CNN Poll: JFK remains most popular past president

[jobeterob]

COMMENT [[6 comments)
PERMALINK
CNN Poll: JFK remains most popular past president
By: CNN's Rebecca Stewart


[[CNN)–It's a golden anniversary Thursday for John F. Kennedy's inauguration. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker John Boehner will mark the 50th anniversary with a tribute ceremony, that will include remarks by Vice President Joe Biden, at noon ET in the rotunda of the US Capitol.

And fifty years later, JFK's popularity endures. A CNN/Opinion Research poll indicates that most Americans continue to have a positive view of how the president handled his White House duties.

Full results [[pdf)

"Eighty-five percent of all Americans approve of the way Kennedy handled his job as president, ranking him first among all the presidents who have served in the White House in the last half-century," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

Thursday is also the 30th anniversary of Ronald Reagan's first inauguration. President Reagan places third on the list of historic approval ratings for presidents since almost seven in 10 Americans say that they approve of his job performance in the White House.

President Bill Clinton edged Reagan out of second place with a 72 percent approval rating in the poll. Of the ex-presidents tested, four received a positive rating along with Presidents Kennedy, Clinton, and Reagan: Presidents George H. Bush, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Lyndon Johnson.

Less than half the nation approved of two former presidents. Three in 10 approve of President Richard Nixon and 40 percent approve of President George W. Bush.

Check out CNN's new Polling Center, which provides the most comprehensive polling data of any news organization in the political landscape.

Filed under: CNN poll • John F. Kennedy • Polls • Ronald Reagan

[tamla617]

jobeterob
i'm not suprised,i agree with them!in your other thread i said he was imo a good president the way he handled the russians,kicked the space programme to the moon.and the civil rights bill.those 3 things to me showed him to be one of the best.his family and personal life,nowhere near it.the chicago vote was bent [[probably) marylin and sam giancana doesnt sit well,but as president and decisions taken, he was good.
suprised that clinton knocked reagan into 3rd i must admit.i thought nixon was good too,but watergate would've put paid to that.and probably should to be honest,but he did open up the chinese and see vietnam for what it was,un-winable.carter,oh dear.

[arrr&bee]

I'm not surprised jfk was the first president born in the twentieth century and at the time of his election[1960]america was at the dawn of a new age in terms of change as civil rights had come to the forfront as well as the beginnings of space exploration and it made sense that an energetic young president would lead the country on it's quest into the new decade and onto great things for the country,it was an exciting time filled with hope for the future...and then dallas happened and to this day the mystery of his death lingers over america like nasal drip had jkf lived he would have moved america forward at an amazing rate and many of the old ways would've been cast aside forever....the specter of jkf will always be with us in this generation and all those that follow.

[tamla617]

arr&bee
correct! well said

[pshark]

http://www.google.com/logos/2011/jfkinaugural11-hp.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE0iPY7XGBo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s6U8GActdQ&feature=related

[soulster]

Just as long as Clinton beat out Reagan, i'm happy!

[smark21]

jobeterob
i'm not suprised,i agree with them!in your other thread i said he was imo a good president the way he handled the russians,kicked the space programme to the moon.and the civil rights bill.those 3 things to me showed him to be one of the best.his family and personal life,nowhere near it.the chicago vote was bent [[probably) marylin and sam giancana doesnt sit well,but as president and decisions taken, he was good.
suprised that clinton knocked reagan into 3rd i must admit.i thought nixon was good too,but watergate would've put paid to that.and probably should to be honest,but he did open up the chinese and see vietnam for what it was,un-winable.carter,oh dear.

JFK didn't sign the Civil Righs Act. LBJ did as the act wasn't passed until 1964.

[tamla617]

smark.
i didnt say he signed it,he started the ball rolling didnt he?
as lbj signed in '64,jfk shot nov '63 the work.drafts etc were already started.

[tamla617]

was reagan a bad president?

[jobeterob]

JFK did start the ball rolling on the Civil Rights Act; actually, the ball was probably rolling, like it is rolling these days on other issues and there is no stopping them.

Reagan..........compared to Bush, no! He was an excellent communicator, even with alzheimers developing, whereas Bush couldn't even speak English.

I heard an interview this morning about a new Book on Osama Bin Laden and the author says Bush took no interest in Bin Laden, they only had one cabinet meeting on that issue [[the day before 9/11) and then they went and gave the world "Iraq" which helped turn the Middle East against the USA.

