Sunny
53°
Sunny
Hi 57° | Lo 25°

My Turn: From the ‘Monitor,’ prejudice, divisiveness, ignorance

Re “From O’Brien, a despicable argument” (Monitor editorial, Aug. 5):

It is really no wonder the Concord Monitor, the Nashua Telegraph, and other voices of the Doctrinaire Left are so angry that I brought up the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 during a speech on Obamacare in Concord.

Those on the Left are always embarrassed and compromised by any mention of slavery. Indeed, they should be uncomfortable because the same philosophy that excused slavery underlies their current politics. In fact, those foundational ideals have easily led them to Obamacare’s individual mandate, which, for the first time in American history, orders people to engage in private commerce to support a federal government program.

Pre-Civil War, racist U.S. Sen. John C. Calhoun was a principal apologist for slavery in America. As a recent article by Jarrett Stepman and Inez Feltscher explains, “three of the core ideas Calhoun’s pro-slavery school embraced continue to resonate on the left (and) . . . (e)ach of these principles is echoed in the policy and philosophy of the modern left.”

Those core and continuing principles are, in summary, a rejection, in order to promote such racist policies as slavery, segregation and affirmative action, of the natural rights of men and the concept that all men are equal, and a belief, necessary to economically justify first slavery and now permanent welfare such as Obamacare, that dependency is a positive when contrasted with uncaring capitalism.

The liberals populating the editorial boards of these newspapers ought to spend some time reviewing and understanding history before their editorials again spin forth with the personal attacks that have both come to characterize the Left these days and so polluted our politics.

They can start by reading the article that explains how historically confused they are (www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/06/The-Pro-Slavery-Roots-of-the-Modern-Left).

They can continue by answering some specific questions relevant to their free-wheeling attacks on me: What taxes would they have increased in order to spend more money than was available when we cut spending in the 2011-13 state budget? And why, if that budget was so awful, have the spending cuts been continued into the 2013-15 budget in order to again avoid raising taxes?

Prejudice, divisiveness and ignorance all have found homes at the editorial boards of these legacy media newspapers.

We don’t have let them come into our homes.

(Republican state Rep. Bill O’Brien of Mont Vernon is the former speaker of the New Hampshire House.)

Van, I don't care what name LBJ called blacks. The proof is what he did for them, passing civil rights. He lost the south for the Democratic Party by passing civil rights. He did what was right no matter the cost. Not many politicians today with that courage. If you are interested in hearing some obscene words used to describe blacks and Jews, why not listen to some of the Nixon tapes Nixon, the author of the "Southern Strategy". You know what that was don't you? If not look it up on one of your conservative websites and then google it to find out the truth. To paraphrase Jack Nicholson, you wouldn't know what the truth is if it hit you in the face.

in 1992, the south was still decidedly democratic in the house and senate. The southern strategy...30 years later.

No amount of revisionist attempts at muddying the waters can change the fact the "Southern Strategy" was and is a Republican effort to appeal to disaffected whites. "Dog whistle racism" was and is part of the strategy as well--recall Reagan's Meridian speech. Undoing 100 years of history and tradition takes time. But starting in 1968, the South was no longer a sure bet to vote Democratic in presidential elections. There is no denying the South is today a Republican stronghold--and with the exception of Carter and Clinton, whom the Democrats chose in an effort to retain the South, white Southerners almost always votes for conservative Republicans (with rare exceptions,is there any other kind? ) at every level of government.

Poor Boss O'Brien . . . he thinks it's 1913, not 2013! And quoting Breitbart.com - that's rich. He's as dead as John C. Calhoun. Who, btw, I'm related to on my father's side of the family. I had a great great grandmother named "Minnie Magnolia Calhoun" - now if that's not a southern name I dunno what is! NOTE TO MR O'BRIEN - that last fact is NOT proof that I'm pro-slavery or a racist.

Dan you have an intersecting historical back ground. I guess we are going to have to disagree on Breitbart.com. Breitbart.com is one of my favorite websites.

Did I also tell you I'm related to John Hinckley on my mom's side of the family?

