

“If you still believe these are unfair characterizations”

Yes...given that I was never a supporter of Gov. Wallace, and given that his name was brought up, not by me, but you...you were and are very unfair to me, and to this forum.

You have prejudices that I can’t even begin to fathom.

BTW, I was in high school, and college, during this time.

Yes...that is a very long reply, with quite a bit of innuendo and a lot of assumptions.

You know DixieChick2000, having a discussion with you is rather difficult. You keep making insults, but don't address specifically what it is that you disagree with. If you think I've displayed innuendo or assumptions unfairly, then disagree on point and I'll address the specific issue you disagree with.

First and foremost, In the late 1960s, I returned to Southern California. Returned...from where?

For your last three posts, you have tried to make this about me. I'm not going to play along with that. Your region had major problems. I have not said that every person in your region was a bad person or a racist. I'm sorry you don't seem to be able to grasp the difference. Those facts do not hinge on whether I lived in the big city, a small city, or even if I existed at all.

The North East, the North, and the West were different than the South in that respect. That’s not just my take on things.

You’re right about that! Just look at Boston, for example.

I wasn’t in a “big city”. I was in a small city.

I don't believe this discussion hinges on where you lived. I haven't asked where you live. I have only addressed issues that are on the public record.

If you wish to go through life refusing to admit that the South had major racial problems in the 50s and 60s, be my guest.

When I said that the black population was repulsed by the feds, it had to do with the fact that we already had integrated schools. We had Freedom of Choice. There were black families who didn’t want their kids in the desegregated school system.

Do you have any idea why? And even to this point in time, you still haven't come to terms with the fact that Blacks were being denied entry by Faubus and Wallace. So you didn't have universal integrated schools did you. Freedom of Choice?

Unannounced, during the Christmas break in ‘69, the feds closed the black school system...then and there. There was a lot of anger in the black community, and I don’t blame them whatsoever.

Okay, so you had a separate all Black school system. Could you please give me an example of an all Black parallel public school system outside of the South.

Can you explain to me why the education system should run racially segregated schools? If so, would you please tell me where we draw the line with that? Should we have separate school systems for other races than Blacks. Perhaps I'll learn something here.

If you still believe these are unfair characterizations

Yes...given that I was never a supporter of Gov. Wallace, and given that his name was brought up, not by me, but you...you were and are very unfair to me, and to this forum.

Please link me to a post of mine that said you supported Governor Wallace. Failing that, please link me to where I said or implied that everyone in the South backed Governor Wallace.

At it's zenith, the Klu Klux Klan membership was not even close to being universal in the South. I shouldn't have to explain to you that I don't think everyone in the South was racist. None the less, there were racial asepcts of the South that had become accepted, not uncommon, and not resoundingly opposed by Whites.

You have prejudices that I can’t even begin to fathom.

DixieChick2000, you are welcome to think whatever you like about me. I didn't come here years ago to make over 117,000 posts thinking others were always going to agree with me, or even like me. By the third grade I accepted that there were going to be some people who disliked me no matter what I did.

BTW, I was in high school, and college, during this time.

Okay. Thank you. You are an adult now.

The one question I would like answered is “where you returned from.” ? If you answer that question, maybe we will get somewhere.

It wouldn't matter if I lived in Little Rock, Birmingham, Huntsville, Mobile, or New York City. The facts don't change based on where I lived.

The only pertinant facts that need to be addressed, are what was taking place in the South during this period. I have no problem in general telling folks where I lived in those days, but under the circumstances, I'm not inclined to play along. That is a diversion technique, and I'm not buying in.

Please point out any insult I’ve made towards you. I’ve not made any post “about you”, though you might like to think so.

I could have sworn you made this comment to me. If it wasn't to me, please tell me who you were making it to.

Yes...that is a very long reply, with quite a bit of innuendo and a lot of assumptions.

You know DixieChick2000, having a discussion with you is rather difficult. You keep making insults, but don't address specifically what it is that you disagree with. If you think I've displayed innuendo or assumptions unfairly, then disagree on point and I'll address the specific issue you disagree with.

Everything hinges on where one lived at the time. There were very big differences between a big city and small cities.

You know what, I grow more than a little tired of you trying to make where I lived the issue. For that reason, I will respond on point at the bottom of this post. Perhaps then you'll see just how absurd it is to make the case where I lived makes all the difference in the world.

If you wish to go through life refusing to admit that the South had major racial problems in the 50s and 60s, be my guest.

Okay...I never said that. There were things that needed changing. However, there were things that were good, and you refuse to recognize that.

The issue I have been trying to address since the start of this thread, is the absurdity of the idea that "RACIST ROMNEY SUPPORTERS "LIKE THE OLD CONFEDERACY". You took ofense to that because I pointed out that the Democrats had a solid lock on the South until Richard Nixon won it in 1972. Did they or didn't they? Well, yes they did. The Democrats have tried to flip the whole Civil War, Confederacy, and racism reality on it's head. Once again, when I see this, I object stridently. I will always do so. The Democrats to this day, try to claim we're racists. Who were the racists? Republicans or Democrats? Once again, which party had a lock on the South during those years?

I’ve admired you in the past, but I now recognize you to be a bully.

If you truly admired me, you would realize I am not trying to be unfair to you or anyone else in the South. It may seem to you that I am talking in generalities, but I am not. I have family in the South. I have come into contact with many people from the South. I've got no axe to grind with people in the South. None the less, I can't change history.

Ah yes, I am a bully. And why am I a bully? Why I'm a bully because I made some comments and I have stuck to my guns on those comments. If I renounce my thoughts, I'm A-Okay. If I stick to my premise, I'm a bully. Do you really win discussions this way?

Not going to play anymore.

Alright, I'm not going to give you grief over it. I'm sorry we've had a disagreement here. You take care...

Please consider how where I lived would change any of what is posted below. You can right click, view, any of these to see larger versions.

This doesn't even start to take into account the actions of the KKK, burning crosses, and various lynching parties.

I considered those photos to be too rank to even post here.

Look, there was isolated KKK and even NAZI activity across the country. Lynchings took place outside the South too. The vast majority of such activity took place in the South. And as such, when the idiot-stick Andrew Sullivan tried to reference the Republicans in the manner he did, I objected strenuously. He specified the region.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.