New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

This needs to be asked

write on

Governor
First, sorry for the delay in responding, I've been out of town. Second, the answer to your question is "depending on how you define hearsay, no, I don't have unquestionable proof."

If you look at the Snopes documentation of the statement it is listed as unproven. It's initial sourcing is Ronald MacMillan, an Air Force One steward who acted as a eye witness source in the 1995 book, "Inside the White House" by Ronald Kessler. Some people have questioned whether or not MacMillan is telling the truth. Among other anecdotes in the book was Linda Baines Johnson allegedly tellling MacMillan "Go find my N@gger." She denies ever having done this, but then, she naturally would make such a denial whether she had done so or not. So much depends on whether you trust MacMillan's statements and find him credible -- as an eyewitness, and if you find him credible, his statement would not be hearsay.

LBJ was a notable "man of his time" quite comfortable in using the "n-word" and his motivation for passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has often been questioned. At least according to MacMillan by way of Kessler, his motivation was straightfoward partisanship, "I'll have those n@ggers voting Democrat for 200 years." While the statement may or may not have been made depending, as above, on MacMillan's veracity, it does explain a possible motive.
Then it is unproven that LBJ said those words. Which is why I asked the question of proof that he did.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
First, sorry for the delay in responding, I've been out of town. Second, the answer to your question is "depending on how you define hearsay, no, I don't have unquestionable proof."

If you look at the Snopes documentation of the statement it is listed as unproven. It's initial sourcing is Ronald MacMillan, an Air Force One steward who acted as a eye witness source in the 1995 book, "Inside the White House" by Ronald Kessler. Some people have questioned whether or not MacMillan is telling the truth. Among other anecdotes in the book was Linda Baines Johnson allegedly tellling MacMillan "Go find my N@gger." She denies ever having done this, but then, she naturally would make such a denial whether she had done so or not. So much depends on whether you trust MacMillan's statements and find him credible -- as an eyewitness, and if you find him credible, his statement would not be hearsay.

LBJ was a notable "man of his time" quite comfortable in using the "n-word" and his motivation for passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has often been questioned. At least according to MacMillan by way of Kessler, his motivation was straightfoward partisanship, "I'll have those n@ggers voting Democrat for 200 years." While the statement may or may not have been made depending, as above, on MacMillan's veracity, it does explain a possible motive.
There are a number of accounts of him saying n*gger or nigra...that is likely to be accurate. Him saying "we'll have those n*ggers voting democratic for 200 years" is unlikely...Bill Moyers says he told him "we've just lost the south for a generation".
 

write on

Governor
There are a number of accounts of him saying n*gger or nigra...that is likely to be accurate. Him saying "we'll have those n*ggers voting democratic for 200 years" is unlikely...Bill Moyers says he told him "we've just lost the south for a generation".
For anyone to think that LBJ said that with earnestness is laughable.

And then sign the Civil Rights Act?

Republicans trying to rewrite history won't work while thinking blacks, at the time, didn't see what was happening.

They secretly believe that blacks are inferior.
 

trapdoor

Governor
There are a number of accounts of him saying n*gger or nigra...that is likely to be accurate. Him saying "we'll have those n*ggers voting democratic for 200 years" is unlikely...Bill Moyers says he told him "we've just lost the south for a generation".
The two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Dropping the use of the pejorative term, if you gain the minority vote elsewhere, you don't need the South to be relevant in terms of national politics. The Democratic Party abandoned the union and working class white voters it once needed, in favor the minorities and social-program voters it now needs. The "solid south" now votes solidly Republican, while the Democratic Party now receives most urban votes and most minority votes.
 

write on

Governor
The two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Dropping the use of the pejorative term, if you gain the minority vote elsewhere, you don't need the South to be relevant in terms of national politics. The Democratic Party abandoned the union and working class white voters it once needed, in favor the minorities and social-program voters it now needs. The "solid south" now votes solidly Republican, while the Democratic Party now receives most urban votes and most minority votes.
All while ignoring the gerrymandering happening county by county, state by state.
 

trapdoor

Governor
Then it is unproven that LBJ said those words. Which is why I asked the question of proof that he did.
Well, whether it is proven or not rests on whether you accept MacMillan, I acknowledge that. There's some reason he related that story and he seems an otherwise credible witness.
 

write on

Governor
Well, whether it is proven or not rests on whether you accept MacMillan, I acknowledge that. There's some reason he related that story and he seems an otherwise credible witness.
The thing is, it is a misconception that the right wing is trying to latch onto in order to hide their racism.

It doesn't work on those that can think for themselves.

