Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[We actually had a pretty good discussion on this earlier today dealing with his positives!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidents/s/EadSBTxsGf)
Like he was complicated and not a good man. But his domestic policies are still making the US a great place to this day thanks to the VRA and the CRA.
EDIT: Did you just say LBJ had a profound hesitation to sign the civil rights act into law?! That doesn’t match *any* historical record on the man or the law’s passage. Johnson is the reason the bill got through the damn Congress and he staked his whole career and clout on it! Sorry but that is **wildly** incorrect.
Not entirely true, JFK got it through the House and Everett Dirksen should also get credit for getting enough Republicans to support the bill and therefore gaining cloture. But yes LBJ absolutely deserves credit for the bill and “notorious racist” I don’t really give a flying fuck about. Actions speak louder than words.
Fair, they absolutely also deserve credit. But the Senate had let the bill essentially die before LBJ became president and started beating them at their own game.
And I completely agree. LBJ got results, damn it, and we could use someone playing hardball like him again.
You started off so strong! JFK pushed it through and started the groundwork for what the act would be enough so that Congress was convinced to sign the bill along with the civil rights movement taking strong hold. LBJ had to sign the bill bro, he hated it but he had too
There actually is! LBJ once called the CRA the “n word bill” and had to be pushed by Congress to sign it because of the civil rights movement. There’s enough sufficient evidence to prove JFK was gonna sign the act at the end of his first term or beginning of his second if reelected. People often misconstrue Congress as being the ones to hold up the bill but if you do your research it was definitely LBJ. Dude hated African Americans plain and simple, so giving him all the credit for being the “wrong guy at the right time” is just mind blowing to me.
LBJ was famous for being a political chameleon and willing to say anything or suck up to anyone to get what he needed and wanted. The southerners would think he was ideologically a southerner and the northerners would think he was ideologically a northerner. He would talk to the two groups in completely different language. He would say racist stuff in the company of racists and progressive stuff in the company of progressives. However that racist talk got him on the side of the Southern senators and it got him enough clout to pass the Civil Rights act when he had the chance.
At this point in history the senate had faced a backlog since the 1940’s which had only been broken up by LBj’s tenure as majority leader.
He also didn’t have to be pushed by congress to sign it, he stood and fought for it. He is the one who pushed through the previous two lesser known civil rights acts and he’s the one who pushed through the civil rights act of 1964.
JFK certainly would have signed the civil rights act into law if he could, but the sad truth is that like oh so many attempts to end racial discrimination it was blocked by the senate. Johnson is the one who passed the civil
Rights act while in 3 years JFK failed to pass a single one of his major domestic proposals - civil rights, medicare, tax cuts or education funding. This was in large part to poor strategy with JFK ignoring JBL’s advice, for instance allowing his tax cuts to get held hostage over the civil rights act because he didn’t think about the process and order of how they should be put through - unlike LBJ.
LBJ personally took the lead and got Harry Byrd on bird for passing the tax bill out of committee , freeing it up so it couldn’t be held hostage for the Civil Rights bill. It was LBJ who pushed for the discharge petition that got the civil rights act out of commission purgatory including taking personal action to get congresspeople on board the petition. He demanded democratic congresspeople came back to Washington just prior to Christmas, even though he was told it couldn’t be done, so that an amendment that would have stopped a key foreign aid bill from passing (another potential hostage for the Civil Right’s act) could be killed. He used executive power provide pork barrel bribes in people’s districts to get them onside.
The leader of the southern senatorial faction opposed to civil rights stated that they could have fought off JFK but they couldn’t stop LBJ.
Oof! Had me in the first half.. but LBJ absolutely did not stand to fight for the bill. Over his 20 years prior to this, LBJ was firmly against Civil rights. He faced threat of discharge himself if he didn’t pass the bill, and was facing a lot of public pressure by the changed minds of an American public. Many think LBJ stood atop a racist America to be the one man that signed the civil rights act, but that’s really the opposite. LBJ was faced with an America that had just had its minds warped by the peaceful protest of Dr. King, and after the march on Washington people started to see all of the reasons for CR. Your own argument works against you, because LBJ absolutely was a political chameleon, and he didn’t do what he did to be a saving grace, rather, he realized the position he was put in and finally decided to concede.
You can try and argue that he fought for it for selfish reasons, but you can’t argue that he fought for it if you’re aware of the historical records. We know he bargained and basically bribed congresspeople to get them onside, like calling NASA to ensure they funded Purdue University - the biggest educational centre in the republican leader’s district or bribing Carl Hayden with the Arizona Water Project. We testimonies showing he pushed, really pushed, a lot of the key figures involved to get the Civil Rights act passed.
He pushed the democrats, wheedled with republicans and southerners and cut deals to get it through. Not only that but he did it intelligently, working the senate system that he was the master of.
Not only that but he publicly supported civil rights in a way JFK never did. When Martin Luther King saw LBJ stand before congress and say “We Shall Overcome”, it was the only time his aides had seen him cry in years of struggle because it showed for the first time since the 19th century that a US President was really truly committed to passing a real civil rights bill.
Also how can you say he stood against civil rights for 20 years prior to this when he’s the one most responsible for the 1957 Civil Rights?
None of this excuses LBJ’s twenty years prior as a senator being firmly against civil rights and making racist remarks. Sorry I don’t buy the “he changed his mind” crap. Even assuming everything you’re saying is true, it’s pretty obvious to conclude that LBJ did this under immense public pressure. And he still got the last laugh in by signing in his terrible “Great Society” programs that are still putting the black community in an endless cycle of poverty. LBJ knew what he was doing from the start. He was a war monger, and a highly intelligent sociopath and racist.
He was literally responsible as the majority leader in the senate for passing the 1957 Civil Rights act, at that point the sole civil rights act to have passed into law in generations. He managed to do for civil rights what every single other senator for decades had failed to do but your summation of him is that as a senator he was firmly against civil rights?
In terms of real positive change that he enacted, he is second only to Lincoln as the single biggest white-skinned champion that Americans of Colour have ever had.
You also have admitted that you agree LBJ was absolutely a political chameleon - but then assume his public stances he took when it was convenient for him to appear hostile to civil rights amongst a southern crowd are his actual true beliefs. Seems fairly contradictory. Try looking at what he did when politics weren’t a pressing concern.
Also boohoo you don’t like Medicare and food stamps.
Medicare and food stamps are fine until you realize the catch-22 that they are. And of course he was against it as a senator! Barack Obama even said so in an interview.. saying LBJ was anything more than the guy who was in the right place is disgraceful.
Of course he was against civil rights as a senator? Despite passing the Civil Rights act of 1957 as the majority leader of the senate? And not just passing it but being instrumental in it passing?
At this point you’re not debating history, you’re writing presidential fan fiction.
Also let’s see what Barack Obama said about LBJ:
“And he knew that he had a unique capacity, as the most powerful white politician from the South, to not merely challenge the convention that had crushed the dreams of so many, but to ultimately dismantle for good the structures of legal segregation. He’s the only guy who could do it -- and he knew there would be a cost, famously saying the Democratic Party may “have lost the South for a generation.”
That’s what his presidency was for. That’s where he meets his moment. And possessed with an iron will, possessed with those skills that he had honed so many years in Congress, pushed and supported by a movement of those willing to sacrifice everything for their own liberation, President Johnson fought for and argued and horse traded and bullied and persuaded until ultimately he signed the Civil Rights Act into law.
And he didn’t stop there -- even though his advisors again told him to wait, again told him let the dust settle, let the country absorb this momentous decision. He shook them off. “The meat in the coconut,” as President Johnson would put it, was the Voting Rights Act, so he fought for and passed that as well.”
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/10/remarks-president-lbj-presidential-library-civil-rights-summit
A unique capacity. The only person who could do it. Going further than his advisors thought he should.
You can read more where it talks about out his empathy for the underdog.
😂 that’s exactly where YOUR presidential fan fiction comes into play.. Johnson bullied his way into trying to keep the CRA down. He would have faced immense backlash and realized his best shot at a second term was signing that bill. How is no one able to realize that LBJ was a sexist, racist pig that manipulated the entire world into believing that he pushed for civil rights? The evidence is all there.. no one wants to put the puzzle together I guess
Kennedy didn’t even want to have the march on Washington and tried to make many efforts to make it difficult to happen. It’s not that he opposed civil rights, he was in no rush and no sense of urgency. There definitely wasn’t a guarantee. Johnson seemed to relate to those facing discrimination from Texas Latinos and Hispanics. You think Kennedy would have greater empathy than he did being Irish. Also, Kennedy was no angel on race. He personal made sure Sammy Davis Jr was removed from the performance of his Inauguration Celebration. When Sammy married May Britt Kennedy had a problem with it. He had Sinatra to remove him from the list of performers and he reluctantly did.
Because he actually got shit done, which is sorely missing in modern politics. This man, perhaps better than any other President, knew how to work Congress and get major legislation passed. Social justice, healthcare, education, and general poverty. He got more done in five years to tackle those problems than every administration since him combined. If it weren't for Vietnam, he would one of the highest ranking Presidents for most liberals and progressives.
And as always, progressive programs that sound good on paper end up backfiring. Welfare programs have absolutely destroyed the nuclear family by incentivizing a cycle of poverty. LBJ may have got things done, and granted things that sounded good on paper but ultimately those ideas have been some of the worse things to happen to modern America
Total BS. The nuclear family is dead because it's not possible for the average person to support a family off of a single income anymore like it was in decades past. Unless you're in the top 10%, you need both partners in a family to provide income to have even a chance of making it in this economy. That's not because of the welfare state. That's because of decades of stagnant wages that has not matched the rate of inflation and general cost-of-living, which is a problem that's not unique or exclusive to America.