[tamla617]

jobeterob
i remember when bush was being interviewed,i think he was president elect at the time.he was being asked questions on world current affairs,because he was suspect on knowing anything,who is the pakistani president?he probably didnt think it was important,even though pakistan is a nuclear power.he had no idea,infact he didnt know all the answers to the questions he was asked,and none of them were hard questions.the irony is that he must have been either talking to him or at least discussing him on just about everyday of his presidency post 9/11.you cant make it up.
he kept talking about the evil doers and then you read what you just posted.between him and b.liar what a couple of con men.

[soulster]

JFK did start the ball rolling on the Civil Rights Act; actually, the ball was probably rolling, like it is rolling these days on other issues and there is no stopping them.



Actually, it was President Lyndon B. Johnson who got the ball rolling on Civil Rights, and all sorts of other corrective programs, but got bogged down with Viet Nam. It was...wait for it...Fmr. President Richard M. Nixon who took action. But, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed by Johnson.

Truth is, Kennedy kind of sidestepped civil rights. He was for it, but, like most of his contemporaries, he didn't want to actually do much of anything about it. he didn't want to offend certain groups.

[tamla617]

soulster
sorry i'm a bit confused,your saying lbj did nothing but sign the bill and his successor, president nixon that got it working.
over here an act of parliament is voted in both houses and once gained a majority vote is sent for royal assent and then it is law.it is acted on instantly.
isnt that the case over in the states?the president signs the bill,isnt it law then?
and how does something as complicated as a bill and especially the civil rights issue was done between dallas and summer '64.a month before he was killed,jfk called the congressional leaders to the whitehouse to line up the required votes for passage through house.having given a speech in the summer of '63 of his intention to have such a law [[which i have on a vinyl lp).obviously post dallas it was lbj's task to see out what jfk had started.and this was done in honour jfk as he had fought for it so long.this is in essence what lbj said.it passed into law june 64.i've just read about nixons terms in office to see if i'd forgotten about anything 'cept opening up to china,watergate, pulling out of vietnam and the desegregation of schools down south.which brings me to a another question.why wasnt the desegregation of schools not law or not implemented on the bill passing into law?U.S. laws do confuse me as state laws vary so much,but i assumed the bill was federal law.
so had he [[jfk) not been shot he would have seen it through as far as i can make out.

[jobeterob]

Soulster..........what's the answer to Tamla's question? I wonder the same thing; JFK must have had something to do with desegregation and the Civil Rights Act? I seem to remember RFK being very involved in those issues when I was a little kid. LBJ can't have done that all overnight????

[tamla617]

good point jobeterob,i forgot about rfk,did he carry on in lbj's administration? he and his brother were pushing this,and as atorney general rfk was probably doing more of the background work on the drafts,i'm using virtual RAM here,trying to remember stuff from when i was 8!

[smark21]

Actually, it was President Lyndon B. Johnson who got the ball rolling on Civil Rights, and all sorts of other corrective programs, but got bogged down with Viet Nam. It was...wait for it...Fmr. President Richard M. Nixon who took action. But, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed by Johnson.

Truth is, Kennedy kind of sidestepped civil rights. He was for it, but, like most of his contemporaries, he didn't want to actually do much of anything about it. he didn't want to offend certain groups.

You're right about JFK and Civil Rights. He was for it, but it was not a high priority in his Administration. Fighting the Cold War was. And JFK viewed both the Southern Segregationists and the Civil Rights workers as groups that were making the US look bad on the World stage as the Communist bloc was using the situation in the South for propaganda. It wasn't until the last year of his life that JFK began to seriously push for a Civil Rights bill and take the movement seriously and not be annoyed because they were making America look [[correctly) quite bad. But he was assasinated. But LBJ was the one who did the heavy lifting to push through the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Before he was VP and then President he was Senate Majority Leader and a very effective one and he knew how to get legislation through. In terms of domestic initiaitives such as Civil Rights and the Great Society and Medicare, LBJ is one of the most effective and productive Presidents ever. JFK's big domestic accomplishment was cutting taxes. On the foreign policy front, JFK was a warmonger. He ran to the right of Nixon on foreign policy and military issues in 1960. He led US attempts to assasinate foregin leaders such as Castro [[failed several times), Patrice Lumumba, and one of the heads of South Vietnam who was deemed not good for the US military image. It was no accident that shortly after JFK was assasinated, Malcolm X wisely observed that the assasination was the chickens coming home to roost for America. JFK is popular because he was good looking, gave good speeches and witty press conferences and was assasinated before the shit hit the fan for the US both in America and in Vietnam. If he had not been shot, there would still have uprisings in the ghetto, a strong anti war movement against the Vietnam War, and the assasinations of Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, and Dr. King.

