Should the TSBD be demolished?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

  Johnson, like other presidents, would often reveal his true motivations in asides that the press never picked up.
  During one trip, Johnson was discussing his proposed civil rights bill with two governors. Explaining why it was so
  important to him, he said it was simple: “I’ll have them niggers voting Democratic for two hundred years.”

  “That was the reason he was pushing the bill,” said MacMillan, who was present during the conversation. “Not
  because he wanted equality for everyone. It was strictly a political ploy for the Democratic party. He was phony
  from the word go.”

- Ronald Kessler, "Inside the White House: The Hidden Lives of the Modern Presidents and the Secrets of the World’s Most Powerful Institution", 1995

So we have on the one hand Caro's (and other historians; see Dallek for example) long detailed account of LBJ and his support for civil rights and other legislation and then on the other you have this anecdote and you think the latter outweighs the former?

As I cited from Caro, LBJ literally risked his presidency - his election in 1964 - by pushing this legislation. His advisers told him no, don't do it, it's too risky, it might split the party, lose the South. But he went ahead. From our advantage point today it didn't appear too risky; but not at that time. They didn't know that a terrible candidate like Goldwater would get the Republican nomination.

He then worked after his election in '64 and after the Civil Rights Bill had been enacted for passage of a Voting Rights Act, a Fair Housing Act, poverty programs, education programs and more to address racial injustice. The civil rights bill alone was enough to secure the black vote. Particularly after Goldwater and the GOP came out against it. Once they did that the black vote was lost for generations. As it has been. So why then follow up with all of this other legislation? It's not needed. He's got the black vote secured.

That long series of acts (yes, he didn't pass them alone; he had a large majority in Congress after the '64 election) are not the acts of a racist who hates black people. If he hated black people then why try to get their vote? And by trying to get their votes in the South he risked losing the larger white vote. And chances for election. Which also happened later. As he said it probably would. It makes no sense.

Was all of this done with no self interest involved? Of course not. He was a mean, nasty, miserable person. Caro documents it - his regular use of the "n" word and other shocking language; as have others. In fact, Caro has repeatedly stated that he "loathes" LBJ. But to dismiss it all - when the evidence presented by Caro indicates otherwise - as being only selfish acts by a racist (really? why would a racist want black votes when he didn't need them? for what) to win over black votes is simply not supported by history.

It's difficult to reconcile these two images: LBJ the user of racist slurs and other horrible language and LBJ the promoter of racial justice. Who was the real LBJ? Answer: both. We have to somehow hold both views of the man at the same time. Not easy to do but it's what he was.

[Jerry Organ]

So when is Richard going to demand Lyndon Johnson be expurged from the history books? Also Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

"Trump Isn't Alone: Five Racist Quotes From Modern U.S. Presidents" Newsweek, January 12, 2018 ( Link )

[Steve M. Galbraith]

LBJ won 94% of the black vote in the 1964 election. He didn't need to do anything more; the black vote was his. Meanwhile, the Republican Party, by opposing the '64 Civil Rights Act, had lost the black vote for generations. The "game" was over. As it essentially has been since then.

If LBJ was driven solely by a desire to secure or win over the black vote (a strange wish for a supposed racist), he had accomplished that. He didn't need to then pass, as was done in his administration, a Voting Rights Act, a Fair Housing Act, another civil rights bill, and a series of poverty and education programs that were intended to address racial injustice. Why do all of this? The black vote had been won. It wasn't necessary.

As to his role in the passage of the Civil Rights Bill, the accounts have been made by historians like Robert Caro, Robert Dallek and others. His work on behalf of the bill was essential in getting it passed. As Caro pointed out, at the time of JFK's death, the bill was going nowhere. It took JFK's death and LBJ's efforts (and yes, others) to get it passed. To ignore this is to ignore the fact that 1+1=2.

It has nothing to do with Donald Trump or "strongman" or any other silly argument. It has to do with the facts.

[Jerry Organ]

Caro seems smitten with Johnson:

    "To see Lyndon Johnson get that bill through, almost vote by vote
     is to see not only legislative power but legislative genius."