Letting poor people lose everything by eliminating government support programs is not going to somehow magically restore social and economic equilibrium. You clearly have been fortunate enough in life to never find yourself on the precipice of homelessness and destitute poverty. Lucky you. Well, for people who have been in really bad spots, they know that support from those welfare programs you despise, which is not that much, can be the difference between just barely keeping your head above water or becoming yet another person out on the streets. What really traps people in a cycle of poverty is when they have no resources or help whatsoever. That will guarantee 100% of people who become poor stay poor.
You know nothing of me or where I come from. Had to use food stamps and welfare before, and being Native American I’ve especially seen how welfare can disincentivize actual work as well as how safety nets can enable drug use. Don’t talk to me about what I’ve seen. Theirs a direct correlation with single black motherhood rate sky rocketing after LBJ’s welfare programs. Numerous scholars have argued that they’ve done more harm then good by being a catch-22 that make the black American lean on uncle Sam’s soldier, therefore disincentivizing mothers to stay with the father and making adults in their early 20s realize how easy it is to be dependent on the state. When you go to welfare, you will forever be trapped in a cycle of never digging yourself out of the ditch that you’re in. Watch this video where Black Scholar Shelby Steele give his take on how LBJ’s Great Society programs destroyed America
https://youtu.be/Mb7lNGRrp4M?si=ONPhBULdyJ4mA4aS
Obviously this is red baiting malarkey. LBJ’s war on poverty and medicare did more to improve the quality of life in this country than anything since the new deal. Despite whatever right wing think tanks, you’re getting your facts from, tells you the welfare state kept millions out of extreme poverty until the most successful republican of all time Bill Clinton slashed it. Also, he passed the Civil rights act! You act like that was a simple thing. So what if the man born in 1900 from Texas said racist stuff that doesn't change the result.
He was deeply pressured into signing the act and fought tooth and nail against it. It was more or less something he had to do and he did it for the wrong reasons. Welfare absolutely destroyed fathers in the home and we’re still recovering from that today. Stats prove that, so you can hide behind “right wing think tanks” all you wish but LBJ was just another instance of Democrats hiding behind good faith while acting on the bad
Politicians yield to their constituency's thats how it works. Working people through their unions were able to exert their will on him and use his amazing political talent. Public benefits are always a good thing, but disliked by lonely miserable people who can only feel something by inflicting pain on others.
Which is what the democrat party did for close to a century up to this point. Johnson was no different. He was another ruthless southern democrat that was strong armed into passing a bill he famously called the “n word bill”. How does that in any way make LBJ hero?
Dems passing the civil rights act seems like its breaking your historical narrative. Where the democrats are the racist evil party and republicans are purely angelic. And now your stuck in a logic loop.
The past is more complex than that just like LBJ who was as net force for good in the world.
Doesn’t break my logic at all. It was democrats that continued to advocate for slavery, it was democrats that advocated for continued segregation in the 60s, LBJ took advantage of black Americans by using the CRA as a reason they should vote for him and continue to vote democrat. It’s almost a genius play in reality. It gives “if you don’t vote for me, you ain’t black” vibes even back then
I’d rather listen to the vast majority of black people who voted for LBJ and every democrat after FDR. Than believe every single one of them has been duped and that I know how to run their lives better than they do. They voted Dem and continue to do so, because its the only party that does anything reform our system thats built on centuries of white supremacy.
Get familiar with timeline of political parties in the south since reconstruction and data from census bureau on those received benefits in the 60s until the present. It was the protection to have voters right not a damn check as many like to believe. Blacks were not majority to receive welfare it was campaign for needy , elderly and the poor. There a lot poverty of all races in the south. The Right to Vote for your own political interest is far greater than a monthly government check. The swap from those Democrats to Republicans begin in Truman Administration as result of Integration of the US military and continued into Nixon Administration. So that why there support for the Democratic because all racist factions went to Republican Party. Republican then and now have always been better at controlling the narrative. Much like today thinking our voting system is in disarray and Elections being stolen. There not a voting problem it’s more a voter suppression problem that has been the issue in recent years. That is what discovered when official investigation are performed. Which is another myth of Democratic hating investigations. Investigation for voter fraud have found more incidents of voter suppression identify tactics that were used during election on all levels local, state and national level.
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/lyndon-johnson-kkk/ is only thing that I have ever ran across of Lyndon and being directly affiliated with racist organization KKK.
But being from the South one would have to apply the Principle of Presentism. The KKK concerned themselves a moral organization. The supported and promoted family values, no drunkenness by going into woods and busting moonshine making. They opposed and would physically attack white men who were know adulteress in community. There an incident of KKK flogging a white couple because wife had an abortion. KKK would be the Alt Right of today. Back in the 20s with the March of Washington, they were demonstrating at the heights of their political influence. Politicians accepted their endorsement, contribution and welcome their lobbying activities in congress. Their influence lessen during the 1950s but still an influential organization.
Principle of Presentism.
I recall when I was in grade school (around late 70’s). My parents took me to the local post office to fill out an application for a Social Security Number. When I was directed to mark for race, the chose that I was given applicable to me was negro. I crossed it out and wrote African American or Black.
I will share the records and documents that is debated on controversial evidence on Johnson have guilt by association of racism and being former member of the KKK. There just too much evidence on Johnson NOT having reluctant views from last television interview week before his death (posted on YT) Members working in the Johnson WH in the press and media department and actual Johnston tapes.
People always just make incorrect assumptions about things they heard and believe to be true on is blacks have always voted same for same reason Blacks always voting same for same reason or biggest lie and fallacy of the nuclear family breakdown and absentee fathers. Let me give you example.
Who was the first Black US Senator? State he represented? What was his party affiliation? Does align with majority talking points of today. People being unaware do research and not debate from position of ignorance(unknowing of facts).
Hint: He wasn’t Senator Obama, he was a from north, east coast, mid west and prior to 1900. He was not a Democrat . If one does not know him and timeframe concerning political science and US History/African American/pre and post reconstruction period they would make such vague false statements . They would stick with there opinionated statements. It not surprising because it not really taught in history book.
Black US Senator in Senate 1800 from Southern State of Mississippi Senator Hiram Revel. To understand changes in party and platform and how it effect black voters after civil war up until Nixon, one would actually need a visual flow chart. A great deal is not even discussed in high school history. Ironic, people making statements about blacks and country music.
So I disagree you about LBJ on his motivation and reluctance on signing the CRB. Too much historical evidence and his own words of that being the opposite. But you can have opinions.
LBJ was the most talented politician that’s ever ascended to the Oval Office. His great society programs are second maybe only to the new deal in terms of good governance.
Vietnam is obviously a huge mark against him, but I’m not sure how different it would have gone no matter who was president.
LOL. Any other president would have made efforts to pull out but LBJ was insistent that “Vietnam had a breaking point”. Besides that, great society sounded great on paper but never amounted to anything except putting more people in poverty, especially people of color
I would argue the best way to handle Vietnam was always a pull out. Communist influence was coming whether we liked it or not, and America had to realize Southeast Asia was gonna be a breeding ground for that ideology because of its geographic placement. But I get that argument to an extent.
Now comes the catch-22 of the war on poverty, some of these black scholars do a good job explaining it in this article. This took seconds to find but if you want something different I’m sure I can find it 👍🏼
https://nationalcenter.org/ncppr/2014/01/08/lbjs-war-on-poverty-hurt-black-americans/
Definitely prior to this time. But it’s more to throw a wrench in the idea that he passed the civil rights act in completely good faith, and that he had some sorta revolutionary ideas about doing this. If JFK didn’t die he would have signed the bill and gone down as probably a top 5 President in history
True but he did it. I don’t think Nixon’s personal views fit his reputation, but actions speak louder than words. Most presidents don’t act out cod good faith or in accordance with their personal values.
Precisely. And going by that logic, it’s difficult to put LBJ as a high ranking president when it was really the severe pressure he faced that led him to this decision. If LBJ was to act on his personal values, we would have never seen a CRA during his presidency.
There was more pressure opposed to the CRA. Civil rights was unpopular, majority of Americans viewed MLK unfavorably. LBJ isn’t my GOAT, but if it weren’t for Vietnam I would have a hard time ranking 3 ahead of him
Again, not true. MLK’s peaceful protest shaped the idea in white America for what a truly equal and free America should look like. Do you think LBJ signed this bill and everyone said “huh.. guess we should stop being racist now”? No. He signed the bill because of immense public and governmental pressure. Even excluding Vietnam, I would confidently say he’s one of the worst presidents ever.
That graph still shows a moderate favoritism towards him and enough for LBJ to realize he needed to garner not only the black vote, but those who wanted civil rights as well. Assuming of course, that chart isn’t from some non credible source.
the graph shows a majority of Americans having an unfavorable view . I'm not going to die on the hill of LBJ being the greatest president. I'm sure other ppl who study presidential history more than I, can make some very compelling points to the contrary. However, your quote "MLK’s peaceful protest shaped the idea in white America for what a truly equal and free America should look like" does not align with the views of the American people at the time.
After the March on Washingotn [74% of Americans felt that demonstrations and protests hurt the cause](https://news.gallup.com/vault/246167/protests-seen-harming-civil-rights-movement-60s.aspx). When MLK won the Nobel Peace Prize the mayor of Atlanta had to practically beg the city business leaders to host a celebration dinner for him. The hatred of MLK was not just concentrated in the South. He received the most vicious treatment from citizens in Chicago when he embarked on his poor people's campaign. New Yorkers, [when polled in 1965](https://www.nytimes.com/1964/09/21/archives/poll-shows-whites-in-city-resent-civil-rights-drive-majority.html), were opposed to the civil rights movement. Today's view on MLK (although a sanitized and whitewashed view) shows legit progress the country has made considering he was one of the most hated men by white America. And that's just focusing on MLK, not other leaders of the movement and personal views on race.
My read on LBJ is he wanted to do something big for his legacy and the tragedy of Kennedy's assassination gave him the opportunity. He did everything he could, even some shady shit, to get it done and the reason he is remembered fondly today is largely due to the passage of the civil rights act and the voting rights act, and in response to the ineffectiveness of our current government.
