Two Examples That Prove Republicans Are Completely Devoid of Reality

salvador-daliI know what you’re thinking, “Only two?!”  Yes.  For the purposes of this article I’m only going to highlight two fairly recent events that perfectly showcase just how delusional Republicans truly are.

The first example I want to use happened this past summer during the anniversary of the Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech.  I can’t count the comments I read from Republicans on my page Right Off A Cliff, my Twitter account or here on Forward Progressives claiming MLK would be a Republican.

And they were dead serious.

Let me try to understand that mind set.  Republicans currently control the south.  Alabama, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Tennessee — you get the picture.

States which supported segregation during King’s lifetime and many of the same states that fought to keep slavery legal.

Now, MLK was obviously a civil rights leader who stood against the mistreatment of African Americans nationally, but especially in the south.  Now these southern conservatives think MLK would be on their side?  

That’s not just stupid, it’s insane.  Why would he be a conservative?  Because he was a religious man who might have opposed abortion and homosexuality?  Sure, in the 1950’s and 60’s he might have opposed both.  But hey, so did many liberals at that time.  Society has evolved and Dr. King epitomized evolution in a society.  He lived and died fighting for the progress in this country to give equal rights to African Americans.

Homosexuality is much more accepted now than it was even 10-15 years ago and supporting abortion rights isn’t about agreeing with abortion — it’s about giving women the right to have control over their own bodies.

To believe MLK would side with the party which continues to deny civil rights to millions of Americans — not to mention how many of their voters openly detest our first black president — is so absurd I honestly can’t even grasp how ridiculous someone has to be to really believe that.

Then, more recently, the claim by Republicans that President John F. Kennedy was a conservative.  The Democrat who Republicans at the time loathed was actually a conservative.

Why, because he cut taxes?  Yeah, he did.  But guess what the top tax rate was at that time?  Right at 70%.  I’ll gladly support tax rates for the richest among us at 70% if Republicans will get on board with that.  Since, you know, Kennedy was a conservative and all.

Or let’s just look at an actual quote from Kennedy about being “liberal”:

“What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label “Liberal?” If by “Liberal” they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer’s dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of “Liberal.” But if by a “Liberal” they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a “Liberal,” then I’m proud to say I’m a “Liberal.”

Now, I can see why the first part of that quote is something Republicans might champion as evidence that Kennedy was conservative.  But not quite.  If President Obama said something similar like that right now, they would dismiss it as a lie.

Then the second part of the quote is almost entirely the opposite of what the modern day Republican party stands for.

Republicans aren’t for new ideas.  They’re people that are always looking behind.  Any mention of change with them brings about a harsh and ridged reaction.  They couldn’t care less about the welfare of the people, their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights or their civil liberties.

They cut funding for programs that help people, oppose giving people access to health care, think it’s acceptable that poor people live in slums, constantly cut funding for education, allow companies to outsource jobs (in fact give them tax breaks for doing it) and we covered civil rights and civil liberties during the MLK part of this.

It’s just absurd that Republicans really believe John F. Kennedy would be a conservative if he were alive today, or was any sort of “conservative” during his time.  I guess we should just ignore the fact that the Kennedys continue to have a presence in the Democratic party with his own daughter working for the Obama administration as an ambassador.

But yeah, I’m sure he’d be a modern day Republican.

It’s this level of delusion that I simply cannot grasp.  A party which constantly stands in the way of civil rights for homosexuals, who has members of their party who have recently claimed the Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional, believing that two civil rights icons would be on their side if they were alive today.

It’s honestly laughable that many conservatives, and the right-wing media, really try to perpetuate the idea that these great men would actually side with their ignorance.

It goes to show exactly how devoid of reality these people have really become.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Michael Ryland

    Your assertions about Dr King are 100% accurate. There is nothing in his history to suggest he was a Conservative. If, by Republican, they mean the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, then yes, he would have been aligned with THAT Republican Party. Originally, Republicans were the Liberals and Democrats were the Conservatives. That has certainly changed 180%.

    As for John F Kennedy, the record is less clear. Certainly, Kennedy would never have been a Republican; not in his day or in the current climate. But, some of his positions would, today, be seen as more conservative (lower case “C” on purpose) than many contemporary Democratic positions. As a strong anti-Communist, JFK increased America’s presence in Southeast Asia. There were the covert incursions against Castro as well. Kennedy was not a Civil Rights advocate by nature. His position evolved over time to come to support this cause. I don’t think the term “Blue Dog” could be applied to JFK, but “Liberal Lion” wouldn’t fit either.

    What is interesting to me about the political philosophies of the Kennedy brothers is the left shift as we move from John to Bobby to Ted. Each brother was significantly more Liberal than their next oldest sibling. This was partly due to the times, but I believe Ted Kennedy was the only instinctively Liberal of the three.

  • Matthew Reece

    JFK’s political positions would put him outside of both major parties today. He probably wouldn’t be a Libertarian or a Green either.

  • SteveRic

    I believe I have heard that the MLK – Republican myth has been debunked by his family several times.

  • Raamah Aoxomoxoa

    The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism. All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right. The “best man” at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

    Senator Goldwater had neither the concern nor the comprehension necessary to grapple with this problem of poverty in the fashion that the historical moment dictated. On the urgent issue of civil rights, Senator Goldwater represented a philosophy that was morally indefensible and socially suicidal. While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist. His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America, I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy.” – The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr.

  • George Harvard

    I’m interested in joining the Democratic Party, What would be required of me, in order to do so?

    • Jim Bean

      You must abandon reason thought and support the ideology regardless of its obvious fatal flaws. (Example: you must be willing to believe that you can provide health care to 30 million additional people at less cost than it requires to provide it to 30 million fewer.)

      • lloydsev

        And yet, so many other first world countries do it, and do it for far less. You don’t have to copy other countries, but to say it can’t be done is a flat lie.

      • Jim Bean

        Is not. 30 million more cannot be covered for less money. Nor is there any evidence that the cost goes down as more people are covered in other countries.

      • George Harvard

        Correct, Mr. Lloydsev…..liberalism is successful…..successful at using taxpayer money, to purchase power, via government “handouts”…, in liberal land, as long as the taxmoney continues to be available, we liberal “progressive” Democrats can purchase success.

  • Jim Bean

    If MLK were alive to see what his successors have done to his dream and how they’ve destroyed the black community for political profit, he would probably shoot himself.