President Johnson signed the bill into law on July 2, 1964
For President Johnson to sign the Civil Rights Act into law on July 2, 1964, was a no-brainer: the date was a Thursday, just as it is this year, and the symbolism of marking the hard-fought victory just before Independence Day would be a shame to waste.
But, as TIME noted in its original 1964 coverage of the landmark legislation, the Fourth of July wasn’t the only significant date in play. The date on which the Senate passed the bill was June 19, 1964—precisely one year after “President John Kennedy sent to Congress a civil rights bill, [and] urged its speedy passage ‘not merely for reasons of economic efficiency, world diplomacy or domestic tranquility, but above all because it is right.’” Though Kennedy had been assassinated the previous fall, the law he had advocated for had actually grown in strength and scope.
After the House also passed the bill and it went on to the President, the season of its signing—and not just the calendar date—would also prove significant.
The bill included many obviously important provisions affecting matters of great weight, like voting rights and equal employment. But, as TIME pointed out, it would take months to see the voting rules take effect, and the labor matters included a period during which businesses could adjust. On the other hand, one of the parts of the law—a part that may seem today to be far less important—was, as TIME put it, “effective immediately, and likely to cause the fastest fireworks.”
“Due to the recent derogatory statements by Donald Trump regarding immigrants, NBCUniversal is ending its business relationship with Mr. Trump,” NBC said in a statement, adding, “At NBC, respect and dignity for all people are cornerstones of our values.”
This means the network won’t air the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants, which Trump co-owns, and Trump will no longer host the “The Apprentice.” “The Celebrity Apprentice” is expected to continue — but without the real estate mogul as host.
The comment that was too much for NBC?
“The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” Trump said. “They’re sending people that have lots of problems. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”
Serious witch doctor stuff from a person that a large swath of the media represent as a credible candidate for President of the United States.
I’m ashamed to admit it wasn’t all that long ago that I actually considered Mike Huckabee an example of a “decent Republican.” To be fair, I didn’t know a great deal about the man when I believed such a thing, but I just never recall him being this bizarre. The few stories I had come across about him always seemed fairly sane and I never remember seeing anything from the man as absurd as I’ve seen here lately.
I’m not exactly sure if he’s always been this outlandish, or he’s simply behaving in these radical ways to pander to the ultra-religious wing of the Republican party in the hopes that their support might be enough to give him the GOP nomination in 2016.
Take for instance a recent rant he went on where he said that he’s ready to stand alone if he must and call down fire from Heaven to cast out “false prophets.”
“God wants us to stand in the gap,” Huckabee said. “And sometimes my heart’s broken because, in our own country, a lot of pastors will stand in the pulpit but they won’t stand in the gap. We wonder why our culture has turned godless. We wonder why people don’t grow up understanding the fundamentals of natural law, the moral basis of our Judeo-Christian founding as a nation. Might it be that the problem is not the history classes in our high schools but the pulpits of America who have not taken what they even believe and applied it to the pulpit and to the people?”
Okay, Mike, why don’t you do something worthwhile and call down some fire on ISIL’s forces in Iraq and Syria? Are the liberal “false prophets” really that much worse to you?
They never stop trying to screw over the little guy.
The Republican-controlled House Appropriations Committee today released a budget proposal that would prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from implementing its new net neutrality rules.
The Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill for fiscal 2016, to be considered in a subcommittee meeting tomorrow, “contains $315 million for the FCC—a cut of $25 million below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $73 million below the request,” the committee said in its announcement. “The legislation prohibits the FCC from implementing net neutrality until certain court cases are resolved, requires newly proposed regulations to be made publicly available for 21 days before the Commission votes on them, and prohibits the FCC from regulating rates for either wireline or wireless Internet service.”
The modern Republican party, and the conservative movement that gives the party its only real energy, never has been down with this whole right-to-vote business — except, of course, as an equal-protection dodge in Bush v. Gore. The current Chief Justice, John Roberts, kick-started his rise in conservative politics by working to undermine the Voting Rights Act as a lawyer in Ronald Reagan’s Justice Department.
You really have to admire how they’ve done it. First, they turn our elections into a plutocrat’s playground (Citizens United, McCutcheon). Then they uphold in the main voter-suppression tactics designed by the candidates the newly corrupt system produces out in the states (Crawford). Then, they gut any remedy that the people against whom these new laws discriminate have in federal court (Shelby County.) And now, it appears, the day of Jubilee having been declared, the circle may be closing for good.
The court’s ruling, expected in 2016, could be immensely consequential. Should the court agree with the two Texas voters who brought the case, its ruling would shift political power from cities to rural areas, a move that would benefit Republicans. The court has never resolved whether voting districts should have the same number of people, or the same number of eligible voters. Counting all people amplifies the voting power of places with large numbers of residents who cannot vote legally, including immigrants who are here legally but are not citizens, illegal immigrants, children and prisoners. Those places tend to be urban and to vote Democratic. A ruling that districts must be based on equal numbers of voters would move political power away from cities, with their many immigrants and children, and toward older and more homogeneous rural areas.