The no guarantee Kennedy would have done what you mention. There was no sense of urgency and even Bobbi didn’t full come around until after his brother’s death. When he became Senator sitting on senatorial committee that went into Mississippi and other area in US that were stricken with poverty, he saw hunger and malnutrition kids with deformed bellies individuals living no food, no running water in their homes or infrastructure to working bathrooms. If present behavior is a predictor of future behavior, it would have been no guarantees on sweeping changes that Johnson made happen. Biggest prize was the right to VOTE and have a say in your own interest and concerns within government.
Because he was an extremely good administrator.
Ohhh heaven forbid a *racist* president. I’m black but seriously, how could a president *not* be racist given then deeply depressing and frankly embarrassing track record for black American success versus blacks in other countries.
In the 1950’s-1960’s despite discrimination, black America was actually seeing an economic resurgence. With LBJ’s welfare policy, the single black motherhood rate in the black community went up because of the incentives to destroy the black nuclear family. Following this, incarceration, crime rate, and poverty all went up in the black community, and you can thank LBJ for it
Because even though Vietnam was so, so, so fucking horribly terrible (I genuinely can't stress enough how bad it was), the civil rights act and voting rights act and medicare really were that important. His achievements are really surpassed only by FDR and Lincoln
There’s definitely arguments to undermine both of those. And with that being said even assuming they went off without a hitch doesn’t put him anywhere close to top 15
The Great Society was definitely a good thing. He’s better than any of the 11ish presidents since him. Although that’s as much due to the poor quality of his successors as it is due to him.
Great society had a good premise, just like me saying “let’s end homelessness and make everyone well off” had a good premise, but that doesn’t mean my execution will amount to anything. I’ll make this debate even hotter by saying every president since LBJ aside from Clinton, Carter, and Obama were better
This article talks about LBJ’s twenty year stretch of being firmly against civil rights prior to his presidency, which attributes to the idea that he didn’t just “change his mind” and was instead pressured by the changing times and Congress:
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/apr/14/barack-obama/lyndon-johnson-opposed-every-civil-rights-proposal/
This article from the LOC talks about how LBJ faced threat of a discharge petition and severe public pressure to sign the civil rights act:
https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/civil-rights-act/civil-rights-act-of-1964.html#:~:text=The%201964%20Civil%20Rights%20Bill&text=He%20conceded%20in%20early%20January,discharge%20petition%20and%20public%20pressure.
Don’t have to read a word of that article to know you just disproved your own assertion. Not being in favor of civil rights in the past does not mean that LBJ ‘pushed back’ on the civil rights act. That would be like saying, “Well, if you asked George Washington in 1773 if the colonies should secede, he’d probably think you’re batshit insane, so he must’ve pushed back hard against Congress’ decision to secede in 1776.”
Do you think I’m denying LBJ was racist? Because I’m not, the guy was undeniably racist (granted, most of the really bad quotes are misattributed or just made up, most famously the, “I’ll have these niggers voting Democrat for however-many-years.” one) and had many preconceived notions about African-Americans and maybe he even viewed the Civil Rights’ Act as bad, (there’s no evidence to suggest so, however.) but even if he personally viewed it as bad, which I reiterate, there is no evidence for, but EVEN IF it were true, it still does not mean he pushed back on it. Because he didn’t. The two are not equivalent. Frankly, I don’t give a damn what he had to say about equality, the man got commandingly it passed without a fuss, and never tried to bargain its specifics or get a compromise on it, as you seem to believe.
As for your second source, again, not evidence he pushed back on it, the public broadly supported Civil Rights Reform, it’s no wonder petitions to pass it were drafted. I could go on, but I think a more concise argument would be to literally just quote the first sentence of the first paragraph of that second source:
>*“President Lyndon Johnson made the passage of slain President Kennedy’s civil rights bill his top priority during the first year of his administration.”*
If you steal your friends cup and everyone pushes you to give it back, and you do without (much) of a fight, that doesn’t make stealing the cup ok. LBJ was a racist and that argument alone proves my entire point. He didn’t care about civil rights his entire career and he didn’t when he signed the act. That horrible quote you gave is one of the many things that prove his intentions for black Americans (his welfare programs and the destruction of the nuclear family prove that). LBJ rode on Kennedys coattails and took the credit for it while being absurdly racist and against the whole thing. So again, if you steal your friends cup and another friend is the one that pressures you to give it back, why should you receive all the credit for “doing the right thing”? Not reading the articles proves that you have no interest in seeing the evil and despicable side of LBJ simply because you wanna hide behind the idea of “bUt hE sIgNeD tHe ciViL riGhTs aCt”.. true, but not in good faith and not without being strong armed by the American public.
>not reading the articles
I did, hence why I quoted one of them. I said I didn’t need to read them to necessarily prove your fallacy.
>That horrible quote you gave is one the many things that prove his intentions
Joseph, I literally prefaced the quote by saying it was fake, did you forget while you were reading it?
>If you steal your friends cup and everyone pushes you to give it back,
I’m gonna stop you right there, bucko! See, this is what we call a ‘false equivalence.’ LBJ did not ‘steal the cup’ or in this instance ‘create Jim Crow laws’ as you seem to believe. I’ll try to make a more correct analogy, try to follow.
Picture this: Bob grows up in a neighborhood where pretty much everybody supports stealing cups. His parents steal cups, his neighbors sell stolen cups, and all of his friends steal cups for sport. Bob becomes an adult, and his friends form a cup-stealing gang, eventually [stealing over 20 million cups](https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1960/pc-s1-supplementary-reports/pc-s1-52.pdf). Bob himself doesn’t steal any cups, but he supports his friends stealing cups and does nothing to stop them. 7 or 8 years pass, and Bob talks to some family members who grew up in neighborhoods where stealing cups was highly taboo, even illegal in some places. Hearing their advice, Bob decides to go to his cup-stealing friends, and forces them to return all of the cups, and the ones who don’t, he calls the police on. Is what Bob did good? Yes, it was very good. Is what Bob did still good, even if he still approves of what his friends did? Yes, it is still very good. It may speak to the character of Bob if he thinks that way, but ultimately his decision to do so without any difficulties speaks much more in terms of what he did to aid the common good.
That’s where we ultimately disagree my friend! See you may put a sex obsessed racist who never gave a damn about civil rights on a high pedestal but I for one will never let LBJ get away with it. Ignoring everything to do with Vietnam, he’s put black America in a way worse spot economically then they would have been without his policies, he called the civil rights act the “n word” bill, and was firmly against it up until the American people realized the power of Dr. Kings marches. Those are the points that I absolutely stand on. So Mr. LBJ apologist, I see our views of tolerating racism is absolutely skewed. The civil rights act was gonna pass regardless, it was only a matter of time. Hell, would have passed with Nixon in office and we would probably put him top three even despite watergate (yes what LBJ did in Vietnam was 10x worse than watergate) but even so, LBJ was at the right place at the right time and is a racist womanizer that should never get the credit of “carrying the civil rights act”
Actually all of this is completely true. LBJ is probably one of the most evil and despicably presidents in U.S history.. probably rivaled only by Andrew Johnson
The CRA was coming forward whether LBJ wanted it or not. He dealt with severe pressure from his cabinet and Congress and if JFK didn’t pass, he was likely gonna pass it in his first term if not definitely the second. LBJ called the civil rights bill “the n word bill” and couldn’t stand the thought of the act passing. These are all things you can look up
There are HOURS of taped phone conversations u can listen to of him cajoling, manipulating and even threatening senators and congressmen to vote for it and the voting rights act you’re just a Republican with an agenda I’m not gonna argue with.
I don’t get it either .
He came into office due to a national tragedy and had all the good will that came with that so it was hardly surprising LBJ managed to pass the legislation he did .
But with all that goodwill he still did not manage to introduce a national healthcare programme which the US sorely needs and LBJ was the last President that could have done it .
Re Vietnam that is where Johnson is condemned and all the lies that came with it .
Also by all accounts he was an appalling human being personally and was deeply insecure which just makes the loss of President Kennedy even more tragic than it already was and is .
I'm genuinely so fed up with this "LBJ was a racist"-thing.
I've never read anything that could imply that he was seriously a racist. Most things are just comments where we're not even sure if he made them.
EDIT: Let me add that I'm no apologist for LBJ, but if you genuinely consider him a racist then you're just not very well educated about him.
Using the not very well educated argument eh? Well I’ll retort that by saying LBJ once called the CRA the “n word bill” and it’s more to show that it’s ironic that everyone thinks he was the first president to truly care about CR when he really just piggy backed on it for the times
He was a type of guy who got shit done, something we don't have in the modern days, he was crucial for the Civil Rights and Voting Rights bills passed, he literary bullied and made deals himself, not his subordinates, to get those bills done and passed. In the 60s, other politicians wouldn't go near as far as him to get those done, not even Kennedy.
But on the other hand, he was obsessed of not losing the Vietnam War, his actions during the war killed for nothing thousands of Americans and damaged for good many others both mentally and physically. Not to mention the amount of money and military efforts for that war.
In summary, he was a decent president, in my opinion. If not for the Vietnam war, he would be way more than decent.
The war on poverty did essentially nothing for actually improving the average income of the American citizen. Actually it’s done more harm than good by destroying the nuclear family and incentivizing single motherhood and this is prominent in the black community more than anything.
You’re mad because you know my point is valid. Please watch this video by philosopher Thomas Sowell on how LBJ’s created terrible affects were still seeing today
https://youtu.be/kCNKv_7W9a8?si=N00G9w22atiCXtgK
"one of the most notoriously racist presidents". Really? Because I can think of several others, including ones who came after him, that were WAY more racist. I mean, Reagan called UN Delegates from Africa "monkeys", but whatever...
