At the rate things are going now, it may even be 3 generations.

I remember inaugeration day, I literally cried. I’m not ashamed of that, I did. The tears flowed big time. I was so happy (I sooooo wanted Obama to win) AND so proud of my country for doing what it did.

Now it seems everything has gone backwards since. Obama’s been a disappointment, and so has the reaction of his presidency by far too many of my countrymen.

Racism is alive and well in America, and it ain’t just a southern trait either.

Just have to go off topic for a bit BT and I hope you’ll indulge me. Unemployment is going back up, people are hurting out here. Republican generics are way up while Democratic enthusiasm couldn’t get much lower and yet, Harry Reid wants to “debate” extending tax cuts for the wealthy when they get back. Despite the fact that they’ll expire without any action from Congress, he thinks this is a winning strategy to make the Democrats seem like they care more about the people than Republicans do. Here’s an idea: How about trying to pass legislation that will HELP people? Keep re-introducing it over and over a MAKE the Republicans filibuster it loudly, publicly and on record. Something like that would make me more willing to go vote but instead he’s going to bring up the Bush tax cuts, which is rife with the probability of a “compromise” that allow those tax cuts to stay in place for now. God, I’m glad I don’t live in Nevada! The idiotic nutjob or the idiotic jellyfish?

talking about race in america is an exercise in hopelessness. But Haley’s an out of the box thinker:

…Wearing a big smile and striking a pitchman’s pose in newspaper ads, Barbour promised $1 million to any American who could prove him wrong. “Bold, attention-getting,” was how one aide described the Million Dollar Medicare Challenge in an RNC memo at the time.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/may98/barbour02.htm

It’s “Lawrence”…

About southern racist Republicans? Please, I can name several without scratching my head or putting on my thinking cap. How do you want them? By region, era or gender?

Try three, BT. Between immigration and the community center non-issue it’s given the closet bigots permission to come out. I hear the n-word more now than I have in years. (on edit: and disparaging remarks about Arabs/Muslins) Young, limited education whites, male and female.

Yep, thanks.

LawO’Do is MSNBC’s newest hapless liberal; his tryouts for his new wee programme so far indicate he’s not capable of handling guests more nuanced that Keith or Ed. If JoScar and Mika tie him in knots, think of the damage Atlas Juggs or Erick+Woods Erick(+Woods)son will do.

Back to work. Damn.

Namaste

I used to like O’Donnell on the McLaughlin Group but ever since he got thrown out for being too liberal, he acts like he thinks it best to be more like Harold Ford.

You probably never got over the fact it was Democrats that supported slavery the most up until the Civil War. It was only when a Republican administration replaced the many years of consecutive Democratic administrations that slavery was abolished. If fact, it was the pending coming of a Republican administration which did not support slavery as Democrats had for many years which got the ball rolling toward the Civil War.

It’s a hard fact to face that the party you are a supporter of was the biggest supporter of slavery. Yes, it is embarrassing.

And, it was those same Democrats, except in Southern states only this time, that worked so hard to block the civil rights acts of the 60′s. They weren’t alone, but they were right at the front of the parade.

Apparently he got the message…

All the Dems have to do in regard to any Republican is ask where were you during the disastrous eight years of the Bush administration? Where were you?

Funny how they found a home in the welcome arms of the GOP, ain’t it?

LawO’Do is MSNBC’s newest hapless liberal

*

I can not stand him. He has had one or two moments but normally is a heratic of liberal progressive policy. Wasn’t it last night that he entertained a bunch of wankers honking ( I was too busy to pay attention to the teevee). Chris Hayes or Cenk please, if they want to expand into the 10PM hour with a new show.

Yup

Possibly David Gregory warned him that he would stop being invited to the incestuous lawmaker/press parties if he kept acting so liberal. It must have gone over better with O’Donnell than it did with Glennzilla.

Ouch, cregan. Well, I guess you told us! You’re right, progressives are wrong!