Dig deep, trapdoor.

Why does the right wing want to change known history being taught?
 

trapdoor

Governor
The thing is, it is a misconception that the right wing is trying to latch onto in order to hide their racism.

It doesn't work on those that can think for themselves.

Dig deep, trapdoor.

Why does the right wing want to change known history being taught?
I don't see it that way. The story has been circulating for nearly 30 years. If the GOP wants to point at racism on the part of Democrats, it merely has to point at literally any Democratic candidate from 1865 to 1968, which is the era in which the Democratic Party was also the party of segregation and Jim Crow.
As for changing known history being taught, why does the left-wing want to change the way history is being taught?
 

write on

Governor
Both sides gerrymander, and you can't gerrymander until after you've won enough popular votes to control a state legislature.
How are those 'popular' votes won?

Every 10 years, after the census. That is how the right wing wins the right to continue control. Why do you think the right wing hates the census?

Democrats had better snap to the right wing game of their quest at total control.

Fascism will soon ensue.
 

write on

Governor
I don't see it that way. The story has been circulating for nearly 30 years. If the GOP wants to point at racism on the part of Democrats, it merely has to point at literally any Democratic candidate from 1865 to 1968, which is the era in which the Democratic Party was also the party of segregation and Jim Crow.
As for changing known history being taught, why does the left-wing want to change the way history is being taught?
Look at how the right wing has stacked the scotus, beginning with obama's pick being denied but trump's choices being pushed through..

The right wing is fascist.

You know it as well as I do.
 
Last edited:

trapdoor

Governor
How are those 'popular' votes won?

Every 10 years, after the census. That is how the right wing wins the right to continue control. Why do you think the right wing hates the census?

Democrats had better snap to the right wing game of their quest at total control.

Fascism will soon ensue.
They're won via votes, by the public. Don't decry the "dirty" practice of redistricting when both sides do it, until at least you've cleaned up your own side of the fence. You have to first have won the popular vote to be in a position to gerrymander.
 

write on

Governor
They're won via votes, by the public. Don't decry the "dirty" practice of redistricting when both sides do it, until at least you've cleaned up your own side of the fence. You have to first have won the popular vote to be in a position to gerrymander.
Don't play me for the fool.

Gerrymandering IS redistricting. When you control gerrymandering, you control the vote.

And that is right wing fascism.
 

trapdoor

Governor
Don't play me for the fool.

Gerrymandering IS redistricting. When you control gerrymandering, you control the vote.
In what way? And again BEFORE YOU CAN GERRYMANDER YOU HAVE TO HAVE WON POPULAR VOTE.

All gerrymandering can do is change the borders for congressional districts, this can be done in a way that it lumps more votes from one party into a given set of districts, so that the other party doesn't have a majority in any given district in the state. But the only way to achieve the state-level control that allows this to happen is to win the popular vote in the first place.

As for right wing facism:

1640080246214.png
 

write on

Governor
In what way? And again BEFORE YOU CAN GERRYMANDER YOU HAVE TO HAVE WON POPULAR VOTE.

All gerrymandering can do is change the borders for congressional districts, this can be done in a way that it lumps more votes from one party into a given set of districts, so that the other party doesn't have a majority in any given district in the state. But the only way to achieve the state-level control that allows this to happen is to win the popular vote in the first place.

As for right wing facism:

View attachment 67615
Like the gerrymandering here in Oklahoma?


What 'constituents' are the fascist right wing talking about with their 'redistricting' shown in the link above?
 

trapdoor

Governor
Like the gerrymandering here in Oklahoma?


What 'constituents' are the fascist right wing talking about with their 'redistricting' shown in the link above?
As I see no reference to right wing fascists when I visit your link, merely standard whining from some Democrat who can't get a party win in a red state, I have no answer to make.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
The two statements aren't mutually exclusive. Dropping the use of the pejorative term, if you gain the minority vote elsewhere, you don't need the South to be relevant in terms of national politics. The Democratic Party abandoned the union and working class white voters it once needed, in favor the minorities and social-program voters it now needs. The "solid south" now votes solidly Republican, while the Democratic Party now receives most urban votes and most minority votes.
I'm just going by quotes that can be verifies....

Merry Christmas Trap.
 

trapdoor

Governor
I'm just going by quotes that can be verifies....

Merry Christmas Trap.
Merry Christmas to you, as well. I admitted some time ago that the reliability of the quote depends on how reliable you assume MacMillan was. Even if you go by utterly confirmed quotes, we know that Johnson was a political manipulator par excellence, and that he threw the n-word around a lot.
 
Top