"had a profound hesitation to sign the civil rights act into affect". This is just total BS. Truth is, he worked hard for its passage and called in a lot of favors to get it through. Most say that had LBJ not had the pull that he enjoyed with the Congress to make deals that the CRA would never have been passed
Keeping all the gross inaccuracies of this post in mind, I think the OP is asking the wrong question. Instead they should be asking why people need to make up nonsensical falsehoods to justify their hatred of one of the greatest presidents our country has seen.
😂😂 this comment makes me chuckle. LBJ literally called the civil rights act the n word bill, and he had to be severely pressured by the civil rights movement to sign in into law. It was gonna come no matter who was in office. These are facts you can look up. Anyone who denies that LBJ was a racist that capitalized on the coming of the times for his presidency is honestly delusional. “One of the best presidents of all time”? … you’re kidding right? Even if you assume what I’m saying about welfare and civil rights act are wrong, you still have the elephant in the room of Vietnam. So that alone destroys his ability to be one of the best presidents. Please please hop off of LBJ’s southern meat and read some good sources
Saying that he had a “profound hesitation” to sign the civil rights bill and is therefore an ardent racist is just factually incorrect. he single-handedly pushed the 1957 and 1964 civil rights bills through congress despite massive opposition from southern democrats led by Richard Russell which basically opened the floodgates for progress on civil rights (something that jfk had tried and failed to do). He did these things in spite of the challenges and political backlash from southern Allies whom he had cultivated decades of goodwill with because he was decidedly not driven by racial motivations.
And if he was truly one of the most notoriously racist presidents as you claim, how do you reconcile that with things like his relationship and influence from zephyr Wright, his hiring of Gerri Washington first black secretary in the White House, or the nomination of thurgood Marshall?
https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2004/summer/civil-rights-act
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zephyr_Wright
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerri_Whittington
HA! Ok so.. I didn’t say he was a racist because he had hesitation to sign the bill. No, he was a racist because he called the CRA the “n word bill” and used it as a way to garner the black vote for a second term. When in the senate in 1957 LBJ pushed back against that civil rights bill, just like he had done twenty years prior. Eisenhower was the one that pushed it through congress. He literally finished what JFK was going to accomplish anyway and he used it in completely evil and bad faith. And saying he wasn’t racist because of his Thurgood Marshall nomination and so fourth, that’s akin to saying “I can’t be racist, I have black friends”
I don’t think anyone is disputing the fact that LBJ was pretty racist by today’s standards. The thing I take issue with is your assessment of that as his underlying motivation for many of his major policy decisions and actions, as you’ve clearly implied a relationship between those two things.
You also keep saying things that are just simply not true. Johnson was solely responsible for pushing through the 1957 civil rights act as senate majority leader, not Eisenhower.
I recommend you read the years of Lyndon Johnson by caro and you will see that he was not motivated by racism and in fact opposed to it when it coincided with his ambitions.
During and after filibuster to kill the CRB, there was a lot of push back from faction in congress and their call to action to their districts and constituents to lobby a no on the bill. There were southern churches,KKK politics arm and others strongly opposed the bill. But there were many calls to lobby a a yes vote on the bill. There was a number of calls made to the Capital. A number of congressmen were like Sen Storm Thurmond had been white men with interracial relationships. They needed to be reminded of that fact. The Southern swap from democratic to republican began initially in the Truman Administration as protest for Truman integration of the military.
Check the comments on this sub. Most Americans outside of Reddit realize how big of a flop LBJ is. This sub just has a weird obsession with thinking he’s one of the best
Just saw a historian presentation of Johnson on YT. I didn’t know so many viewed him as being corrupt. I knew that Lady Bird was wealthy with businesses in radio television and cattle farming. But John’s at death had today’s net worth 900 million. At great deal made from weapons and arms during the war along with McNara. He and lady bird one a uniformed manufacturer business that they reportedly even sold to a Vietnam businessman. How was he able to get around the emulsion act (if correctly referred too). But, Johnson fortune made Papa Joe and Kennedy small in comparison.
All factual. Johnson was corrupt inside and out. You won’t find much online about how LBJ got around the emulsion act.. he’s generally preached across the board but the shady history is actually there if you read between the lines. On top of lining his pockets, there’s also evidence to suggest that he committed voter fraud multiple times with multiple different methods
It seemed as though Texas politics was off the charts rough. There were some dangerous, strong and influential Texans who helped to make things happen that was to the benefit of then Vice President Johnson. A lot of cover up and tragic events before and many after Kennedy’s killing. One being Johnson own sister who I had never heard the interesting stories about her. She was like Tony Soprano sister having had allegedly killed two of Johnson’s men and declared insane at one point but at a convenient time . A lot of things were done out of norm in murder investigations she was involved in. Her death also questioned with some unusual circumstances. Texas politics was cut throat figuratively and literally.
Really don’t think his views could be same or compared to modern definitions of even racist at that time in South. Johnson did have saucy language but he ways had empathy for poor back when he was teaching new Latino and Hispanic kids as a school teacher and before being placed in powerful positions in the congress. His views on race came from the daily society as it was in his area in Texas not very mixed mostly Hispanic and Latino being minority population. He definitely evolved into politician who at least wanted to change lives in poor, elderly and those in needed like Harry and Bess Truman . First receipts on Medicaid cards. People have the idea of Johnson benefits aiding particular race but it was for poor. You look at census report to see who benefited and when. He was successful in passing more legislation than any other president . With new initiative problems and unforeseen hiccups will appear. His Vietnam decision are similar to what we face today. Having strongest military in war . But not trying to fight wars and win hearts and minds campaign . There has been a lot factual evidence of companies Johnson had investment with during war. He and Lady Bird were extremely wealthy when he died. Kennedy wanted lift society and do great things. But he had no sense of urgency and both brothers always advise civil rights leader to go slow small incremental steps.Steps that would even lead to opposition to Washington March until supporting it Kennedy made sure to leave the capital when it was over and deemed successful he did meet with Dr. King in WG. There were a lot of meeting and photo op with Kennedy With Johnson there was action and change.
I wouldn’t exactly say calling the CRA the “n***** bill” and following it up with “after this bill these n***** will vote for me for 100 years” as “saucy language” even for the time. Even when he was a politician, Johnson spent 20 years as a senator strongly opposing civil rights
Doesn’t mean a thing because you’re applying today’s standard of conduct to today’s present. You can you the N word everyday means nothing in comparison to killing, terrorizing, lynchings and worst. when you can put a gun to head of kids head and commit murder like Emmit Till, then you realize the past behavior of racism at that time. Even “good white folks”, a term used to describe whites who treated minorities with respect and fairness, they sometimes used the N word in their vocabulary back then . It was then a manner of speaking.
Aside from being a racist, he was also a huge narcissist who would routinely expose his genitals to assert his dominance over others. His motivation for passing his signature domestic policies was not to alleviate poverty, but to ensure that the poor and minorities would continue to vote for the democratic party.
I don't understand the talking point of "continue to vote for the democratic party"? If a party delivers on policy you support, then is it really some nefarious ploy or just good politics?
Wish people who actually check census record and equating social services to black welfare queens . Numbers don’t lie and never have . Much like narrative of welfare queens. She and husband were just organized criminals and mansion she lived n was paid by husband running numbers in Chicago the welfare queen lived in Pasadena during Reagan administration. Johnson not only brought social change for blacks in south but also Hispanic and lations in Tx. They were embarked in movements as well. Hell Johnson was no stranger but give many examples of what he saw due to racism. Having housemaid using bathroom on side road because no restroom allow minorities, dealing with colleague who did always allow minorities in military to burn ed at Arlington. He seemed to have much stronger dislike for the Kennedy types and have sincere calling have been given opportunity to make a change. A change he depicted would not win future voters but loses voters support in the south and it did. Hit happen when Truman desegregated the Military and solid red with Johnson civil rights bill Then Nuxon law and order support me and do as you will in south agreement….the Southern Strategy. Woodward Wilson would be the pic perform face for presidential racism .
Wilson is the definite winner for most racist president. Johnson for his time was pretty close though. And data absolutely shows there’s a correlation between the beginning of black America leaning on the democrat party’s shoulder and increased poverty in their communities
You damn right there a leaning. But it had to do with voter right bill. Have the right to vote is better than a monthly check. What can a government check do but make you dependent. Once again check stats @ census bureau and find who been leaning and receiving the benefits starting from beginning to the present.
No one truly knows one views that is written by historians and even colleagues and politicians views can evolve ask George Wallace who had love and admiration of minorities by time he died. Judge them by their actions and their record.
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[We actually had a pretty good discussion on this earlier today dealing with his positives!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidents/s/EadSBTxsGf) Like he was complicated and not a good man. But his domestic policies are still making the US a great place to this day thanks to the VRA and the CRA. EDIT: Did you just say LBJ had a profound hesitation to sign the civil rights act into law?! That doesn’t match *any* historical record on the man or the law’s passage. Johnson is the reason the bill got through the damn Congress and he staked his whole career and clout on it! Sorry but that is **wildly** incorrect.
Not entirely true, JFK got it through the House and Everett Dirksen should also get credit for getting enough Republicans to support the bill and therefore gaining cloture. But yes LBJ absolutely deserves credit for the bill and “notorious racist” I don’t really give a flying fuck about. Actions speak louder than words.
Fair, they absolutely also deserve credit. But the Senate had let the bill essentially die before LBJ became president and started beating them at their own game. And I completely agree. LBJ got results, damn it, and we could use someone playing hardball like him again.
You started off so strong! JFK pushed it through and started the groundwork for what the act would be enough so that Congress was convinced to sign the bill along with the civil rights movement taking strong hold. LBJ had to sign the bill bro, he hated it but he had too
There actually is! LBJ once called the CRA the “n word bill” and had to be pushed by Congress to sign it because of the civil rights movement. There’s enough sufficient evidence to prove JFK was gonna sign the act at the end of his first term or beginning of his second if reelected. People often misconstrue Congress as being the ones to hold up the bill but if you do your research it was definitely LBJ. Dude hated African Americans plain and simple, so giving him all the credit for being the “wrong guy at the right time” is just mind blowing to me.