[smark21]

good point jobeterob,i forgot about rfk,did he carry on in lbj's administration? he and his brother were pushing this,and as atorney general rfk was probably doing more of the background work on the drafts,i'm using virtual RAM here,trying to remember stuff from when i was 8!

He remained Attorney General for a short while after his brother's assasination then stepped down to run for US Senate in New York to which he was elected in 1964.

[smark21]

Soulster..........what's the answer to Tamla's question? I wonder the same thing; JFK must have had something to do with desegregation and the Civil Rights Act? I seem to remember RFK being very involved in those issues when I was a little kid. LBJ can't have done that all overnight????

The ones who should get the most credit for the Civil Rights accomplishments of the 60's are the actual Civil Rights leaders and activists who were on the frontlines in the South, busy organizing marches, sit ins and demonstrations and making their case in a variety of venues from visits to the White House to speeches and articles in a wide variety of platforms.

[soulster]

And JFK viewed both the Southern Segregationists and the Civil Rights workers as groups that were making the US look bad on the World stage as the Communist bloc was using the situation in the South for propaganda. It wasn't until the last year of his life that JFK began to seriously push for a Civil Rights bill and take the movement seriously and not be annoyed because they were making America look [[correctly) quite bad.

And, if it hadn't been for the image, he wouldn't have made the effort.

[soulster]

The ones who should get the most credit for the Civil Rights accomplishments of the 60's are the actual Civil Rights leaders and activists who were on the frontlines in the South, busy organizing marches, sit ins and demonstrations and making their case in a variety of venues from visits to the White House to speeches and articles in a wide variety of platforms.

And, if legislation hadn't passed, the civil rights struggle would have taken a militant turn. The real heroes of the Civil Rights movement were the activists, the Black leaders. Not just MLK, Jr., but Malcolm X, and everyone all the way back to Rosa Parks. Of course, she wasn't trying to be defiant, she was just tired.

[smark21]

And, if legislation hadn't passed, the civil rights struggle would have taken a militant turn. The real heroes of the Civil Rights movement were the activists, the Black leaders. Not just MLK, Jr., but Malcolm X, and everyone all the way back to Rosa Parks. Of course, she wasn't trying to be defiant, she was just tired.

NOt 100 percent true. Rosa Parks didn't spontaneously decide one day not to give up her seat on the bus to a white man. She had already been part of the movement and had attended non violence education. She was chosen to defy the law because she was an eminently respectful and her reputation could not be tarnished. I think the reason why a myth developed that Rosa Parks just decided one day out of the blue to resist is because it fits into the dominant ideology that would like to celebrate individuality and discourage people getting organized to effect social change. Such organization is considered a threat by those who hold power. If you haven't done so, you should check out the book Lies My Teacher Taught Me. It's about how American history is taught in schools and text books and how so many history curriculums, when they have to deal with social change movements try to erase the movement aspect of how change was accomplished and make it seem it was just individual action. Or else, as in the case of Helen Keller, who was a prominent anti war activist, socialist and human rights advocate in her adulthood, is reduced to nothing but a blind and deaf child who learned how to communicate and nothing else.

[soulster]

NOt 100 percent true. Rosa Parks didn't spontaneously decide one day not to give up her seat on the bus to a white man. She had already been part of the movement and had attended non violence education. She was chosen to defy the law because she was an eminently respectful and her reputation could not be tarnished. I think the reason why a myth developed that Rosa Parks just decided one day out of the blue to resist is because it fits into the dominant ideology that would like to celebrate individuality and discourage people getting organized to effect social change. Such organization is considered a threat by those who hold power. If you haven't done so, you should check out the book Lies My Teacher Taught Me. It's about how American history is taught in schools and text books and how so many history curriculums, when they have to deal with social change movements try to erase the movement aspect of how change was accomplished and make it seem it was just individual action. Or else, as in the case of Helen Keller, who was a prominent anti war activist, socialist and human rights advocate in her adulthood, is reduced to nothing but a blind and deaf child who learned how to communicate and nothing else.

