The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. —THOMAS JEFFERSON, 1788

Being snarky gets you booted from Facebook and the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Cover of TIME

toddkinsey.com

Perhaps I should be honored. I was booted from Facebook after making this statement:

No need to dispute facts, huh? Sounds like a typical low information voter.

The article that I was commenting on was written by “activist” Joni Lindgren titled, “Why is the death panel myth so hard to shake?”

I discussed her propaganda here, but was compelled by some of the ObamaCare rah rah crowd to respond to their blind allegiance to ObamaCare, particularly that it could ever possibly lead to rationing.

I pointed some of them to a piece that I wrote on the Shire Blog that illustrates the mentality in academia, particularly in bioethics, that rationing is inevitable. Quote after quote of prominent academics discussing how old people should be euthanized and infanticide should be embraced is not enough to convince these die-hard Obama zombies, however.

In fact, it is difficult to find a bioethicist that does not heartily endorse rationing.

When a LIV pointed out that my source was a “right-wing blog” and therefore not credible, I noted that the sources are what should be considered – academic papers and conferences that are clearly linked on the Shire piece. Of course, low information voters are not open to facts, and will defend ObamaCare even as Unions and Democrats defect.

Anyway, after quite a bit of this, I wrote the comment mentioned above.

I admit, I get a bit snarky at times. But was my comment sufficiently offensive to get me kicked off Facebook? After all, Sally Mabbit, for example, called me a “goofy troll.”

The author of the piece, by the way, posted a comment that I would respond to if I could (but I will…oh I will) that declares that among other things, that the 1964 Civil Rights Act was “opposed by Republicans in Congress.” It would be interesting to know what history book this lady is reading.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the “Southern Bloc” of 18 southern Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage.

Russell stated:

We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states.

The most fervent opposition to the bill came from Senator Strom Thurmond (D-SC):

This so-called Civil Rights Proposals, which the President has sent to Capitol Hill for enactment into law, are unconstitutional, unnecessary, unwise and extend beyond the realm of reason. This is the worst civil-rights package ever presented to the Congress and is reminiscent of the Reconstruction proposals and actions of the radical Republican Congress.

On the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) completed a filibustering address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier opposing the legislation.

More facts about the 1964 Civil Rights Act can be found here.

Follow Renee Nal on Twitter @ReneeNal and Facebook. Check out her news and political commentary on Tavern KeepersGather and the Examiner for news you won’t find in the mainstream media. Renee is also a guest blogger for the Shire Blog.

Renee Nal is a co-founder of TavernKeepers.com, a news and political commentary site founded by former Glenn Beck interns. She is also the National Conservative Examiner and a contributor for the Brenner Brief.

More by

Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
You may use HTML in your comments. Feel free to review the full list of allowed HTML here.