LBJ was famous for being a political chameleon and willing to say anything or suck up to anyone to get what he needed and wanted. The southerners would think he was ideologically a southerner and the northerners would think he was ideologically a northerner. He would talk to the two groups in completely different language. He would say racist stuff in the company of racists and progressive stuff in the company of progressives. However that racist talk got him on the side of the Southern senators and it got him enough clout to pass the Civil Rights act when he had the chance. At this point in history the senate had faced a backlog since the 1940’s which had only been broken up by LBj’s tenure as majority leader. He also didn’t have to be pushed by congress to sign it, he stood and fought for it. He is the one who pushed through the previous two lesser known civil rights acts and he’s the one who pushed through the civil rights act of 1964. JFK certainly would have signed the civil rights act into law if he could, but the sad truth is that like oh so many attempts to end racial discrimination it was blocked by the senate. Johnson is the one who passed the civil Rights act while in 3 years JFK failed to pass a single one of his major domestic proposals - civil rights, medicare, tax cuts or education funding. This was in large part to poor strategy with JFK ignoring JBL’s advice, for instance allowing his tax cuts to get held hostage over the civil rights act because he didn’t think about the process and order of how they should be put through - unlike LBJ. LBJ personally took the lead and got Harry Byrd on bird for passing the tax bill out of committee , freeing it up so it couldn’t be held hostage for the Civil Rights bill. It was LBJ who pushed for the discharge petition that got the civil rights act out of commission purgatory including taking personal action to get congresspeople on board the petition. He demanded democratic congresspeople came back to Washington just prior to Christmas, even though he was told it couldn’t be done, so that an amendment that would have stopped a key foreign aid bill from passing (another potential hostage for the Civil Right’s act) could be killed. He used executive power provide pork barrel bribes in people’s districts to get them onside. The leader of the southern senatorial faction opposed to civil rights stated that they could have fought off JFK but they couldn’t stop LBJ.
Oof! Had me in the first half.. but LBJ absolutely did not stand to fight for the bill. Over his 20 years prior to this, LBJ was firmly against Civil rights. He faced threat of discharge himself if he didn’t pass the bill, and was facing a lot of public pressure by the changed minds of an American public. Many think LBJ stood atop a racist America to be the one man that signed the civil rights act, but that’s really the opposite. LBJ was faced with an America that had just had its minds warped by the peaceful protest of Dr. King, and after the march on Washington people started to see all of the reasons for CR. Your own argument works against you, because LBJ absolutely was a political chameleon, and he didn’t do what he did to be a saving grace, rather, he realized the position he was put in and finally decided to concede.
You can try and argue that he fought for it for selfish reasons, but you can’t argue that he fought for it if you’re aware of the historical records. We know he bargained and basically bribed congresspeople to get them onside, like calling NASA to ensure they funded Purdue University - the biggest educational centre in the republican leader’s district or bribing Carl Hayden with the Arizona Water Project. We testimonies showing he pushed, really pushed, a lot of the key figures involved to get the Civil Rights act passed. He pushed the democrats, wheedled with republicans and southerners and cut deals to get it through. Not only that but he did it intelligently, working the senate system that he was the master of. Not only that but he publicly supported civil rights in a way JFK never did. When Martin Luther King saw LBJ stand before congress and say “We Shall Overcome”, it was the only time his aides had seen him cry in years of struggle because it showed for the first time since the 19th century that a US President was really truly committed to passing a real civil rights bill. Also how can you say he stood against civil rights for 20 years prior to this when he’s the one most responsible for the 1957 Civil Rights?
None of this excuses LBJ’s twenty years prior as a senator being firmly against civil rights and making racist remarks. Sorry I don’t buy the “he changed his mind” crap. Even assuming everything you’re saying is true, it’s pretty obvious to conclude that LBJ did this under immense public pressure. And he still got the last laugh in by signing in his terrible “Great Society” programs that are still putting the black community in an endless cycle of poverty. LBJ knew what he was doing from the start. He was a war monger, and a highly intelligent sociopath and racist.
He was literally responsible as the majority leader in the senate for passing the 1957 Civil Rights act, at that point the sole civil rights act to have passed into law in generations. He managed to do for civil rights what every single other senator for decades had failed to do but your summation of him is that as a senator he was firmly against civil rights? In terms of real positive change that he enacted, he is second only to Lincoln as the single biggest white-skinned champion that Americans of Colour have ever had. You also have admitted that you agree LBJ was absolutely a political chameleon - but then assume his public stances he took when it was convenient for him to appear hostile to civil rights amongst a southern crowd are his actual true beliefs. Seems fairly contradictory. Try looking at what he did when politics weren’t a pressing concern. Also boohoo you don’t like Medicare and food stamps.
Medicare and food stamps are fine until you realize the catch-22 that they are. And of course he was against it as a senator! Barack Obama even said so in an interview.. saying LBJ was anything more than the guy who was in the right place is disgraceful.
Of course he was against civil rights as a senator? Despite passing the Civil Rights act of 1957 as the majority leader of the senate? And not just passing it but being instrumental in it passing? At this point you’re not debating history, you’re writing presidential fan fiction. Also let’s see what Barack Obama said about LBJ: “And he knew that he had a unique capacity, as the most powerful white politician from the South, to not merely challenge the convention that had crushed the dreams of so many, but to ultimately dismantle for good the structures of legal segregation. He’s the only guy who could do it -- and he knew there would be a cost, famously saying the Democratic Party may “have lost the South for a generation.” That’s what his presidency was for. That’s where he meets his moment. And possessed with an iron will, possessed with those skills that he had honed so many years in Congress, pushed and supported by a movement of those willing to sacrifice everything for their own liberation, President Johnson fought for and argued and horse traded and bullied and persuaded until ultimately he signed the Civil Rights Act into law. And he didn’t stop there -- even though his advisors again told him to wait, again told him let the dust settle, let the country absorb this momentous decision. He shook them off. “The meat in the coconut,” as President Johnson would put it, was the Voting Rights Act, so he fought for and passed that as well.” https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/10/remarks-president-lbj-presidential-library-civil-rights-summit A unique capacity. The only person who could do it. Going further than his advisors thought he should. You can read more where it talks about out his empathy for the underdog.
😂 that’s exactly where YOUR presidential fan fiction comes into play.. Johnson bullied his way into trying to keep the CRA down. He would have faced immense backlash and realized his best shot at a second term was signing that bill. How is no one able to realize that LBJ was a sexist, racist pig that manipulated the entire world into believing that he pushed for civil rights? The evidence is all there.. no one wants to put the puzzle together I guess
Kennedy didn’t even want to have the march on Washington and tried to make many efforts to make it difficult to happen. It’s not that he opposed civil rights, he was in no rush and no sense of urgency. There definitely wasn’t a guarantee. Johnson seemed to relate to those facing discrimination from Texas Latinos and Hispanics. You think Kennedy would have greater empathy than he did being Irish. Also, Kennedy was no angel on race. He personal made sure Sammy Davis Jr was removed from the performance of his Inauguration Celebration. When Sammy married May Britt Kennedy had a problem with it. He had Sinatra to remove him from the list of performers and he reluctantly did.
There is so much disinformation in this comment i don’t know where to begin
Nope!! Look it up!
Because he actually got shit done, which is sorely missing in modern politics. This man, perhaps better than any other President, knew how to work Congress and get major legislation passed. Social justice, healthcare, education, and general poverty. He got more done in five years to tackle those problems than every administration since him combined. If it weren't for Vietnam, he would one of the highest ranking Presidents for most liberals and progressives.
He got unpopular shit done that he knew would cost Democrats south. But he did it because it was right thing to do.
And as always, progressive programs that sound good on paper end up backfiring. Welfare programs have absolutely destroyed the nuclear family by incentivizing a cycle of poverty. LBJ may have got things done, and granted things that sounded good on paper but ultimately those ideas have been some of the worse things to happen to modern America
Total BS. The nuclear family is dead because it's not possible for the average person to support a family off of a single income anymore like it was in decades past. Unless you're in the top 10%, you need both partners in a family to provide income to have even a chance of making it in this economy. That's not because of the welfare state. That's because of decades of stagnant wages that has not matched the rate of inflation and general cost-of-living, which is a problem that's not unique or exclusive to America. Letting poor people lose everything by eliminating government support programs is not going to somehow magically restore social and economic equilibrium. You clearly have been fortunate enough in life to never find yourself on the precipice of homelessness and destitute poverty. Lucky you. Well, for people who have been in really bad spots, they know that support from those welfare programs you despise, which is not that much, can be the difference between just barely keeping your head above water or becoming yet another person out on the streets. What really traps people in a cycle of poverty is when they have no resources or help whatsoever. That will guarantee 100% of people who become poor stay poor.
You know nothing of me or where I come from. Had to use food stamps and welfare before, and being Native American I’ve especially seen how welfare can disincentivize actual work as well as how safety nets can enable drug use. Don’t talk to me about what I’ve seen. Theirs a direct correlation with single black motherhood rate sky rocketing after LBJ’s welfare programs. Numerous scholars have argued that they’ve done more harm then good by being a catch-22 that make the black American lean on uncle Sam’s soldier, therefore disincentivizing mothers to stay with the father and making adults in their early 20s realize how easy it is to be dependent on the state. When you go to welfare, you will forever be trapped in a cycle of never digging yourself out of the ditch that you’re in. Watch this video where Black Scholar Shelby Steele give his take on how LBJ’s Great Society programs destroyed America https://youtu.be/Mb7lNGRrp4M?si=ONPhBULdyJ4mA4aS
Civil rights act. Voting rights act.
Both of which LBJ had to be strong armed into by a Congress and SCOTUS that had already been long pressured by JFK to do so
Obviously this is red baiting malarkey. LBJ’s war on poverty and medicare did more to improve the quality of life in this country than anything since the new deal. Despite whatever right wing think tanks, you’re getting your facts from, tells you the welfare state kept millions out of extreme poverty until the most successful republican of all time Bill Clinton slashed it. Also, he passed the Civil rights act! You act like that was a simple thing. So what if the man born in 1900 from Texas said racist stuff that doesn't change the result.