You forgot one little detail. It’s not 50 years ago. Grow up and join the present where Democrats elected an African-American President for the first time in history.

M’eh. Put him on Morning Joe permanently. Then I’ll never have to look at him again.

Leave cregan aloooooooooooooooooooone! Only half a century behind! That’s lightning speed and almost incomprehensibly advanced for most conservatives.

And, it was those same Democrats, except in Southern states only this time, that worked so hard to block the civil rights acts of the 60’s.

No.

The Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s was passed by a Democratic House, a Democratic Senate, and signed by a Democratic President.

That effectively killed the Democratic Party in the South, because the South has always been very conservative.

Conservatives opposed the Civil Rights legislation, they opposed integration, and they opposed going to war over slavery.

Speaking of Morning Joe, lately I’ve been getting daily spam from Daily Kos. I haven’t been whined to about being blacklisted from MSNBC yet but I’m sure that’s coming.

Wasn’t that guy David Duke a Democrat?

Yes, it is funny how everyone who disagrees with you or Democrats are always some sort of cardboard stereo type figure. Racist, homophobes, crooks, morons, etc., etc.

Viewed one at a time, it seems all so innocent. When brought together, you realize that no one is allowed to disagree with you. Kind of psychopathic.

Yep. GOP racism expands into the mid-west and now Southwest. Democratic racism remains more concentrated int the south.

Wikipedia says he changed affiliation from Democrat to Republican in 1988.

Sure, until he tried to run for office in Louisiana and discovered that DEMOCRATS wouldn’t elect him but REPUBLICANS would. You’re shooting down your own argument there buddy.

You better go back and read some history. Or, are you saying the Republican Party were liberals?

And, you can’t deny that Southern Democrats led the parade to fight the civil rights acts. And if a number of Republicans did not support it, it would not have passed the filibuster.

But, I know it doesn’t matter much. You’ll work it around until you are right and everyone else who doesn’t agree with you is wrong.

You know, you don’t need to make others wrong to be right. You can be right without making everyone else wrong.

Not that easy. When you do they will say, ( as I’ve heard Hannity say) “I’ve often been very critical of President Bush.”
And then they consider the question answered. They turn the burden of proof back on you. Then you need to do research and provide video clips as evidence which they will say are “taken out of context” or edited when they are not. They you need to prove that you did not take them out of context and they were not edited. By then it’s old news.

So, you’re saying his roots were in the Democratic Party?

B T I am so glad to see you writing about this. The Democrats have never raised much protest to this rewriting of history. I really think liberals need a concerted strategy to neutralize this garbage the GOP has gotten away with for years.

I am saying his white supremacy agenda was not acceptable to the Democrats then in power.

And, you can’t deny that Southern Democrats led the parade to fight the civil rights acts

And YOU can’t deny that when they lost that fight, they bailed the Democratic party en masse and were welcomed into the Republican Party with open arms. BT is exactly correct: When civil rights legislation was passed and state sanctioned segregation was ended, the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and Lyndon Johnson was a Democrat. The terms “liberal” and “conservative” as they were used then are not analogous to the way they are used today. Please try to keep up.

So, then, you are denying his roots were in the Democratic Party?

Ditto. I cried during the inauguration and was proud of our nation for appearing (at least temporarily) to overcome our baser instincts to elect a minority to POTUS. I also had some hope that BHO would make a good leader. I have no regrets. I didn’t vote for BHO simple because of race, but I was satisfied to have that choice.

As one who grew up during Apartheid in the USA, I view the present encouragment of the venality of bigotry and racism as worse than despicable.

I’m no fan of BHO, but it has nothing to do with his race (or his gender or his sexual preference). That Republics feel they have to stoop to racism to gin up their base says a LOT about them. I certainly feel that they have some other “arguments” (from their rightwing perspective) to make about BHO’s “leadership,” and I would welcome constructively critical debate and arguments.

