First Female Senator

[hobowh]

Are we sure they are not the same person just saying... Lol

[68Charger]

68Charger, you're missing the point. It's not a lie unless there's an intent to deceive. In the case where someone is just plain wrong, it's not a lie. Mikulski is so stupid, it's entirely possible she believes the garbage she spews in which case she's just wrong (as usual) and not necessarily lying.

Still not buying it, it's still untrue- which makes what she said a lie... the fact that she doesn't know it's untrue and a lie makes her ignorant- it doesn't make it no longer an untruth- so it's still a lie- and she is still saying it... which makes her a liar- just an ignorant liar "she's so stupid that she doesn't even know that she's lying"

If you're going to make a claim like that (first to do anything), then if you have any integrity you will research to make sure your position is correct before stating it.

I don't believe in relativistic morality- either it's right or it's wrong. She is wrong on several levels.

[Big E3]

She just thought that since the Demonrat controlled teaches union had stopped teaching history that nobody would know she lied. Plus, Caraway along with other Demonrats voted against anti-lynching legislation, a southern Demonrat pastime. So the truth is also inconvenient and doesn’t fit with rest of the Demonrat lies currently being told.

[Gman]

You guys just don't get it. Feelings are more important than facts.

[cstone]

Oh Barb hon, if the people back in Highlandtown could only see you now.

[Ah Pook]

Hattie Caraway also voted against anti-lynching bills, like most of her Southern Dem cohorts. Southern Democrats were frankly some of the most overtly racist folks that ever lived.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyer_Anti-Lynching_Bill
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hattie_Caraway#Legacy

Oh Southern dems? That's a whole 'nother ballgame...

The House of Representatives passed the 15th Amendment on February 25, 1869, by a vote of 144 to 44.

The Senate passed the 15th Amendment on February 26, 1869, by a vote of 39 to 13.

[cstone]

He was referring to the Voting Rights Act of 1965:

House - Democrats 217-54, Republicans 111-20
Senate - Democrats 49-17, Republicans 30-1

Signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965

[Alpha2]

So, you're saying that the vote in 1869 did, or did not happen. Because if you're talking about the second time, not the first, original time, we need to know that. And, I'd also like to know what additional un-related amendments were tacked on to the legislation...you know how they like to do that, so that it is voted against, for un-related reasons to the original legislation...I don't know this mind you, it's just that it happens almost all the time. Subterfuge, you know.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Of course, Cummings focuses on the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because it passed with huge majorities from both parties, unlike the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which required Republican support to overcome a filibuster led by one Senator Robert Byrd (yes, that Robert Byrd) and 90-odd other Democrats. The Republican support for the CRA in 1964 arguably made Byrd's Democrats realize any similar resistance to the VRA in 1965 was futile.

[68Charger]

I was trying to remember the saying, just found it...

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn’t so." Ronald Reagan