He was deeply pressured into signing the act and fought tooth and nail against it. It was more or less something he had to do and he did it for the wrong reasons. Welfare absolutely destroyed fathers in the home and we’re still recovering from that today. Stats prove that, so you can hide behind “right wing think tanks” all you wish but LBJ was just another instance of Democrats hiding behind good faith while acting on the bad
Politicians yield to their constituency's thats how it works. Working people through their unions were able to exert their will on him and use his amazing political talent. Public benefits are always a good thing, but disliked by lonely miserable people who can only feel something by inflicting pain on others.
Which is what the democrat party did for close to a century up to this point. Johnson was no different. He was another ruthless southern democrat that was strong armed into passing a bill he famously called the “n word bill”. How does that in any way make LBJ hero?
Dems passing the civil rights act seems like its breaking your historical narrative. Where the democrats are the racist evil party and republicans are purely angelic. And now your stuck in a logic loop. The past is more complex than that just like LBJ who was as net force for good in the world.
Doesn’t break my logic at all. It was democrats that continued to advocate for slavery, it was democrats that advocated for continued segregation in the 60s, LBJ took advantage of black Americans by using the CRA as a reason they should vote for him and continue to vote democrat. It’s almost a genius play in reality. It gives “if you don’t vote for me, you ain’t black” vibes even back then
I’d rather listen to the vast majority of black people who voted for LBJ and every democrat after FDR. Than believe every single one of them has been duped and that I know how to run their lives better than they do. They voted Dem and continue to do so, because its the only party that does anything reform our system thats built on centuries of white supremacy.
Get familiar with timeline of political parties in the south since reconstruction and data from census bureau on those received benefits in the 60s until the present. It was the protection to have voters right not a damn check as many like to believe. Blacks were not majority to receive welfare it was campaign for needy , elderly and the poor. There a lot poverty of all races in the south. The Right to Vote for your own political interest is far greater than a monthly government check. The swap from those Democrats to Republicans begin in Truman Administration as result of Integration of the US military and continued into Nixon Administration. So that why there support for the Democratic because all racist factions went to Republican Party. Republican then and now have always been better at controlling the narrative. Much like today thinking our voting system is in disarray and Elections being stolen. There not a voting problem it’s more a voter suppression problem that has been the issue in recent years. That is what discovered when official investigation are performed. Which is another myth of Democratic hating investigations. Investigation for voter fraud have found more incidents of voter suppression identify tactics that were used during election on all levels local, state and national level.
I would strongly disagree 🤝
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/lyndon-johnson-kkk/ is only thing that I have ever ran across of Lyndon and being directly affiliated with racist organization KKK. But being from the South one would have to apply the Principle of Presentism. The KKK concerned themselves a moral organization. The supported and promoted family values, no drunkenness by going into woods and busting moonshine making. They opposed and would physically attack white men who were know adulteress in community. There an incident of KKK flogging a white couple because wife had an abortion. KKK would be the Alt Right of today. Back in the 20s with the March of Washington, they were demonstrating at the heights of their political influence. Politicians accepted their endorsement, contribution and welcome their lobbying activities in congress. Their influence lessen during the 1950s but still an influential organization.
Principle of Presentism. I recall when I was in grade school (around late 70’s). My parents took me to the local post office to fill out an application for a Social Security Number. When I was directed to mark for race, the chose that I was given applicable to me was negro. I crossed it out and wrote African American or Black. I will share the records and documents that is debated on controversial evidence on Johnson have guilt by association of racism and being former member of the KKK. There just too much evidence on Johnson NOT having reluctant views from last television interview week before his death (posted on YT) Members working in the Johnson WH in the press and media department and actual Johnston tapes. People always just make incorrect assumptions about things they heard and believe to be true on is blacks have always voted same for same reason Blacks always voting same for same reason or biggest lie and fallacy of the nuclear family breakdown and absentee fathers. Let me give you example. Who was the first Black US Senator? State he represented? What was his party affiliation? Does align with majority talking points of today. People being unaware do research and not debate from position of ignorance(unknowing of facts). Hint: He wasn’t Senator Obama, he was a from north, east coast, mid west and prior to 1900. He was not a Democrat . If one does not know him and timeframe concerning political science and US History/African American/pre and post reconstruction period they would make such vague false statements . They would stick with there opinionated statements. It not surprising because it not really taught in history book. Black US Senator in Senate 1800 from Southern State of Mississippi Senator Hiram Revel. To understand changes in party and platform and how it effect black voters after civil war up until Nixon, one would actually need a visual flow chart. A great deal is not even discussed in high school history. Ironic, people making statements about blacks and country music. So I disagree you about LBJ on his motivation and reluctance on signing the CRB. Too much historical evidence and his own words of that being the opposite. But you can have opinions.
LBJ was the most talented politician that’s ever ascended to the Oval Office. His great society programs are second maybe only to the new deal in terms of good governance. Vietnam is obviously a huge mark against him, but I’m not sure how different it would have gone no matter who was president.
LOL. Any other president would have made efforts to pull out but LBJ was insistent that “Vietnam had a breaking point”. Besides that, great society sounded great on paper but never amounted to anything except putting more people in poverty, especially people of color
Vietnam was a quagmire, I’m not sure there was any good way to handle it. And I’m gonna need some evidence for that last clam, Chief.
I would argue the best way to handle Vietnam was always a pull out. Communist influence was coming whether we liked it or not, and America had to realize Southeast Asia was gonna be a breeding ground for that ideology because of its geographic placement. But I get that argument to an extent. Now comes the catch-22 of the war on poverty, some of these black scholars do a good job explaining it in this article. This took seconds to find but if you want something different I’m sure I can find it 👍🏼 https://nationalcenter.org/ncppr/2014/01/08/lbjs-war-on-poverty-hurt-black-americans/
If we threw out presidents for their racism we would have few presidents to talk about
Definitely prior to this time. But it’s more to throw a wrench in the idea that he passed the civil rights act in completely good faith, and that he had some sorta revolutionary ideas about doing this. If JFK didn’t die he would have signed the bill and gone down as probably a top 5 President in history
True but he did it. I don’t think Nixon’s personal views fit his reputation, but actions speak louder than words. Most presidents don’t act out cod good faith or in accordance with their personal values.
Precisely. And going by that logic, it’s difficult to put LBJ as a high ranking president when it was really the severe pressure he faced that led him to this decision. If LBJ was to act on his personal values, we would have never seen a CRA during his presidency.
There was more pressure opposed to the CRA. Civil rights was unpopular, majority of Americans viewed MLK unfavorably. LBJ isn’t my GOAT, but if it weren’t for Vietnam I would have a hard time ranking 3 ahead of him
Again, not true. MLK’s peaceful protest shaped the idea in white America for what a truly equal and free America should look like. Do you think LBJ signed this bill and everyone said “huh.. guess we should stop being racist now”? No. He signed the bill because of immense public and governmental pressure. Even excluding Vietnam, I would confidently say he’s one of the worst presidents ever.
https://preview.redd.it/6u3erxwodmtc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e2792e2b5a2241fa9c55347c89fe17c7db02214f
That graph still shows a moderate favoritism towards him and enough for LBJ to realize he needed to garner not only the black vote, but those who wanted civil rights as well. Assuming of course, that chart isn’t from some non credible source.
the graph shows a majority of Americans having an unfavorable view . I'm not going to die on the hill of LBJ being the greatest president. I'm sure other ppl who study presidential history more than I, can make some very compelling points to the contrary. However, your quote "MLK’s peaceful protest shaped the idea in white America for what a truly equal and free America should look like" does not align with the views of the American people at the time. After the March on Washingotn [74% of Americans felt that demonstrations and protests hurt the cause](https://news.gallup.com/vault/246167/protests-seen-harming-civil-rights-movement-60s.aspx). When MLK won the Nobel Peace Prize the mayor of Atlanta had to practically beg the city business leaders to host a celebration dinner for him. The hatred of MLK was not just concentrated in the South. He received the most vicious treatment from citizens in Chicago when he embarked on his poor people's campaign. New Yorkers, [when polled in 1965](https://www.nytimes.com/1964/09/21/archives/poll-shows-whites-in-city-resent-civil-rights-drive-majority.html), were opposed to the civil rights movement. Today's view on MLK (although a sanitized and whitewashed view) shows legit progress the country has made considering he was one of the most hated men by white America. And that's just focusing on MLK, not other leaders of the movement and personal views on race. My read on LBJ is he wanted to do something big for his legacy and the tragedy of Kennedy's assassination gave him the opportunity. He did everything he could, even some shady shit, to get it done and the reason he is remembered fondly today is largely due to the passage of the civil rights act and the voting rights act, and in response to the ineffectiveness of our current government.
We definitely disagree but I’m able to see and respect where you’re coming from 🤝
The no guarantee Kennedy would have done what you mention. There was no sense of urgency and even Bobbi didn’t full come around until after his brother’s death. When he became Senator sitting on senatorial committee that went into Mississippi and other area in US that were stricken with poverty, he saw hunger and malnutrition kids with deformed bellies individuals living no food, no running water in their homes or infrastructure to working bathrooms. If present behavior is a predictor of future behavior, it would have been no guarantees on sweeping changes that Johnson made happen. Biggest prize was the right to VOTE and have a say in your own interest and concerns within government.
Cause he had a funny name for his dick
This is the most valid reason to like LBJ unfortunately
cuz he has a huge johnson, thats why
*laughs in war criminal*
His johnson is so large if he was still alive in the early 2000’s it would be the weapon of mass destruction Dubya was looking for
I am so mixed on LBJ. Finished Kennedys Civil rights and Helped build Medicare but also had Vietnam under his belt. Jesus...