In her words many years ago, she said that she sat down because she was tired.

[tamla617]

jfk was not a war monger.he'd seen action in the pacific during ww2.so he knew 1st hand what war was.
he was president during the cold war and when the berlin wall went up.
when russia tried to install short/medium range ICBM'S on cuba.thats when he drew the line.he was your president and as such is c in c of U.S. forces and is charged with the security of the U.S. people and borders.
he pushed the russians to the brink,because thats what it was going to take.
part of the deal for them withdrawing the ssm's was the U.S. withdrawing the jupiter missiles from turkey [[near russia's southern border) the jupiters were obsolete and earmarked for removal before the cuban crisis.the russians didnt know this and the U.S.agreed to remove them within 6 months,which was about 3 months longer than they had already planned!the russians thought they'd got a result.
in vietnam jfk was toying with the idea of withdrawing from there completely.any president serving during the cold war had to show steel and resolve in the face of russian expansion plans.they'd invaded hungary in 56 to quell the uprising against the communist government and would do so again,in 68 invading czechoslovakia after 1st secretary dubcek wanted to reform their political system.supplied president sukarno's indonesian airforce with frontline soviet bombers and fighters,nasser's egypt with the same,along with syria and iraq.the 1967 six day war in the mid.east was a war of russian v predominatly U.S. equipment.
but before that this is what jfk was up against and why he did what he did.as a matter of interest curtis lemay the airfoce general was a war monger and jfk and rfk had to fight him tooth and nail not to sink the russian ships and flatten cuba.they had to lie to him, that no U.S. aircraft had been shot at over cuba on recon missions, but they had been,lemay and his supporters in the administration didnt want restraint.he was that dangerous and the most scary thing..he was the running mate of george wallace in 68 obviously he and wallace didnt make it.that would have been ww3 in the making.at the height of the cuban crisis a friend [[flapping)of my dad phoned him to tell him there were missiles on the pads in east anglia [[uk) with liquid oxygen venting.thats just a button push away from launch.so it wasnt just america we were involved too.

[ms_m]

Nice post tamla617.

I also wanted to share something I wrote [[a few years back) that may give you a little more history and insight on LBJ and the Civil Rights Movement and the subsequent signing of the bill.

It's pretty long and I apologize for that but once you read it I think you will understand why I felt the need to post it in it's entirety.

I should mention, this was written for another forum [[during the height of the Health Care Rebate) and not SDF so please keep that context in mind while viewing. Other than that, I hope you enjoy and I also hope it adds a little more light on the subject.

Part 1
LBJ 's Civil Rights Legacy: The Missing Links

I walked away from Daily Kos shortly after the California Proposition 8 vote. I decided I needed a break after I read a rant describing the long, hours and personal money that had been spent in order to GOTV for Barack Obama. A few more rants later and the commenter called Black voters in California the derogatory, "n" word. I'm not easily offended by words. I decided years ago, the only person who will define me, will be me. However, I was offended by what I felt was a denial of understanding. An understanding as to why the word so easily slipped through the poster's subconscious. We all have our dark sides and until we learn to acknowledge it, what we deny, will grow stronger but for now, that will have to be a discussion for another time. I didn’t stick around that day to see how events eventually unfolded. I do not know when or how people finally moved on. I’d like to believe apologies were made, and emotional wounds and hurt feelings were healed.

Several months passed before I clicked on Kos again but even then, I was only a lurker from time to time. I have finally returned to Kos on what I consider part time, permanent bases. Shortly after my return I was called, ignorant, an Obamabot, a troll [[the person has since apologized for the troll remark and thank you again for that) and a few other names I've chosen to delete from my memory. I came back because of the Health Care fight. This time, I’ve stayed through the name calling, insults and vitriol because none of it amounts to a quarter of the abuse my ancestors and many of your ancestors went through to fight for their inalienable rights, and the inalienable rights of others.

Back in the day, [[to borrow urban slang) and around the time of the First Constitutional Convention in 1778, Blacks, or African Americans if you prefer, were labeled "others" and deemed three-fifths of a person. There was a laundry list of things three-fifths of a person could not have, as well as things they were not allowed to do. The right to vote was on that list although, I think it’s safe to say voting wasn’t uppermost in the minds of anyone considered, three-fifths of a person. Around the start of the First Constitutional Convention, 18% of the U.S. population were slaves. I included that fact only because I found the number interesting since African Americans today, are an estimated 13% of the total population.