Racism and bigotry should have no place at the table these days, but sadly Republicans continue to revert to type and beat that drum. It’s digusting.

And so: on it goes….

You know, you don’t need to make others wrong to be right. You can be right without making everyone else wrong.

It doesn’t take Blue Texan to “make” you wrong. You start off wrong and get wronger.

I am not denying it. The fact is a Democratically controlled House and Senate, and White House passed the Civil Rights legislation.

The Democrats in the South were what we call today “conservatives” — who promptly fled the party. The liberal Democrats formed a coalition with yes, liberal Republicans in the Northeast. Because unlike today — there were liberal Republicans and extremely conservative Democrats (even more right-wing than say, Ben Nelson).

That’s why JoeScar’s little game doesn’t work. Conservatives were on the wrong side of history on civil rights, and that includes Southern conservatives, who were predominately Democrats.

PS
David Duke ran for Congress as a Republican.

Republican-Democrat, orange-purple, christian-atheist, alien-non alien, south-north-anywhere…doesn’t matter a god damn diddly…if your a racist…you’re a racist…simple. It’s not the freakin label…it’s the act, and mindset, and the ignorance that needs to change…

anything else is a useless argument!

Have you stopped beating your wife?

PS
David Duke ran for Congress as a Republican

Exactly! AFTER he found out that the Democrats wouldn’t elect him but the Republicans were more than happy to.

No, Blue Texan was trying to make out the Republican Party that ended slavery after nearly 40 years of Democratic rule had supported it was a bunch of liberals. NO, they were Republicans.

And, those Democrats were pissed at the GOP just like the Democrats of today were pissed at the GOP when they ended 40 years of congressional rule. That’s just how it is with Democrats, they can’t stand the fact that there isn’t one party rule.

I know the civil rights acts would not have passed without Republican support. That’s a fact.

Agree with your analysis or “take” on attitudes about race. Sadly, though, I do see the continuing pounding of the racist drums (against all minorities, and the Muslims) having some effect across the boards.

Citizens are mostly asleep, and the rightwing has correctly concluded that by pounding out racist bigotry, many citizens (no matter how they vote) will be at least somewhat swayed by it. I am seeing more citizens openly express more racist viewpoints than I have in many years. Very chilling.

Yes, I understand that everyone who disagrees with you is some kind of evil, no good, low down, two timin’, racist, anti-semetic, cousin-marryin’, denture wearin’, moron who cares nothing about Bambi.

Such an odd world view to have.

The terms “liberal” and “conservative” meant different things in the 1960s. Again, please try to keep up. You can’t assign modern tags to people who were in office 50 years ago. It would be no different than if I called you a Tory. It’s not applicable and you’re ignoring everything anybody says that endangers that little bubble of ignorance you’ve wound about yourself.

That Republican party no longer exists; those Dixiecrats became Republicans; you’ve got serious projection issues.

Duke started out in the American Nazi Party; then the KKK; then the Republican Party.

He was an opportunist of the first order. Where he saw his opportunity was more instructive than his politics.

There was a time the Republicans saw him as an embarrassment. Today, he’d fit right in.

Well, now that we’ve allowed cregan troll to hijack yet another thread, I think I’ll spend the remainder of my afternoon in more worthy pursuits.

I know the civil rights acts would not have passed without Republican support. That’s a fact.

First. There were virtually no white Republicans in the deep south and border states. The few, and I was one of them, were indeed liberal but they had no power in the south. It was Everett Dirksen of Illinois and the urban liberal Republicans whose support was indeed essential for passage of the Civil Rights legislation. Of course now Liberal Republican is an oxymoron thanks to their having been cleansed from the GOP by the conservatives

Citizens are mostly asleep, and the rightwing has correctly concluded that by pounding out racist bigotry, many citizens (no matter how they vote) will be at least somewhat swayed by it. I am seeing more citizens openly express more racist viewpoints than I have in many years. Very chilling.