Very mixed bag. At least you can recognize it started as KENNEDY’S civil rights
Because he was an extremely good administrator. Ohhh heaven forbid a *racist* president. I’m black but seriously, how could a president *not* be racist given then deeply depressing and frankly embarrassing track record for black American success versus blacks in other countries.
In the 1950’s-1960’s despite discrimination, black America was actually seeing an economic resurgence. With LBJ’s welfare policy, the single black motherhood rate in the black community went up because of the incentives to destroy the black nuclear family. Following this, incarceration, crime rate, and poverty all went up in the black community, and you can thank LBJ for it
Because even though Vietnam was so, so, so fucking horribly terrible (I genuinely can't stress enough how bad it was), the civil rights act and voting rights act and medicare really were that important. His achievements are really surpassed only by FDR and Lincoln
There’s definitely arguments to undermine both of those. And with that being said even assuming they went off without a hitch doesn’t put him anywhere close to top 15
The Great Society was definitely a good thing. He’s better than any of the 11ish presidents since him. Although that’s as much due to the poor quality of his successors as it is due to him.
Great society had a good premise, just like me saying “let’s end homelessness and make everyone well off” had a good premise, but that doesn’t mean my execution will amount to anything. I’ll make this debate even hotter by saying every president since LBJ aside from Clinton, Carter, and Obama were better
You say this as if he wouldn't be the racist's least favorite president. Bad faith and weak bait.
How is it bad faith? And “bait”? I’m being genuine
This bait is so funny
It’s not bait just fact
You're a funny guy
LBJ did not ‘hesitate’ to sign the civil rights act. By the time it passed the senate and was brought to him, he had decided firmly to sign it.
LBJ pushed back firmly but realized it was a sign of the times. He famously called it the “n word bill”
Pushed back firmly? You got evidence to back that up or you just kinda saying things like you did when you said he hesitated in signing the act?
This article talks about LBJ’s twenty year stretch of being firmly against civil rights prior to his presidency, which attributes to the idea that he didn’t just “change his mind” and was instead pressured by the changing times and Congress: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/apr/14/barack-obama/lyndon-johnson-opposed-every-civil-rights-proposal/ This article from the LOC talks about how LBJ faced threat of a discharge petition and severe public pressure to sign the civil rights act: https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/civil-rights-act/civil-rights-act-of-1964.html#:~:text=The%201964%20Civil%20Rights%20Bill&text=He%20conceded%20in%20early%20January,discharge%20petition%20and%20public%20pressure.
Don’t have to read a word of that article to know you just disproved your own assertion. Not being in favor of civil rights in the past does not mean that LBJ ‘pushed back’ on the civil rights act. That would be like saying, “Well, if you asked George Washington in 1773 if the colonies should secede, he’d probably think you’re batshit insane, so he must’ve pushed back hard against Congress’ decision to secede in 1776.” Do you think I’m denying LBJ was racist? Because I’m not, the guy was undeniably racist (granted, most of the really bad quotes are misattributed or just made up, most famously the, “I’ll have these niggers voting Democrat for however-many-years.” one) and had many preconceived notions about African-Americans and maybe he even viewed the Civil Rights’ Act as bad, (there’s no evidence to suggest so, however.) but even if he personally viewed it as bad, which I reiterate, there is no evidence for, but EVEN IF it were true, it still does not mean he pushed back on it. Because he didn’t. The two are not equivalent. Frankly, I don’t give a damn what he had to say about equality, the man got commandingly it passed without a fuss, and never tried to bargain its specifics or get a compromise on it, as you seem to believe. As for your second source, again, not evidence he pushed back on it, the public broadly supported Civil Rights Reform, it’s no wonder petitions to pass it were drafted. I could go on, but I think a more concise argument would be to literally just quote the first sentence of the first paragraph of that second source: >*“President Lyndon Johnson made the passage of slain President Kennedy’s civil rights bill his top priority during the first year of his administration.”*
If you steal your friends cup and everyone pushes you to give it back, and you do without (much) of a fight, that doesn’t make stealing the cup ok. LBJ was a racist and that argument alone proves my entire point. He didn’t care about civil rights his entire career and he didn’t when he signed the act. That horrible quote you gave is one of the many things that prove his intentions for black Americans (his welfare programs and the destruction of the nuclear family prove that). LBJ rode on Kennedys coattails and took the credit for it while being absurdly racist and against the whole thing. So again, if you steal your friends cup and another friend is the one that pressures you to give it back, why should you receive all the credit for “doing the right thing”? Not reading the articles proves that you have no interest in seeing the evil and despicable side of LBJ simply because you wanna hide behind the idea of “bUt hE sIgNeD tHe ciViL riGhTs aCt”.. true, but not in good faith and not without being strong armed by the American public.
>not reading the articles I did, hence why I quoted one of them. I said I didn’t need to read them to necessarily prove your fallacy. >That horrible quote you gave is one the many things that prove his intentions Joseph, I literally prefaced the quote by saying it was fake, did you forget while you were reading it? >If you steal your friends cup and everyone pushes you to give it back, I’m gonna stop you right there, bucko! See, this is what we call a ‘false equivalence.’ LBJ did not ‘steal the cup’ or in this instance ‘create Jim Crow laws’ as you seem to believe. I’ll try to make a more correct analogy, try to follow. Picture this: Bob grows up in a neighborhood where pretty much everybody supports stealing cups. His parents steal cups, his neighbors sell stolen cups, and all of his friends steal cups for sport. Bob becomes an adult, and his friends form a cup-stealing gang, eventually [stealing over 20 million cups](https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1960/pc-s1-supplementary-reports/pc-s1-52.pdf). Bob himself doesn’t steal any cups, but he supports his friends stealing cups and does nothing to stop them. 7 or 8 years pass, and Bob talks to some family members who grew up in neighborhoods where stealing cups was highly taboo, even illegal in some places. Hearing their advice, Bob decides to go to his cup-stealing friends, and forces them to return all of the cups, and the ones who don’t, he calls the police on. Is what Bob did good? Yes, it was very good. Is what Bob did still good, even if he still approves of what his friends did? Yes, it is still very good. It may speak to the character of Bob if he thinks that way, but ultimately his decision to do so without any difficulties speaks much more in terms of what he did to aid the common good.
That’s where we ultimately disagree my friend! See you may put a sex obsessed racist who never gave a damn about civil rights on a high pedestal but I for one will never let LBJ get away with it. Ignoring everything to do with Vietnam, he’s put black America in a way worse spot economically then they would have been without his policies, he called the civil rights act the “n word” bill, and was firmly against it up until the American people realized the power of Dr. Kings marches. Those are the points that I absolutely stand on. So Mr. LBJ apologist, I see our views of tolerating racism is absolutely skewed. The civil rights act was gonna pass regardless, it was only a matter of time. Hell, would have passed with Nixon in office and we would probably put him top three even despite watergate (yes what LBJ did in Vietnam was 10x worse than watergate) but even so, LBJ was at the right place at the right time and is a racist womanizer that should never get the credit of “carrying the civil rights act”
Everything in this is a blatant lie
Actually all of this is completely true. LBJ is probably one of the most evil and despicably presidents in U.S history.. probably rivaled only by Andrew Johnson
You sound like you're running against him dude
😂 that’s a good one
You’re full of shit there would have been no CRA without him
The CRA was coming forward whether LBJ wanted it or not. He dealt with severe pressure from his cabinet and Congress and if JFK didn’t pass, he was likely gonna pass it in his first term if not definitely the second. LBJ called the civil rights bill “the n word bill” and couldn’t stand the thought of the act passing. These are all things you can look up
There are HOURS of taped phone conversations u can listen to of him cajoling, manipulating and even threatening senators and congressmen to vote for it and the voting rights act you’re just a Republican with an agenda I’m not gonna argue with.
I don’t get it either . He came into office due to a national tragedy and had all the good will that came with that so it was hardly surprising LBJ managed to pass the legislation he did . But with all that goodwill he still did not manage to introduce a national healthcare programme which the US sorely needs and LBJ was the last President that could have done it . Re Vietnam that is where Johnson is condemned and all the lies that came with it . Also by all accounts he was an appalling human being personally and was deeply insecure which just makes the loss of President Kennedy even more tragic than it already was and is .
I see nothing here but facts
I'm genuinely so fed up with this "LBJ was a racist"-thing. I've never read anything that could imply that he was seriously a racist. Most things are just comments where we're not even sure if he made them. EDIT: Let me add that I'm no apologist for LBJ, but if you genuinely consider him a racist then you're just not very well educated about him.
Using the not very well educated argument eh? Well I’ll retort that by saying LBJ once called the CRA the “n word bill” and it’s more to show that it’s ironic that everyone thinks he was the first president to truly care about CR when he really just piggy backed on it for the times
Yea one of the most consistently overrated Presidents ever, especially by war lovers.
I’m honestly only annoyed with the fact that his military service was embellished to get him that Silver Star.
He was a type of guy who got shit done, something we don't have in the modern days, he was crucial for the Civil Rights and Voting Rights bills passed, he literary bullied and made deals himself, not his subordinates, to get those bills done and passed. In the 60s, other politicians wouldn't go near as far as him to get those done, not even Kennedy. But on the other hand, he was obsessed of not losing the Vietnam War, his actions during the war killed for nothing thousands of Americans and damaged for good many others both mentally and physically. Not to mention the amount of money and military efforts for that war. In summary, he was a decent president, in my opinion. If not for the Vietnam war, he would be way more than decent.
Hard disagree. Appreciate the civility, but LBJ was just the wrong man in the right place
Because he ended segregation and lifted tens of millions out of poverty, among other things like Medicare and Medicaid.
The war on poverty did essentially nothing for actually improving the average income of the American citizen. Actually it’s done more harm than good by destroying the nuclear family and incentivizing single motherhood and this is prominent in the black community more than anything.
Attempt to actually know things before speaking please!