Sometimes I get the feeling many believe it's all fine and dandy in my [[Black) world because some dude from Texas, who liked to pick dogs up by the ears, "twisted arms" and threatened legislators to sign a Civil Rights Bill. There is more to the story. From the first slave rebellion to today's fight for Universal Health Care, my rights and your rights are forever linked. If my ancestors and your ancestors had walked away from their fight because they could not get everything they wanted, if they had not bowed at times, stood tall and firm at times, if they had not taken crumbs to get their foot in the door, or if most had been too principled to accept compromises, it's plausible, [[and a smidgen of hyperbole)I would still be seen as three-fifths of a person. I would be three-fifths of a person without health insurance and a pre existing condition, but still less than a whole person. Yes, Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act but please know and understand, he was pushed by the will and fortitude of the people to get it done. He was pushed by the ghost of slaves and generations and generations of people who refused to give up. The meme of LBJ getting Civil Rights passed by being tough and twisting arms is only a small part of the narrative. The struggle did not begin or end with LBJ and he was not alone in the fight. I believe it's time, to rediscover the missing links.

[ms_m]

Part 2

Slave Rebellions and Uprisings in the U.S. [[http://www.historyguy.com/slave_rebellions_usa.htm)

One of the most distressing and violent aspects of American history was the institution of slavery. For over two hundred years, Africans were brought against their will to Britain's American colonies and to the new United States of America. One historian [[Herbert Aptheker), calculated that over two hundred separate slave revolts and conspiracies took place from the 1600's to the end of the U.S. Civil War in 1865.

Gloucester County, Virginia--Sept. 1663--This was the first major conspiracy for a possible slave rebellion. The plot by black slaves and white indentured servants was betrayed to the authorities. Several plotters were beheaded.
New York City Slave Rebellion--1712--25 slaves armed with guns and clubs burned down houses on the northern edge of New York City and killed nine whites. The rebels were killed after soldiers arrived. The repercussions of this rebellion resulted in the tortuous execution of 18 participants in the rebellion.

Cato's Conspiracy/Stono Rebellion--1739--Approximately 80 slaves armed themselves and attempted to march toward Spanish Florida from their home area of Stono, South Carolina. When confronted by a group of white militia, a battle ensued. Forty-four blacks and twenty-one whites perished.

Civil Rights Timeline [[http://www.infoplease.com/spot/civilrightstimeline1.html)

Milestones in the modern civil rights movement
July 26, 1948

Truman signs Executive Order 9981, which states, "It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin."

Aug. 1955
Fourteen-year-old Chicagoan Emmett Till is visiting family in Mississippi when he is kidnapped, brutally beaten, shot, and dumped in the Tallahatchie River for allegedly whistling at a white woman. Two white men, J. W. Milam and Roy Bryant, are arrested for the murder and acquitted by an all-white jury. They later boast about committing the murder in a Look magazine interview. The case becomes a cause célèbre of the civil rights movement.

Dec. 1, 1955
Rosa Parks [[Montgomery, Ala.) NAACP member Rosa Parks refuses to give up her seat at the front of the "colored section" of a bus to a white passenger, defying a southern custom of the time. In response to her arrest the Montgomery black community launches a bus boycott, which will last for more than a year, until the buses are desegregated Dec. 21, 1956. As newly elected president of the Montgomery Improvement Association [[MIA), Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., is instrumental in leading the boycott.

[ms_m]

Part 3

A visit with LBJ [[http://culturalexploration.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/mlk-gp-speech.pdf)



I stopped by to see President Johnson about voting rights. The President was concerned about voting, but he said Martin, I can't get this through in this session of Congress. We can't get a voting rights bill, he said because there are two or three other things that I feel that we've got to get through and they're going to benefit negroes as much as anything. One was the education bill and something else. And then he went on to say that if I push a voting rights bill now, I'll lose the support of seven congressmen that I sorely need for the particular things that I had and we just can't get it. Well, I went on to say to the President that I felt that we had to do something about it and two weeks later we started a movement in Selma, Alabama. We started dramatizing the issue of the denial of the right to vote and I submit to you that three months later as a result of that Selma movement, the same President who said to me that we could not get a voting rights bill in that session of Congress was on the television singing through a speaking voice "we shall overcome" and calling for the passage of a voting rights bill and I could go on and on to show. . .and we did get a voting rights bill in that session of Congress. Now, I could go on to give many other examples to show that it just doesn't come about without pressure and this is what we plan to do in Washington. We aren't planning to close down Washington, we aren't planning to close down Congress. This isn't anywhere in our plans. We are planning to dramatize the issue to the point that poor people in this nation will have to be seen and will not be invisible.

