Sean Hannity, Fox News’ race-baiter in residence, didn’t just approve of the Supreme Court’s ruling that struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, he used the occasion to racially fear monger about African American voters via one of his favorite obsessions, the completely irrelevant New Black Panther Party. He was joined in his effort by Erik Rush, who piled on by suggesting that the VRA was little more than an enabler of Obama-administration approved voter fraud.
The New Black Panther Party is an extremist hate group that bears no connection to the 1960’s Black Panthers and receives little support from mainstream African Americans. But Hannity has been acting as if they are as popular as the NAACP for years, even before NBPP’s Malik Zulu Shabazz embarrassed Hannity on his own show by confronting him about his relationship with white supremacist Hal Turner. Shabazz hasn’t been on Hannity’s show since, I don’t think, but that has not stopped Hannity from inflating the group’s importance and injecting them into nearly every story involving race.
So it was not a huge surprise last night when, after calling the Supreme Court’s ruling “fairly common sense,” Hannity once again brought up the bogus New Black Panther Party “voter intimidation” case – in which no voters were intimidated – as "proof" that minority voters no longer need protection. Fortunately for truth-seeking Americans, Juan Williams was on hand to shoot down the baloney.
Still, Hannity's insinuation was clear when he said, sarcastically, "So I guess that's OK now, it's acceptable, standard. We can send - guys can be with batons in front of polling places, OK." (As Williams later confirmed, it was one black guy with a baton, there to protect black voting interests in a black precinct, who was dispatched with an injunction)
Unfortunately, for truth-seeking Americans, Williams was paired with Rush, one of Hannity’s regular, designated African American black attackers. When last we saw Rush, he had tweeted that Muslims are “evil” and “Let’s kill them all.” But what’s not to like if you’re Sean Hannity? Rush was not only presented as a credible expert on voting rights, Hannity had no objection when he suggested that the only purpose of the Voting Rights Act was to facilitate fraudulent (African American) voting:
This administration wants laxity. When you’ve got widespread instances of voter fraud coming up, when you’ve got entire segments of a demographic of voters totaling more than that population of demographics in that area, you know the states really have to step in and do something. …Eric Holder, the Attorney General has been fighting that for a long time on this pretext that there’s a lot of discrimination.
Then, in 1972, you had the Nixon landslide where he won the whole of the “Old South” (i.e., the Confederacy), but that again had little to do with the “Southern Strategy” and more to do with the fact the Dems had nominated the very liberal George McGovern (interestingly, McGovern was no better liked by the Democratic establishment than Bill Clinton would be in 1992) and there were a few other significant in-house problems for the Dems that Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” really didn’t make much of an impact. And of course, there was the Watergate break-in but that didn’t really make much of an impact on the election itself (parts of the scandal had been made public weeks before the election but the real investigation and details wouldn’t become well-known until early 1973). Now, in 1968, the “Old South” was really split between Wallace and Nixon (Wallace took AL, AR, GA, LA and MS and one elector from NC while Nixon got FL, KY, SC, TN, and VA plus the majority of NC’s electoral vote; TX stayed in the Dem column) and in 1972, it went to Nixon all the way (of course, in both 1968 and 1972, a lot of the big union-heavy powerhouses like IL, IN, OH and WI as well as CA went to the GOP, so the “Southern Strategy” and its emphasis on attacking civil rights legislation didn’t seem to have the reverse effect in those states which had already been, at least nominally, supportive of civil rights).
In 1976, the “Southern Strategy” was wholly nullified as the (loathed by the Democratic establishment) Southern peanut farmer, Jimmy Carter, won the Dem nomination and then won ALL the “Old South,” except for Virginia. But, again, the union powerhouses of IL and IN went to the GOP (as did MI) while OH came back to the Dems.
But, in 1980, when racist-empathizer Ronald Reagan won the GOP nomination (remember, he launched his post-convention Pres campaign in Philadelphia, MS—the site of the murders of 3 civil rights workers—with a speech supporting “states’ rights”), Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” was finally launched into turning the South into a reliably GOP bloc (in Presidential elections, at any rate; it would take several more years before other offices in the South would turn to GOP control—many of them doing so as Southern conservaDems switched parties). From 1980 through 2012, Dems have won only 8 states of the “Old South” and with NO regularity or pattern. The Dems won 7 of them twice (GA in 1980 and 1992; AR, KY, LA, and TN in 1992 and 1996; and FL and VA in 2008 and 2012) and won NC only once (in 2008). Since 1980, the Dems have not won AL, MS or TX (TX is really the outlier since in the 9 Presidential elections from 1980 to 2012, a Texan—whether native or self-affiliated—has been involved in 6 of them; Bush the Elder in the 1980, 1984, 1988, and 1992 elections and Bush the Dimwit in 2000 and 2004, and it’s a political rarity for a Presidential ticket to lose the votes of either of its candidates’ “home states”).
So, it really hasn’t been longer. Johnson just couldn’t foresee the other elements which would forestall turning over the South to the GOP for a decade and a half.
Now I agree with him on the attitude change. In 1965 the south overwhelmingly voted Democratic, but because of the Civil Rights act and the Nixon southern strategy the south has voted Republican since. When President Johnson signed it he told Bobby Kennedy and Dr. King that he was handing the south to the Republicans for the next generation. He was wrong. It’s been longer.
My question to those who feel likewise why the law is no longer needed, then why make the change? If everything they told us is true then what harm would there be in keeping it?
Hannocchio the RINO is the product of his environment. His parents moved to a predominantly white neighborhood in Long Island and he had all-white friends. Went to a predominantly white private school and had predominantly white friends.
He befriended a neo-Nazi and called him a friend. He calls Pat Buchanan a good friend.
When he grew up he settled in several cities that were predominantly white at that time.
Hannocchio has a narrow view of black people. He has black people around him to say he’s not racist. It’s all a sham. This Long Island Lolito is a fraud and a street hustler.
That nut on his show is better off standing on a wealthy family’s front lawn in Oyster Bay.