Exactly! That’s the game…played out over and over again. Wash, Rinse, repeat..Pit one set of people against another and do it with vigor and poison…and it goes right down the line…whites against blacks, christians against muslims, employed against unemployed, straights against gays, middle class against poor…

…and if you point out the bigotry and sickness…your’e anti amerikan or worse! We have not evolved much, and that will eventually pave the way for our self-manifest destruction and disappearance while the crickets chirp!

No, not anti-semetic, that doesn’t seem to be considered a fault to many around here.

I am seeing more citizens openly express more racist viewpoints than I have in many years. Very chilling.

I am too. Seeing more and chilled. Laura Schlessenger’s arrogant defense of it is just one example.

as stated ‘useless arguing with you’…waste of time…and the audacity for you to use the word ‘odd’ Heh..Heh…you’re really funny!

S
C
R
O
L
L
!!!!

Usually I like the normally well-informed Larry OD on the tube, so I was surprised to see this clip and how he missed/forgot/was unaware of the rather basic historical fact of Demo political dominance in the South as of the 1964 CR Act. Embarrassing for him, usually a reliable center-left spokesman, and who was pretty good last night on Msnbc in asking good Qs on their Iraq withdrawal marathon coverage.

There’s a reason LBJ said, after signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “We have lost the South for a generation.”

Try two, Lyndon.

BT, seen the quote elsewhere (as later reported by Bill Moyers): “I think we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come.”

http://www.digitalnpq.org/archive/1987_winter/second.html

Well Laura S was always a nasty shrew and ugly to the core.

But I’m seeing some friends and acquaintances of mine sometimes making statements that, at the end of the day, are racist or tending in that direction. Demonization of the Muslims (along with a ton of ignorance about that religion) is on the rise, and many citizens feel empowered to diss them at will. Not good. Not at all.

No, not anti-semetic, that doesn’t seem to be considered a fault to many around here.

Huh?

Say what???

Where do you get that from? You’re not one of those that equates criticism of the state of Israel to criticism of the Jewish faith are you?

They were called Dixiecrats. Now they’re Rethugs, proudly wrapping themselves in the Stars m’ Bars.

“We would have been better off if Strom Thurmond had won more states than Mississippi” said Trent Lott of Democrat turned Dixiecrat turned REPUBLICAN.

That wasn’t the worst part of that quote. It was that he said, “Our state voted for Strom. And we’re proud of it.”

Yes. Of course most of my friends and neighbors are rock solid Republicans and I have heard such stuff for years.My surprise is seeing it outside the south and in the media. It really is about white Christian supremacy. Any other color or religion is demonized.

Curious abut how a southern Christian sees great art?. This would be a hoot if it weren’t so pitiful. :Link

cregan – you are a little be right – and a lot incorrect.

From 1933 through 1959 the Democrats were split on civil rights – with a slight majority against any new laws.

But in the 60′s – the era you refer to – that changed. And it was not the GOP that passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act – it was the Democrats.

When H.R.7152 passed the House on Feb. 10, 1964, the 420 members (211 needed to pass) had the GOP favor it by 138 to 34 and the Democrats supporting it 152-96. While a larger percentage of Republicans supported it than the percentage of Democrats that supported it, more Democrats voted in favor of the bill. The Senate passed the bill by a 73 to 27 roll call vote with the 67 Democrats split 46 to 21 and the 33 Republicans split 27 to 6.

The GOP were necessary to its passage – but the majority of votes came from the Democrats.

Remember when the Clintons tried to credit LBJ with passing the Civil Rights Act of 64, as if it was a mainstream democratic play. Another play loose with the facts Clintons’ misanthrope. In fact it was six Republican Senators who provided the deciding votes in passing the 64 Civil Rights Act, such as Everett Dirksen and Roman Hruska. One may always wonder if Johnson was playing to lose. It was only Hubert Humphrey and Everett Dirksen who put the Senate votes together not LBJ.