He must have gotten the "Johnson Treatment" from listening to all those WH recordings. The "myth" has gone on to infect other authors and now movies and documentaries. So entrenched, it's like JFK was assassinated by a conspiracy.

On September 10, 1963, the tax bill was approved by the House Ways and Means Committee, which allowed work to begin on the Civil Rights Bill. The 16th Street Baptist Church bombing on September 16 prompted Celler and the House Judiciary Committee to greatly strengthened the bill. Kennedy and Johnson has little to do with Celler strengthening the bill; Celler wasn't a Caro-puppet who required a Strongman "lever".

William McCulloch, a Republican Congressman from Ohio, and ranking minority leader on the House Judiciary Committee, also warrants special mention.

    "McCulloch was the ranking minority member of the House judiciary committee,
     and he told the Kennedy Administration that he would back a strong bill in the
     House – and urge his fellow Republicans to follow suit – but only if the White
     House agreed not to trade away the bill's strongest provisions in the Senate,
     and also agreed to give Republicans equal credit for passing it."

          -- "The Battle to Pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964" by Todd Purdum, Vanity Fair, March 31, 2014 ( Link )

McCulloch brought the Republicans to the table, and he made reasonable compromise with Democrats over the stronger Civil Right bill, which kept the Republicans in the game. Charles A. Halleck, Republican from Indiana and House Minority Leader, also helped with compromise. He reportedly told Kennedy:

    "I got a little trouble on my side, a lot of guys As I was walking a' alane, I heard twa corbies makin' a mane. The tane untae the tither did say, Whaur sail we gang and dine the day, O. Whaur sail we gang and dine the day?  It's in ahint yon auld fail dyke I wot there lies a new slain knight; And naebody kens that he lies there But his hawk and his hound, and his lady fair, O. But his hawk and his hound, and his lady fair.  His hound is to the hunting gane His hawk to fetch the wild-fowl hame, His lady ta'en anither mate, So we may mak' our dinner swate, O. So we may mak' our dinner swate.  Ye'll sit on his white hause-bane, And I'll pike oot his bonny blue e'en Wi' ae lock o' his gowden hair We'll theek oor nest when it grows bare, O. We'll theek oor nest when it grows bare.  There's mony a ane for him maks mane But nane sail ken whaur he is gane O'er his white banes when they are bare The wind sail blaw for evermair, O. The wind sail blaw for evermair.'ing … and so I ain’t sure
     they'll make me leader again but … I don’t give a damn."

I can't substantiate it, but one report said on Halleck's desk on the House floor, someone placed a furled umbrella mean to compare his co-operation with the Democrats to Chamberlain's "appeasement" of Hitler. If true, the "umbrella protest" seems to have been active within portions of the GOP, about a month before Louie Witt turned up in Dealey Plaza.

[Richard Smith]

Caro seems smitten with Johnson:

    "To see Lyndon Johnson get that bill through, almost vote by vote
     is to see not only legislative power but legislative genius."

He must have gotten the "Johnson Treatment" from listening to all those WH recordings. The "myth" has gone on to infect other authors and now movies and documentaries. So entrenched, it's like JFK was assassinated by a conspiracy.

Caro is often highly critical of LBJ.  He is the foremost expert on the topic and has spent decades researching his books.  If there is any "myth" in this context it is JFK's "Camelot."  JFK accomplished very little.  Certainly nothing of importance with Civil Rights.  Rather than the shining prince of white liberal elitist lore, JFK was an entitled lightweight with a well documented record of adultery, drug use, and undisclosed serious medical condition that he lied to the public about while running for office.  More Harvey Weinstein than King Arthur.

[Jerry Organ]

Re: Umbrella on Halleck's desk
 
The story seems to originate with a syndicated column by Roscoe Drummond. As published in the Washington Post of Monday, Nov 4, 1963:

"Faithful to Party: Halleck Didn't Sell Out on Rights"

    "The story is going the rounds that on the sunny morning after he had done
     so much to rescue the civil rights bill and assure it Republican support,
     House minority leader Charles Halleck found an odd gift perched ominously
     atop his desk: A big black umbrella a la Neville Chamberlain.