Good Golly. Do you have to put "Republican " Right next to this guy's name? Remember Tim, he was one of yours for most of his life. Not blaming anyone Tim, just don't bundle this guy with the rest of us.. Among the recipients of Bill's political contributions: Mary Landreau, and John Kerry. I don't blame either one for taking his money, nor do I ascribe Bill's belief's to either of the Democratic Senators. I have no idea who contributed to Senator Calhoun. The records are not available, not that it would matter!!!

Democrat party the pro slavery party. The Republican party the anti slavery party. Republicans voted for civil rights because it was the right thing to do Google LBJ's quote: I'll have those (N-Word) voting Democratic for the next 200 years. Democrat party the party of the KKKK The Democrat party racists: Bull Connor, Boss Tweed, George Wallace, and Robert Byrd. Democrats have varied only slightly from the tactics that they used in the early 20th century to keep minorities down as they are using today.

Yes, Van. We know. The Republican Party was the anti-slavery party - In 1860. Then in the 1940s they became the anti-civil rights party. Remember Strom Thurmond leaving the Democratic Party because of their pro-civil rights efforts? Remember dear old Jesse Helms? Paragons of the civil rights struggle, right? Whereas the Democratic Party had Hubert Humphrey, and the recently passed Lindy Boggs, among numerous others. So go ahead and delude yourself about the Republicans glorious history if you want, but you're not fooling anyone else.

The history of civil rights in the USA is this...100 years of Republicans supporting civil rights and democrats opposed ......I remember Strom Thurmond leaving the democrat party, but you know who opposed civil rights and stayed? Orval Fabus, Benjamin Travis Laney, John Stennis, James Eastland, Allen Ellender, Russell Long, John Sparkman, John McClellan, Richard Russell, Herman Talmadge, George Wallace, Lester Maddox, John Rarick, Robert Byrd, Al Gore, Sr., And....Bull Connor.

That's the Democratic Party to you, GW. We all know that the southern Democrats were opposed to civil rights. We all also know that civil rights legislation was passed over the objections of people like Barry Goldwater (actually one of my favorite Republicans by the time he retired), Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms. We also all know that it was northern Democrats that worked to get these laws passed over Republican opposition. No use trying to revise history.

With all this history behind them, I wonder why the Republicans do so badly in elections with minority voters?

What republican opposition? over 80% of republicans voted for it. Compare that to the democrat party.

Good Job GWTW, you smoked Publius. Most of the people who Publius joined the Republican party after the Republicans voted for Civil Rights. Tillie look for LBJs quote on blacks after he signed the Civil rights Bill. LBJ used a very nasty slur when he referred to blacks. That might answer your question.

Not quite. That history of Republican support ended by 1972, if not before. It's true that Republicans in the House and Senate supported civil rights legislation in the 1960's at a higher % than did Democrats, who were the majority party then. But those Republicans who did support such legislation were systematically driven from the party over the next 2 decades, and replaced with far more conservative "sun belt" Republicans--the Reagan Republicans. Barry Goldwater was a bit ahead of his time ( if memory serves, he voted against the civil rights legislation). George Wallace ran as a 3rd candidate in 1968 and won several southern states--it can serve as a marker of the transition from a Democrat-controlled South to a Republican-controlled one today. Without the white Southern/evangelical votes of today, the Republican party would have been relegated to permanent minority status a few election cycles ago.

In 1972, the south was still 80% democrats.

Those "100 years of Republicans supporting civil rights and democrats (sic) opposed" ended some time ago. The proud 'Party of Lincoln' that was the GOP I grew up with and belonged to, has become the 'Party of Jefferson Davis'.

If you care to confuse your thought process with facts. What you are referring to as the party of the KKK would be more accurately today's GOP. Southern Democrats in essence morphed into what we call the GOP today and vice versa. Lester Maddox - Bill O'Brien, the same person - you decide.

John Calhoun died in 1850, 106 years before I was born, and 101 years before my fellow state Representative Bill O'Brien was born. I never knew John Calhoun, and I probably never met anyone who knew him. I have to the best of my knowledge never even read anything he wrote. Our only connection is that he was a member of the Democratic Party for the last 11 years of his life, and I joined the same party over a century later. He has little or no influence over me.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.