That is what I said! :-)

In fact it WAS LBJ taking the Kennedy platform and running with it.

Yes, there were Republican votes, as laid out in the comment right before yours.

But LBJ was a driver for this, no matter how much you try to use him to bash the Clintons.

The Clintons were correct – as usual – in noting that a majority of votes came from Democrats and it was signed by a Democratic Party member who was president – LBJ.

I don’t see how you can see an error in what the Clintons said. And the filibuster required 67 votes back then – so what makes a GOP vote “critical” compared to a “non-critical” Democratic vote?

Everett Dirksen and Roman Hruska

Would these men be welcome in the Reagan’s Republican Party?

LBJ did not knowwhat to do with the Kennedy social agenda which included the Civil Rights Act. To say that LBJ was the force behind that bill because he did not veto it is like saying the Clintons were the force behind the deregulation of the banks because the Clintons did not veto that legislation.

A modicum of research confirms that it was key midwestern Republican and Democratic Senate votes which put the Civil Rights Act into place, not LBJ, that’s for sure. But following your reasoning I suppose we can give full credit to the Clintons for deregulating the banks.

LBJ did not knowwhat to do with the Kennedy social agenda which included the Civil Rights Act.

Yet somehow, he, the former Master of the Senate managed to get the bulk of the Kennedy agenda passed in the ’64/’65 time frame.

Yeah, he was just plumb flabbergasted at the tasks Kennedy left him.

(Note: this in no way absolves him for his actions in exploding Vietnam)

Greeting from the South….yes the Carolinas…and Joe is absolutely right that the racist in the South prior to Barry Goldwater were indeed Democrats. But like Strom Thurmond and Dixiecrat and a Democrat they swiftly moved to the GOP when it became evident that the Birchers had effectively taken the GOP over with the nomination of Goldwater for President…and just a few years beyond and because of the 1964 civil rights act pushed and enacted by Southerner and the super Democrat himself…LBJ …the Nixon southern strategy in 68 and in full bloom in 72 most if not all the racist had moved there political registration throughout the south to the GOP. Later in 79 the final deal with the devil was cut between good old Jesse Helms (yeap the old SOB lived half mile as the crow flies from where I sit right now)and Ronald Raygun delivering NC to Ronnie in his quest for the nomination for president the final deed transfer to the racist, Birchers, and the Bible thumpers from all over the nation better known as todays GOP/Teabaggers. So little Joe
Scarborough can toss that shit out but ask little Joe if his grand dad and his dad was a Democrat and when did they get religion and become Republicans?

Well, I disagree slightly. LBJ did have in mind to get passed the bulk of what JFK had in the pipe, domestically, but not so much because he was such a swell morally upstanding Dem. He said so publicly a few days after Dallas in addressing Congress– “Let us continue” — and besides, he really wasn’t going to be in a favorable position politically for 1964 by suddenly junking the heart of the Kennedy domestic program — Goodbye liberal wing of the party. Might even have raised certain, uh, dark suspicions about him and recent events, which suspicions he was quite aware of.

No choice at all but to go ahead with Kennedy’s CR, Medicare, Tax Reform/Cut, and anti-Poverty ideas.

(Of course, in the view of some, this also provided him with cover — his left flank satisfied and satiated even — to then go ahead and suddenly escalate in VN)

Good summary. I was here in Georgia and a Liberal Republican at the time.

Nixon and the southern strategy was really a crushing disappointment and did much to mute Civil Rights reform in the south by giving the racist majority a place to flee to. I had been so elevated by the hopes of reform and actual integration of facilities when it began and expected to see the transformation of our culture leading to the South finally joining the Union.

I can make a case for Nixon and Reagan having created forces that have been the most destructive to the nation since the Civil War..

I give LBJ a little more credit on the basis of his history as a FDR democrat prior to ascending the presidency.