Selma to Montgomery [[http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/civilrights/al4.htm)

On Sunday, March 21, about 3,200 marchers set out for Montgomery, walking 12 miles a day and sleeping in fields. By the time they reached the capitol on Thursday, March 25, they were 25,000-strong. Less than five months after the last of the three marches, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965--the best possible redress of grievances.

Selma to Montgomery Mini Timeline:full time line here [[http://www.uuworld.org/ideas/articles/2352.shtml)

January 2, 1965
King launches the Selma campaign with a rally at Brown Chapel.

February 1-5, 1965

King and 500 schoolchildren are arrested in Selma; 650 African Americans march in nearby Marion. Unitarian Universalist ministers Ira Blalock and Gordon Gibson arrive in Selma to work with the SCLC. The Rev. Dr. Dana McLean Greeley, president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, sends a telegram to King in jail, praising him as a "model of discipline and non-violence." Greeley urges Johnson and Congress to guarantee voting rights to all citizens.


There are more Negroes in jail with me than there are on the voting rolls." [[Martin Luther King, writing from the county jail in Selma,

25,000 demonstrators join the marchers when they reach Montgomery for a final rally at the state capitol. That night, Viola Liuzzo is shot and killed by Ku Klux Klansmen as she drives toward Montgomery to pick up a carload of marchers.

[ms_m]

Part 4

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/3158355642_5c9ac4aac4_b-1.jpg
Statue depicts attack dogs forced on demonstrators
Kelly Ingram Park, Birmingham, Alabama

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/selma26WhiteHouseProtest-1.jpg
Here protesters block Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House.


http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h74/mmandmusic/streetside1-1.jpg
25,000 Strong!


More Pics Here [[http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.crmvet.org/crmpics/bham-bcri3-1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.crmvet.org/images/imgbham.htm&usg=__EEa2QO1zPdJ9ccCsvOqYEk4a4fc=&h=304&w=450&sz=90&hl=en&start=61&sig2=vM06W9Oeh7GNfVGHxydcmA&um=1&tbnid=VW0lE1nZleO9RM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=127&prev=/images%3Fq%3DCivil%2BRights%26ndsp%3D21%26hl%3Den% 26rlz%3D1B3GGGL_enUS222US242%26sa%3DN%26start%3D42 %26um%3D1&ei=kfMnS87WIpSXtgf86ZjVCw)

177 years passed from the start of that first Constitutional Convention to the passage of the Civil Rights Bill. 300 years have passed since the first slave rebellion. The struggle has seen numerous atrocities, deaths and murders. It has seen set backs, failures, reform and more struggles. So let me repeat myself, Lyndon Baines Johnson did in fact sign the Civil Rights Act, but he was pushed by the will of the people and the struggle continues.

[ms_m]

One more thing I'd like to add tamla617. I understand your comments and questions on the subject but you have to keep in mind the history of the US.

I don't have any problem crediting LBJ for twisting arms [[mostly the Democrats/Dixiecrats) for getting the law pass but he didn't get the ball rolling nor did he do it alone.

In 50 years, the same can and should be said of President Obama and the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell and any other civil rights laws he has, and or will sign.

[tamla617]

ms_m
i'm going to read this tomorrow,so i can do it justice,its nearly midnight here!one thing tho',nixon and the school desegregation down south,i wondered what took so long given the civil rights bill of '64.
you could have mentioned it i'll check tomorrow!

[ms_m]

oops...I forgot the time difference….LOL
But read it at your leisure.

Racial issues and the South are complicated and the biggest complication is fighting the stereotypes, but here is an article that was written in the New York Times back in 1970 that will get you started.

Nation: Nixon Goes South for Integratio [[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,902634,00.html)n
Monday, Aug. 24, 1970

Once you read it we will talk more since there was a prediction made in this article that proved to be quite prolific and the school district here in my [[Southern) community today, is suffering because of it.

[jobeterob]

Thanks for the pictures; I agree with the comments about Dont Ask Don't Tell.

