Filibuster against a pension for a black official, 1906
Filibuster against confirmation of a black official, 1909
Filibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1921
Filibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1922
Filibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1925
Filibuster against monument to black WWI veterans, 1926
Filibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1935
Filibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1938
Filibuster against bill targeting racial discrimination in employment, 1945
Filibuster against Truman's civil rights proposals, 1948
Filibuster against Truman's civil rights proposals, 1949
Filibuster against Truman's civil rights proposals, 1950
Filibuster against measures to fight housing discrimination, 1954
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1957
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1960
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1962
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1963
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1964
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1966
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1968
Filibuster against bill targeting employment discrimination, 1972
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1976
Filibuster against extension of Voting Rights Act, 1982
Filibuster against creation of MLK Day federal holiday, 1983
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1984
As this thread blows up, I should stress this isn't remotely an exhaustive list -- I did it quickly and I didn't repeat years in which there were multiple filibusters on different civil rights issues.
But it should still give a sense of the "racial history" in the filibuster.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This site has gotten steadily worse with every "improvement" Elon has made, but this weekend made it clear that it's no longer a place to get and discuss breaking news.
It's just a cesspool for the worst people on social media and it's getting worse every week.
I've been telling myself for months that the good here outweighs the bad, but I don't believe that anymore.
There's no better way to announce that you've read literally nothing on the party realignment over civil rights than to ask about congressional delegations.
That's not how realignment happened, and anyone pushing this "rebuttal" is either an idiot or a liar.
Again, as I've discussed many times before, the power of sitting congressmen depended entirely on their seniority in the Democratic Party, which held dominant majorities in Congress. That's why they're the lagging indicator in this process.
So let's look at a state, but all the politics of a state, not just the senior southern Democrats determined to hang on to their perks in Congress.
@CheesedHammer @ericjorgenson8 @flakingbaking @quiltsbypagan @Katb4animals @RickLaManna1 @RepJasonCrow I'm a historian who's worked on this for 25 years, so I could point you to a lot of my published work, starting with my chapter in MYTH AMERICA:
@CheesedHammer @ericjorgenson8 @flakingbaking @quiltsbypagan @Katb4animals @RickLaManna1 @RepJasonCrow But I'm happy to provide some primary sources as well.
Here's some news coverage of Prentiss Walker, the segregationist Republican whose first appearance after winning the election was to speak before Americans for Preservation of the White Race:
@CheesedHammer @ericjorgenson8 @flakingbaking @quiltsbypagan @Katb4animals @RickLaManna1 @RepJasonCrow As I've noted here before, Prentiss Walker was an outspoken opponent of civil rights, voted against the Voting Rights Act, and insisted civil rights activists were worse than the Klan:
The House GOP has been riling up its base by repeatedly insisting it has the goods to get Joe Biden.
This works fine in the short term, but repeatedly overpromising and underdelivering is only going to make the base mad at them, more than anyone else.
You can see this with today's tweets from the Oversight Committee.
It's framed as a huge hit on Biden but once you read it, it's clear the "Biden FAMILY AND ASSOCIATES" framing is a load-bearing beam.
It's a showy announcement meant to suggest much more than is actually there.
But the base doesn't get that -- they're riled up and they expect action.
Action that Republican politicians can't *actually* deliver because they (or at least their very patient legal counsel) understand there's really no there there.
Any discussion of Florida's effort to replace the original AP standards for African American history with the state's own version should directly compare and contrast the two.
One thing is readily apparent from even a quick comparison between the two standards -- the claims that Florida's standards are "robust" quickly fall apart when you line them up next to the much more substantial program the AP has put together with specific sources and plans.
A lot of attention has been given to the slavery section -- which in Florida is strongly focused on discussing abolitionism while the AP standards are much more direct on the lived experiences for the enslaved -- but for me the 20th century material is more of an issue.