Whoa – I was marching in the street back then – for JFK – and later for LBJ. JFK “social agenda” was what? He had nice words – like Obama – but in 57 voted against a rather minor civil rights bill – sending it back to committee to be killed. LBJ was indeed the force behind 64 and 65 bills – and the Clintons were correct – guess that is the part that hurts.

As to bank deregulation – there was none that led to the derivative/housing bank crisis – there was the G-S mod that allowed Travelers and City to merge. And much later allowed JP Morgan to join Morgan Stanley and Deutche Bank and a few hundred other banks in masking a market in derivatives of housing loan tranches. And that derivative “innovation” was allowed by Greenspan. If you want a force for evil that is the name – along with Newt that would not allow the 97-98 effort to control derivatives to go forward. Rubin was in their camp – and as Clinton has said, he erred in listening to Rubin on this point.

America has changed a lot since the 1960s. To argue those politics again is fruitless. I wouldn’t charge any candidate today with racism (unless it was really obvious and ugly). I’d just ask what they (presumably a Republican) think of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, Healthcare reform and the Education Dept. That would be enough rope for them to hang themselves anywhere except the South.

America is moving forward and Republicans can harp on us all they want, but that’s their burden.

I can only agree in part. I do think it is not a reasonable political tactic to accuse candidates of being racist, or Nazis or any other.

However to ignore the expanding racism and the history of the GOP is I think a very dangerous course. These people intend to return the country to the 1920s, if not antebellum south. Better strategies are those are positive focus on the better nature of man and positive potentials for the nation.but we must be aware of the dark forces to be neutralized.

None of them are racist?

Well Islam is a religion, but they gin up more than enough fear and blind hatred.

The repubs are trying to get their followers to run in circles screaming “AGGGGHHHHHH MUSSSSLLLLIMMMSSS!!!!!!!! RUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN”

Is Newt racist? Palin and the others? Hellllll yes.

As someone who refuses to ever again read the Great Orange Satan because of the Obamabot pie-throwing flame wars, I know I shouldn’t feed trolls like cregan, but there is a grain of truth in what he/she says…granted, its a pretty damn small grain and the arguments linking racists like David Duke to the Dems is disingenuous, but, here goes…

Yes, the Republican Party of Lincoln and the Civil War and Reconstruction Eras was, by today’s standards, far more enlightened regarding race issues than the Democrats were. No question or debate is necessary, the point is ceded. And yes, Southern Democrats before, during, and many years after the Civil War were certainly racist when viewing their policies concerning African-Americans (Slavery, KKK and Jim Crow, Segregation and public lynchings). Once again, no argument.

But the central point lost in this thread is that political parties change and evolve over time. Most folks don’t realize that prior to the 1860 election, the Republican Party (of Lincoln), which ran on an anti-slavery platform, was a minor and relatively little known 3rd party in the 1856 and 1858 elections. The Democratic Party split into two factions (North and South) in 1860, and the Whigs (remember them?) finally exited the history books by bringing in the rear with John Bell as their candidate for President. Interesting point: Lincoln was not on the ballot in most Southern states which seceded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1860

Anyhoo, long story short, the Republicans were the good guys 150 years ago. It didn’t last very long as the party was swallowed by corrupt corporate interests during the gilded age of the 1880′s – that’s when the Supreme Court ruled that corporations were “individuals” (which may have been a misinterpretation by a clerk, but too long and OT to go into here)- but the Dems weren’t terribly better at avoiding corporate capture either (popular and progressive movements like the Grange and the Silver Movement attest to that). Some liberalism and progressive ideology did make it to the top – Teddy Roosevelt was practically a Bolshevik the way he went after monopolies – but if Wm McKinley wasn’t assassinated that accident of history may never have happened (Pls shudder at the thought of an eight year McKinley administration, Mt. Rushmore would look awful funny).