Have any of you read The Book of Negroes.......I believe it was a huge hit a couple years back written by a black man from Nova Scotia whose ancestors escaped to Nova Scotia; I believe they were called United Empire Loyalists. Many of your comments in here about Rosa Parks et al are retold in that book although it starts, sadly, in Africa.

[ms_m]

You're welcome jobeterobe.

I'm not familiar with the book, but I was aware of a large population of Blacks living in Nova Scotia. From what I understand it's a result of slaves escaping through the Underground Railroad.

I have an old copy of Ebony Magazine around here somewhere that had the story and pics. When I get a chance I'll try and remember to look for it.

Without knowing the book it's hard to say but beginning the story in Africa would be historically accurate. But I can definitely relate to feelings of sadness.

[tamla617]

ms_m
very interesting,thanks.i've also read up on the desegregation of schools which flows into another problem,forced bussing.in which you touched with montgomery,rosa parks and bus boycotts

you're going to have to tell me me/point it out the prediction thats still affecting your area.

[ms_m]

But the more prevalent danger is that relatively affluent whites will increasingly abandon the public schools to the blacks and poor whites.

Starting in the 70's this is exactly what happened here in our school district.[[and probably school districts all over the South) We call it "White Flight."

The more parents were pulling their kids out of school and placing them in private schools the more money the school system lost. In the meantime they initiated a program called diversification which on the surface seemed like a great idea but the problem, as more people moved in, the more the board had to scramble to diversify. It finally reached the point, kids were being reassign to a new school every time they turned around. The kids and their education started to suffer, parents were upset and more and more were taking their children out of the system. Of course that meant schools were losing even more money.

The intentions behind diversification were good but it simply wasn't working as far as a better education and stable school environment. No one wanted to address the problem for fear of being seen as political incorrect or racist. In the meantime, more people are moving here, the district is growing, kids are being shuffled from school to school, parents are taking their kids out of the system, the system is losing money, wash, rinse, repeat.....and now we have ourselves one big mess.

[jobeterob]

This book had a different title in the USA and some other countries; you tell me why!

Product Description
From Publishers Weekly

Starred Review. Stunning, wrenching and inspiring, the fourth novel by Canadian novelist Hill [[Any Known Blood) spans the life of Aminata Diallo, born in Bayo, West Africa, in 1745. The novel opens in 1802, as Aminata is wooed in London to the cause of British abolitionists, and begins reflecting on her life. Kidnapped at the age of 11 by British slavers, Aminata survives the Middle Passage and is reunited in South Carolina with Chekura, a boy from a village near hers. Her story gets entwined with his, and with those of her owners: nasty indigo producer Robinson Appleby and, later, Jewish duty inspector Solomon Lindo. During her long life of struggle, she does what she can to free herself and others from slavery, including learning to read and teaching others to, and befriending anyone who can help her, black or white. Hill handles the pacing and tension masterfully, particularly during the beginnings of the American revolution, when the British promise to free Blacks who fight for the British: Aminata's related, eventful travels to Nova Scotia and Sierra Leone follow. In depicting a woman who survives history's most trying conditions through force of intelligence and personality, Hill's book is a harrowing, breathtaking tour de force. [[Nov.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.


Book Description
Abducted as an 11-year-old child from her village in West Africa and forced to walk for months to the sea in a coffle - a string of slaves - Aminata Diallo is sent to live as a slave in South Carolina. But years later, she forges her way to freedom, serving the British in the Revolutionary War and registering her name in the historic "Book of Negroes". This book, an actual document, provides a short but immensely revealing record of freed Loyalist slaves who requested permission to leave the US for resettlement in Nova Scotia, only to find that the haven they sought was steeped in an oppression all of its own. Aminata's eventual return to Sierra Leone - passing ships carrying thousands of slaves bound for America - is an engrossing account of an obscure but important chapter in history that saw 1,200 former slaves embark on a harrowing back-to-Africa odyssey.
Lawrence Hill is a master at transforming the neglected corners of history into brilliant imaginings, as engaging and revealing as only the best historical fiction can be. A sweeping story that transports the reader from a tribal African village to a plantation in the southern United States, from the teeming Halifax docks to the manor houses of London, The Book of Negroes introduces one of the strongest female characters in recent Canadian fiction, one who cuts a swath through a world hostile to her colour and her sex. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

[olamaebarto]

was reagan a bad president?

Did Rose Kennedy own a black dress?

[tamla617]

lol!care to expand on that?