When people say the two parties are exactly alike, don’t you believe them. Here are some highlights from their 2012 platforms. These quotes are pulled from
An independent web developer named Amit Asaravala combed both documents and made a side-by-side comparison of the stances of each party.
Commerce: Women [W]e are committed to passing the Paycheck Fairness Act…. [p.10]
Education: Sex Education
Democrats support evidence-based and age-appropriate sex education. [p.18]
We renew our call for replacing “family planning” programs for teens with abstinence education….[p.36]
President Obama has encouraged innovation to reach his goal of generating 80 percent of our electricity from clean energy sources by 2035. Democrats support making America the world’s leader in building a clean energy economy by extending clean energy incentives…. [p.7]
We support more infrastructure investment to speed the transition to cleaner fuels in the transportation sector. [p.7]
We will end the EPA’s war on coal…. Further, we oppose any and all cap and trade legislation. [p.16]
We call for timely processing of new reactor applications currently pending at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. [p.16]
As soon as possible, we will reverse the current Administration’s blocking of the Keystone XL Pipeline…. [p.47]
Environment: Climate Change
We affirm the science of climate change, commit to significantly reducing the pollution that causes climate change…. [p.20]
Democrats pledge to continue showing international leadership on climate change, working toward an agreement to set emission limits in unison with other emerging powers. [p.21]
We also call on Congress to take quick action to prohibit the EPA from moving forward with new greenhouse gas regulations….[p.19]
Foreign Policy: Foreign Aid [W]e will continue to respond to humanitarian crises around the globe. [p.29]
Limiting foreign aid spending helps keep taxes lower, which frees more resources in the private and charitable sectors, whose giving tends to be more effective and efficient.[p.46]
Gay Marriage & Rights
We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples. We also support the freedom of churches and religious entities to decide how to administer marriage as a religious sacrament without government interference.[p.18]
We reaffirm our support for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. [p.10]
And on and on—tell me again why any sane person would vote for Republicans?
(And that’s the comparison of the 2012 platforms—with the inmates running the asylum, I’m sure 2016 will see the right-wing additions to their platform going all the way over the cliff.
All around great dude - enjoy!
(maybe he did not get the memo on toning it down a bit?)
@marchaig Its because most Feminists are ugly.
@MarshallFSmith not my town, and don't call me cupcake. ma'am will do just fine - i certainly earned it.
So,obama is rushing to let his friends out of Gitmo. We need to put obama inside Gitmo. Damn Bastard Traitor.
obama is a walking Compost. Happy #EarthDay2015
on ‘bagheads’ oops sorry - we call them Muslims….
@DrMartyFox Dead Whitey does not matter to the Left.
on not understanding the difference between climate and weather….
and he really likes guns….
but as long as they don’t cost too much - it’s a rough economic world for bigots these days….
but really - he just likes guns….
@heavyhokie Money is tight so I'm going with a Bersa Thunder .380 or a Kel Tec PF9,both less than 300 bucks.
and moar guns!!….
on nonsense conspiracy theories….
retweeting super racist - Pat Dollard…..
@PatDollard obama once again using BigGov. as his Personal Louisville Slugger.
on Valerie Jarrett….
And that is just the last five days…. peruse on your own. (at your own risk, obviously, it may be catching)
I have reached out to Hampton Roads Tea Party for comment, but as of publication, none has been proffered,
All of these are based on actual proposals and incidents…
Do you support the laws in Arkansas and Arizona that require doctors to inform women that drug-induced abortions can be “reversed” mid-procedure even though this is not supported by scientific evidence?
Do you believe evolution is just a theory and support those lawsuits like the one in Kansas that argue teaching evolution in schools functions as an endorsement of atheism?
Do you support the order Florida Department of Environmental Protection officials received to not use the term “climate change” or “global warming” in any official communications, e-mails or reports?
Would you have used state funds to oppose Michael Schiavo’s, Terri Schiavo’s husband, wishes that his wife be removed from life support?
Do you think pizza places should be able to deny their product to gay couples who want to have pizza at their weddings?
Do you support the Oklahoma bill that proposes to ban Advanced Placement U.S. History in public schools because it is unpatriotic in teaching our nation’s not-so finest moments?
Do you think your state deserves to be first to name the Bible its official state book as bills introduced in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee propose?
If answer yes to:
0: might be sane
2-4: very nutty
5-6: really nutty
7: living with the squirrels
Young looks like an elder of the Afrikaner Broederbond, which may not be coincidence.
Alaska Republican Rep. Don Young offered an innovative proposal for addressing the problem of homelessness in America on Thursday: Release the wolves.
According to the Washington Post, Young made the comments during a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on the Interior Department’s budget.
“How many of you have got wolves in your district?” he asked his colleagues “None. None. Not one.”
“They haven’t got a damn wolf in their whole district,” Young added. “I’d like to introduce them in your district. If I introduced them in your district, you wouldn’t have a homeless problem anymore.”
Young was reportedly trying to make the point that the Interior Department makes budgetary decisions without consulting with the states those decisions would affect. He believes gray wolves should be removed from the endangered species list, and was ridiculing his colleagues’ efforts to protect the wolves.