Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (960626)	9/2/2016 3:29:59 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577893

What you mean is a second source hasn't come forward. If that makes it incredible then I can tell you there are huge chunks of many historical documents that are just as incredible. We just THINK they came from the likes of Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson is a perfect example. There is probably no single American historical figure that has more proven quotes mis-attributed to him. Especially by the Right. Usually documents written by said individual are considered to be proper attribution. Even single source verbal quotes can be considered proper, but with declining confidence over the years. That particular LBJ quote has one single source some 4 decades after he supposedly uttered it. Given how at variance it is with his known positions and work, there are all kinds of reasons to doubt its veracity. As to LBJ being a racist, that is a bit murkier. He was a product of Texas of the early part of the 1900s. His perception of blacks and their role in society would necessarily be colored by that. There is no evidence that he held any ill will towards blacks as a race. There is copious evidence that he talked about them in the vernacular of the time and place. When he was a lawyer, he regularly took blacks as clients, much as George Wallace did. But, while George seems to have used racial animus as a way of manipulating voters, there is zero evidence that LBJ ever did the same. There are PLENTY of "verified" incidents of his use of the term for other than strategic reasons. Well, duh. I said precisely that. LBJ was a consummate politician. He rarely said anything without weighing the impact of the words. He could be very coarse when it suited him. And he could be very suave. Language was just a tool for him. Was he a racist? In the context of his time, probably not. At least not by the standards of many of his contemporaries. There is no evidence that he did things to hurt other races, just because. Nor is there any evidence that he was willing promote the welfare of any race at the expense of another. He was more interested in putting all Americans on a more or less equal footing. So what about that alleged quote? LBJ certainly saw the value of getting Democrats more aligned with civil rights, despite the wishes of the Dixiecrats. He expended an awful lot of effort in getting at least the most influential Dixiecrats to realize that giving blacks a more equal footing in society was in their interest. But he wasn't a social warrior, burning with indignation over the plight of blacks. But neither was it solely calculation that the quote implies. And there not only was his own personal feelings on the matter, there was his wife's views. Lady Bird was more of the social warrior in her actions, she did take personal risks in her social circles to promote certain black women to a more equal position. And you really cannot discount her influence on LBJ.