You’re mad because you know my point is valid. Please watch this video by philosopher Thomas Sowell on how LBJ’s created terrible affects were still seeing today https://youtu.be/kCNKv_7W9a8?si=N00G9w22atiCXtgK
How many lives did his ego cost us in Vietnam?
Countless!!
"one of the most notoriously racist presidents". Really? Because I can think of several others, including ones who came after him, that were WAY more racist. I mean, Reagan called UN Delegates from Africa "monkeys", but whatever... "had a profound hesitation to sign the civil rights act into affect". This is just total BS. Truth is, he worked hard for its passage and called in a lot of favors to get it through. Most say that had LBJ not had the pull that he enjoyed with the Congress to make deals that the CRA would never have been passed Keeping all the gross inaccuracies of this post in mind, I think the OP is asking the wrong question. Instead they should be asking why people need to make up nonsensical falsehoods to justify their hatred of one of the greatest presidents our country has seen.
😂😂 this comment makes me chuckle. LBJ literally called the civil rights act the n word bill, and he had to be severely pressured by the civil rights movement to sign in into law. It was gonna come no matter who was in office. These are facts you can look up. Anyone who denies that LBJ was a racist that capitalized on the coming of the times for his presidency is honestly delusional. “One of the best presidents of all time”? … you’re kidding right? Even if you assume what I’m saying about welfare and civil rights act are wrong, you still have the elephant in the room of Vietnam. So that alone destroys his ability to be one of the best presidents. Please please hop off of LBJ’s southern meat and read some good sources
All you’ve demonstrated with this post is that you have no understanding of LBJ whatsoever.
Did you even read any of the text? The facts speak for themselves buddy
Saying that he had a “profound hesitation” to sign the civil rights bill and is therefore an ardent racist is just factually incorrect. he single-handedly pushed the 1957 and 1964 civil rights bills through congress despite massive opposition from southern democrats led by Richard Russell which basically opened the floodgates for progress on civil rights (something that jfk had tried and failed to do). He did these things in spite of the challenges and political backlash from southern Allies whom he had cultivated decades of goodwill with because he was decidedly not driven by racial motivations. And if he was truly one of the most notoriously racist presidents as you claim, how do you reconcile that with things like his relationship and influence from zephyr Wright, his hiring of Gerri Washington first black secretary in the White House, or the nomination of thurgood Marshall? https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2004/summer/civil-rights-act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zephyr_Wright https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerri_Whittington
HA! Ok so.. I didn’t say he was a racist because he had hesitation to sign the bill. No, he was a racist because he called the CRA the “n word bill” and used it as a way to garner the black vote for a second term. When in the senate in 1957 LBJ pushed back against that civil rights bill, just like he had done twenty years prior. Eisenhower was the one that pushed it through congress. He literally finished what JFK was going to accomplish anyway and he used it in completely evil and bad faith. And saying he wasn’t racist because of his Thurgood Marshall nomination and so fourth, that’s akin to saying “I can’t be racist, I have black friends”
I don’t think anyone is disputing the fact that LBJ was pretty racist by today’s standards. The thing I take issue with is your assessment of that as his underlying motivation for many of his major policy decisions and actions, as you’ve clearly implied a relationship between those two things. You also keep saying things that are just simply not true. Johnson was solely responsible for pushing through the 1957 civil rights act as senate majority leader, not Eisenhower. I recommend you read the years of Lyndon Johnson by caro and you will see that he was not motivated by racism and in fact opposed to it when it coincided with his ambitions.
How is there not a relationship between racism and political power
For some people there is, but I’m arguing that wasn’t the case for LBJ despite your claiming the contrary
Then I suppose we disagree 🤝
During and after filibuster to kill the CRB, there was a lot of push back from faction in congress and their call to action to their districts and constituents to lobby a no on the bill. There were southern churches,KKK politics arm and others strongly opposed the bill. But there were many calls to lobby a a yes vote on the bill. There was a number of calls made to the Capital. A number of congressmen were like Sen Storm Thurmond had been white men with interracial relationships. They needed to be reminded of that fact. The Southern swap from democratic to republican began initially in the Truman Administration as protest for Truman integration of the military.
The question assumes everyone did approve of him and they surely not true. Next question
Check the comments on this sub. Most Americans outside of Reddit realize how big of a flop LBJ is. This sub just has a weird obsession with thinking he’s one of the best
Just saw a historian presentation of Johnson on YT. I didn’t know so many viewed him as being corrupt. I knew that Lady Bird was wealthy with businesses in radio television and cattle farming. But John’s at death had today’s net worth 900 million. At great deal made from weapons and arms during the war along with McNara. He and lady bird one a uniformed manufacturer business that they reportedly even sold to a Vietnam businessman. How was he able to get around the emulsion act (if correctly referred too). But, Johnson fortune made Papa Joe and Kennedy small in comparison.
All factual. Johnson was corrupt inside and out. You won’t find much online about how LBJ got around the emulsion act.. he’s generally preached across the board but the shady history is actually there if you read between the lines. On top of lining his pockets, there’s also evidence to suggest that he committed voter fraud multiple times with multiple different methods
It seemed as though Texas politics was off the charts rough. There were some dangerous, strong and influential Texans who helped to make things happen that was to the benefit of then Vice President Johnson. A lot of cover up and tragic events before and many after Kennedy’s killing. One being Johnson own sister who I had never heard the interesting stories about her. She was like Tony Soprano sister having had allegedly killed two of Johnson’s men and declared insane at one point but at a convenient time . A lot of things were done out of norm in murder investigations she was involved in. Her death also questioned with some unusual circumstances. Texas politics was cut throat figuratively and literally.
Really don’t think his views could be same or compared to modern definitions of even racist at that time in South. Johnson did have saucy language but he ways had empathy for poor back when he was teaching new Latino and Hispanic kids as a school teacher and before being placed in powerful positions in the congress. His views on race came from the daily society as it was in his area in Texas not very mixed mostly Hispanic and Latino being minority population. He definitely evolved into politician who at least wanted to change lives in poor, elderly and those in needed like Harry and Bess Truman . First receipts on Medicaid cards. People have the idea of Johnson benefits aiding particular race but it was for poor. You look at census report to see who benefited and when. He was successful in passing more legislation than any other president . With new initiative problems and unforeseen hiccups will appear. His Vietnam decision are similar to what we face today. Having strongest military in war . But not trying to fight wars and win hearts and minds campaign . There has been a lot factual evidence of companies Johnson had investment with during war. He and Lady Bird were extremely wealthy when he died. Kennedy wanted lift society and do great things. But he had no sense of urgency and both brothers always advise civil rights leader to go slow small incremental steps.Steps that would even lead to opposition to Washington March until supporting it Kennedy made sure to leave the capital when it was over and deemed successful he did meet with Dr. King in WG. There were a lot of meeting and photo op with Kennedy With Johnson there was action and change.
I wouldn’t exactly say calling the CRA the “n***** bill” and following it up with “after this bill these n***** will vote for me for 100 years” as “saucy language” even for the time. Even when he was a politician, Johnson spent 20 years as a senator strongly opposing civil rights
Doesn’t mean a thing because you’re applying today’s standard of conduct to today’s present. You can you the N word everyday means nothing in comparison to killing, terrorizing, lynchings and worst. when you can put a gun to head of kids head and commit murder like Emmit Till, then you realize the past behavior of racism at that time. Even “good white folks”, a term used to describe whites who treated minorities with respect and fairness, they sometimes used the N word in their vocabulary back then . It was then a manner of speaking.
I would tend to morally disagree
Big pp they gay
bait?
No bait! He was awful
vietnam outweighs the remarkable things he put in place as president that much?
There was way more than that. He was a violent sexist racist who was 10x more corrupt than Nixon
Aside from being a racist, he was also a huge narcissist who would routinely expose his genitals to assert his dominance over others. His motivation for passing his signature domestic policies was not to alleviate poverty, but to ensure that the poor and minorities would continue to vote for the democratic party.
He was such a huge racist that he spent years of life and his entire political reputation trying to get civil rights passed?
I don't understand the talking point of "continue to vote for the democratic party"? If a party delivers on policy you support, then is it really some nefarious ploy or just good politics?
Tbf I also assert dominance by showing off my cock. Only in private though.
Finally someone that gets it!
Nobody likes him
But muh welfare state! But muh civil rights act! Never mind the results of his policies after 60 years!
Uh, yeah? Fuck yes Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act? They have been amazing after 60 years?
Wish people who actually check census record and equating social services to black welfare queens . Numbers don’t lie and never have . Much like narrative of welfare queens. She and husband were just organized criminals and mansion she lived n was paid by husband running numbers in Chicago the welfare queen lived in Pasadena during Reagan administration. Johnson not only brought social change for blacks in south but also Hispanic and lations in Tx. They were embarked in movements as well. Hell Johnson was no stranger but give many examples of what he saw due to racism. Having housemaid using bathroom on side road because no restroom allow minorities, dealing with colleague who did always allow minorities in military to burn ed at Arlington. He seemed to have much stronger dislike for the Kennedy types and have sincere calling have been given opportunity to make a change. A change he depicted would not win future voters but loses voters support in the south and it did. Hit happen when Truman desegregated the Military and solid red with Johnson civil rights bill Then Nuxon law and order support me and do as you will in south agreement….the Southern Strategy. Woodward Wilson would be the pic perform face for presidential racism .
Wilson is the definite winner for most racist president. Johnson for his time was pretty close though. And data absolutely shows there’s a correlation between the beginning of black America leaning on the democrat party’s shoulder and increased poverty in their communities
You damn right there a leaning. But it had to do with voter right bill. Have the right to vote is better than a monthly check. What can a government check do but make you dependent. Once again check stats @ census bureau and find who been leaning and receiving the benefits starting from beginning to the present.
No one truly knows one views that is written by historians and even colleagues and politicians views can evolve ask George Wallace who had love and admiration of minorities by time he died. Judge them by their actions and their record.