[arrr&bee]

What we have to remember is that certain factions didn't want to see the status quo changed and jack kennedy was gonna shake up alot of things[end the vietnam war by-1965..splinter the cia into a thousand peices..retire j.edgar hoover..move forward with civil rights legislation]powerful folks got nervous and a trip to dallas was planned!!!

[tamla617]

that should have been written to the jaws theme.i was getting excited!

[marv2]

[QUOTE=soulster;30393]In her words many years ago, she said that she sat down because she was tired.[/QUOTE

Yeah, tired of the bullshit, desegregation, discrimination and inhumane treatment. I was lucky enough to have had the opportunity to meet Rosa Parks in Detroit in 1989.

[marv2]

This book had a different title in the USA and some other countries; you tell me why!

Product Description
From Publishers Weekly

Starred Review. Stunning, wrenching and inspiring, the fourth novel by Canadian novelist Hill [[Any Known Blood) spans the life of Aminata Diallo, born in Bayo, West Africa, in 1745. The novel opens in 1802, as Aminata is wooed in London to the cause of British abolitionists, and begins reflecting on her life. Kidnapped at the age of 11 by British slavers, Aminata survives the Middle Passage and is reunited in South Carolina with Chekura, a boy from a village near hers. Her story gets entwined with his, and with those of her owners: nasty indigo producer Robinson Appleby and, later, Jewish duty inspector Solomon Lindo. During her long life of struggle, she does what she can to free herself and others from slavery, including learning to read and teaching others to, and befriending anyone who can help her, black or white. Hill handles the pacing and tension masterfully, particularly during the beginnings of the American revolution, when the British promise to free Blacks who fight for the British: Aminata's related, eventful travels to Nova Scotia and Sierra Leone follow. In depicting a woman who survives history's most trying conditions through force of intelligence and personality, Hill's book is a harrowing, breathtaking tour de force. [[Nov.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.


Book Description
Abducted as an 11-year-old child from her village in West Africa and forced to walk for months to the sea in a coffle - a string of slaves - Aminata Diallo is sent to live as a slave in South Carolina. But years later, she forges her way to freedom, serving the British in the Revolutionary War and registering her name in the historic "Book of Negroes". This book, an actual document, provides a short but immensely revealing record of freed Loyalist slaves who requested permission to leave the US for resettlement in Nova Scotia, only to find that the haven they sought was steeped in an oppression all of its own. Aminata's eventual return to Sierra Leone - passing ships carrying thousands of slaves bound for America - is an engrossing account of an obscure but important chapter in history that saw 1,200 former slaves embark on a harrowing back-to-Africa odyssey.
Lawrence Hill is a master at transforming the neglected corners of history into brilliant imaginings, as engaging and revealing as only the best historical fiction can be. A sweeping story that transports the reader from a tribal African village to a plantation in the southern United States, from the teeming Halifax docks to the manor houses of London, The Book of Negroes introduces one of the strongest female characters in recent Canadian fiction, one who cuts a swath through a world hostile to her colour and her sex. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

I have not read Lawrence Hill's book yet, but I have seen his interview on "The Hour" and it sounds like a must read! The book is titled " Someone Knows My Name" in the USA.

[jobeterob]

It's a very good book. You won't want to put it down. Can anyone explain the thinking behind the different titles?

[ms_m]

Can anyone explain the thinking behind the different titles?

marketing.....a book tilted The Book of Negroes, wouldn't go over well in the US. Negroes isn't a derogatory term but it's outdated and hasn't been used since the 70's.

[arrr&bee]

There was a show on cable last night about the kennedys,and the old man's desire to win at any cost took three of his son's lives.

[jobeterob]

Lost track of this thread; thanks for your thoughts Ms. M.

Laurence Hill is an African American, I believe descended from Loyalists. I thought that title to be questionable from way back; so, the book has a 3rd different title in Australia as well, does it?

[ms_m]

Jobeterob I don't see it as questionable as much as outdated.

I'm not familiar with the book so I don't know anything about the Australia title or how Australian people of color deal with the issues of race. Sorry, can't help you there.

According to Mr Hill's website, his parents were emigrants. A Black father and White mother who moved to Canada from the US after they were married. Hill grew up in Toronto. African American is a Black American Citizen. Now he may have dual citizenship [[I don't know) but he didn't spend his formative years here. His perspective is most decidedly that of a person of color but not necessarily the same as Black Americans in general.

http://www.lawrencehill.com/bio.html