Got about 5 minutes in before waiting for something other than the redundancy of the same right wing trope pushed every time about Democrats and civil rights. Heard that nonsense a million times as Republicans try to rewrite history and pretend the Democrats of now are the same as the George Wallace and Bull Connor Southern Democrats of yesteryear as well as the idea that South had been drifting towards the Republican Party for decades. But, hey, solid reasoning. The party platforms of the 1950s are exactly the same as today, surely. Sell me something other than "They don't care about you!" and give a few generalizations, at best, about modern issues.
Long story. Here's a start, in relation to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Do you know which group had the highest percentage vote in favor of it? Northern Democrats. The lowest? Southern Republicans (Although represented in significant less numbers in Congress than Southern Democrats.). There's a lot more to say when I have more time, but, ultimately, it's silly to argue that one should vote today on a party based upon platforms in the 1960s. If so, it's not like the Republican candidate in '64 voted for civil rights.
This one? Link: House: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/88-1964/h182 Senate: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/88-1964/s409 House Vote This one looks like Republicans had 178 House votes, with 136 “Yea” votes - 76.4% approval. The Democrats had 253 House votes, with 153 “Yea” votes - 60.5% approval. Senate Vote This one looks like Republicans had 33 Senate votes, with 27 “Yea” votes - 81.8% approval. The Democrats had 67 Senate votes, with 46 “Yea” votes - 68.6% approval. Republicans Overall: 211 Votes 163 “Yeas” or 77.2% Approval Democratic Overall: 320 Votes 199 “Yeas” or 62.1% Are these accurate? **Edit: Of the 6 Republican “Nay” votes in the Senate, only one (1) was from a southern state (John Tower, R-TX). But to your point, it does look like every Democratic “Nay” in the Senate came from southern states.
Pretending not to see race doesn’t mean what you think it means; it’s actually closer to the opposite of what you think it means.
Sad, lies roll off so easily for you when in the realm of the political. What does that say about your position? Your ideals?
Pretending not to see race, means that in order to see people as equal, you have to strip them of race. People are inherently equal, even with race, gender, sexual orientation, and the like. It’s that people are equal already, not that they have to be somehow made equal, by removing something from them. The woman of color in the video is a woman of color. Pretending she is anything but is a form of bias, and closer to being opposite of what you want it to be. We’re not meant to not see race, gender, sexual orientation and the like; we’re meant to see it, and not have it matter one bit.
I think I get what you are saying. We also need to find a video of a Mexican chick saying this stuff.
You just claimed to be unable to distinguish the low absorbance of light from high absorbance, after thousands of posts discussing viewing sports.
I didn’t notice the color of the person’s skin, while focusing on the content of her character and words.
Yet, chose to post a video and message specifically dedicated to race, so your color blindness seems to have some limits.