        Whether the incident is real or apocryphal, the meaning is the same--
     that someone is accusing Halleck of selling out to the Democrats, of
     throwing away an opportunity to harass the Kennedy administration by
     stymying civil rights.

        The implication of this Munich-esque charge is that Halleck in giving
     his backing to the bipartisan civil rights bill is deserting Republican
     Party policy.

        Such a charge is inaccurate, untrue and unfair. Halleck is implementing
     Republican policy. His politics-at-any-price Republicans are not."

The 1990 book "To End All Segregation: The Politics of the Passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964" by Robert D. Loevy took it a step further.

        "THE FURLED UMBRELLA

     House Republican Leader Charles Halleck was forced to "pay the price"
     for supporting the president's bipartisan compromise and successfully
     pushing it through the House Judiciary Committee. Charging that Halleck
     had "appeased" the Democratic enemy, a group of conservative
     Republicans placed a furled umbrella on his desk and then carefully
     pointed out to the news media that the furled umbrella was symbolic
     of former British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who carried such
     an umbrella, and of Chamberlain's "appeasement" of Adolph Hitler prior
     to the start of World War Two."

The story may have gained embellishments as the years went by. The desk became the one Halleck used on the House floor and there's an outreach to the media.

[Rick Plant]

Cuomo? Like I said the rules of attacking politicians, whatever they are, should be applied equally to all.

Well, let me know when it's equally applied to Trump stooges Greg Abbott and Ron DeSantis as well, then we can talk about it being equal for all politicians.   

[Rick Plant]

JFK made no "contribution to Civil Rights".

Again, after I praised LBJ for his efforts with Civil Rights you bizarrely responded that I viciously attack "every Democratic President."  I assume that even you realize that LBJ was a "Democratic President."  Thus, a falsehood.  Just one of many.  Anyone can read your endless, hate-filled threads on Trump that contain all manner of debunked conspiracy theories and judge for themselves whether you are several fries short of a happy meal.

  

You only "praised" LBJ for Civil Rights so you could disparage President Kennedy claiming he "did nothing" while you viciously attack every other Democratic President. You aren't fooling anybody.

"Endless hate-filled threads on Trump that contain all manner of debunked conspiracy theories". That doesn't even exist. I gave you 3 opportunities to locate one of these posts you claim I posted and you ignored it each time. And rightly so, because they don't exist.

Here's something you might want to consider purchasing Richard. It's a gold coin from the American Mint commemorating President Kennedy's contribution to Civil Rights. It can remind you that you're just a propagandist that makes up garbage to disparage President Kennedy and other Democratic Presidents while you still fawn over your orange criminal that did great harm to Civil Rights.

Kennedy and the Civil Rights Movement Commemorative Coin

President Kennedy's Civil Rights Address - the Speech that Changed the Nation

Features a detailed portraitA 24k Gold-Layered Tribute to JFK on the 50th Anniversary of his Civil Rights Address

With an excerpt from his historic Civil Rights address on the obverse

"Today, we are commited to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free."
John F. Kennedy

On June 6, 1963, President Kennedy presented anationally televised speech in response to the U.S. National Guard being sent to protect Vivian Malone and James Hood, two African-American students enrolling at the University of Alabama. In this nowhistoric address, he urged the nation to take action toward guaranteeing equal treatment of every American regardless of race. Soon after, Kennedy proposed that Congress consider civil rights legislation that would address voting rights, public accommodations, school desegregation, nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs, and more. Kennedy's proposal culminated in the Civil Rights Act of1964. Signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on July 2, 1964 - less than a year after Kennedy's assassination - the act outlawed all discriminatory employment practices based on sex or race andended segregation in public places such as swimming pools, libraries, and public schools.

Specially minted to mark the 50th Anniversary of JFK's historic Civil Rights Address, this AMERICANMINT EXCLUSIVE coin features a highly detailed engraving of President Kenndy and an excerpt from his speech on the obverse. Minted to the highest quality "Proof" standard and layered in 24k gold, it is an incredible 2.75" in diameter. A stirring tribute to one of the most important Presidential speeches in the modern era, this colossal commemorative coin is limited to only 9,999 complete collections worldwide and comes encased in a protective capsule to preserve it for future generations.