Twenty years after Teddy we get FDR as a Dem. FDR begets Truman, then JFK, and most importantly LBJ. LBJ, unlike Kennedy, grew up dirt poor and was an enthusiastic supporter of FDR. (That Kennedy was a Democrat probably had as much to do with Joseph Kennedy being Irish Catholic and nouveau-rich more than anything else. Had Joe been a rich WASP Brahmin, JFK could easily have been a liberal Republican) The South, and Texas, saw limited economic gains since the civil war, and the Dems controlled the political machinery of Southern politics. LBJ certainly knew how racist the South was, and his record on Civil Rights in Congress was certainly not progressive. But LBJ was a fighter, and publicly vowed to enact the Civil Rights agenda of the martyred JFK (who may not have been able to do so on his own). LBJ’s friendship with J. Edgar Hoover (remember that the FBI had files on every Congressman) was certainly used as leverage when persuading Senators and Representatives to vote for the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, and he followed the debates and moves on Capitol Hill closely. He pushed, the goal was achieved, but the South was changed dramatically, and LBJ knew he lost the South as a political ally from that moment on. The southern Racists – who were Democrats – were angry.

Enter Richard Nixon and his “Southern Strategy” in 1968. Nixon made a concerted effort to use that anger in the Deep South felt by white racists to create wedge politics, driving the resentments of white southerners to split the Democratic Party further. Then came Reagan and his “Reagan Democrats” like Phil Graham in Texas to complete the process by switching parties, and the South has been reliably Republican, though not as quite racist – real change did come to Southern society as a result of JFK and LBJ’s efforts -since the 1980′s.

Have you seen Barbour lately? He is about as close to a stroke or a heart attack as you can get. I would worry more about who his running mate would be because Barbour will not be around 4 years from now.

That is pretty much what most of us have been saying (though missing a nuance or two, the most striking being the fact of segregation and political party affiliation was along racial lines in the south). Have you read the preceding posts?

It can also be argued that the Democratic Party has (well, certainly not evolved, but…) changed over time – and not for the better. Since the success of Reagan in the 1980′s, Democrats freaked out about losing the South and FDR’s New Deal coalition dissolved as those leaders retired or died off.

That triangulating DLC and New Democrats replaced them is evidenced by Clinton’s ascendancy and pro-corporate policies (NAFTA, Gramm-Leach Bliley -originally Republican ideas), which became the norm for Democratic office-holders everywhere. Clinton’s priority as President was fund-raising, and his success at raising corporate cash keeps current Democratic leaders like Rahm Emanual in thrall to their corporate overlords- this explains why they never miss an opportunity to punch a hippie.

Obama fooled us as a candidate being he ran as a progressive, and used the imagery and rhetoric of one because he recognized the country was thirsty for change after 30 years of corporate Conservatism (Hope and Change… Yes,We Can…Change We Can Believe In). Maybe his only truthful moment during the campaign was when asked which President he most admired he replied…”Ronald Reagan”. That should have been all we needed to know about him, and about the Democratic Party today.

sorry TStick, I didn’t read much after cregan @33, and me culpa. Obviously what everyone said upthread is spot on. I did think it important to point out that parties can change their identity, and can come out of nowhere like the republicans did in the 1850′s and change history. This gives me some hope that we can reverse this mess, if not with the Dems, then with a 3rd Party that reflects what Dem values used to be…

It can also be argued that the Democratic Party has (well, certainly not evolved, but…) changed over time – and not for the better. Since the success of Reagan in the 1980’s, Democrats freaked out about losing the South and FDR’s New Deal coalition dissolved as those leaders retired or died off.

Yes! Unfortunately the still entrenched leadership in the Southern Democratic Parties remain more conservative that not. And as you imply they wet their pants to outdo the Pubbies in conservatism.

My younger years I was among a small minority of white liberal Republicans. Now I am among a small minority of liberal democrats. The DLC is a horrible organization/philosophy that brought us Clinton globalization and Zell Miller.