The Brutal Truth. Articles, stories, commentaries, videos, etc. are all Conservative based. We present multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information. The opinions expressed through the thousands of stories here do not necessarily represent those of The Brutal Truth.
We are not going to censor the news and information here. That is for you to do.
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
The claim: Democrats held the nation’s longest filibuster for 75 days to attempt to prevent the passing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
When senators want to put the brakes on legislation, they talk. And talk. And talk some more. That's called a filibuster.
Who holds the record for the longest filibuster? Recently a claim has made the rounds: "In 1964, on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Democrats held the longest filibuster in our nations history, 75 days. All trying to prevent the passing of one thing. The Civil Rights Act."
One Facebook user shared a post with the claim on social media on June 5. She did not respond when asked if she had any additional comments.
The Senate’s website states that the “longest continuous debate in Senate history” was about the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Prior to passing the act, Southern congressmen signed the “Southern Manifesto” to resist racial integration by all “lawful means,” states the Library of Congress’ exhibit, “The Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Long Struggle for Freedom.”
The Library of Congress website states the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights led to an attempt to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957.
The Senate site states President John F. Kennedy supported the act prior to his assassination and that President Lyndon B. Johnson encouraged Congress to pass the act in honor of Kennedy and to “end racial discrimination and segregation in public accommodations, public education, and federally assisted programs.”
Emanuel Celler, a New York Democrat, introduced the House’s version of a resolution on June 19, 1963, that would become the Civil Rights Act, according to an article in Smithsonian Magazine.
The House passed the bill on Feb. 10, 1964. It moved to the Senate on Feb. 26, 1964, and was placed on the Senate’s Judiciary Committee’s calendar, the Senate’s website states. The committee was chaired by civil rights opponent James Eastland of Mississippi.
According to Senate history, the issue was moved for consideration on March 9, 1964, when “Southern senators launched a filibuster against the bill,” with debates lasting 60 days.
Disturbing Display: What Catholics Are Saying About the Cathedral Exhibit Grotesque Display In A Cathedral Leaves Catholics STUNNED In Horror A recent display in a cathedral caused shockwaves when congregants and visitors encountered a grotesque installation—intended as modern art—that some feel crossed the line of reverence. While it has evoked strong reactions, opinions vary widely within the Catholic community. Some parishioners say the exhibit is deeply disturbing. They describe figures twisted or distorted, with crosses and statues placed in unsettling ways. To them, the display is disrespectful and even sacrilegious—allegedly reflecting nihilism or mockery of sacred imagery. A viral video from the parish priest urging calm only drew more attention, with viewers expressing confusion and offense at what they see as an assault on Catholic symbols. Supporters argue the art is intended as a meaningful interpretation—commenting on suffering, redemption, or the state of modern faith. Th...
Are Efforts Underway to Remove George Soros and His Network from the U.S.? In recent months, discussions have emerged among certain conservative groups questioning whether George Soros, his son Alex Soros, and their Open Society Foundations (OSF) should be compelled to leave the United States. These calls stem from a broader concern that their global philanthropy has grown too influential, especially in shaping U.S. politics, immigration policy, and social justice movements. Critics point to Soros’s significant financial support—approximately $23 billion distributed since 1993—toward progressive causes such as migrant integration, civil rights advocacy, pro-democracy and green jobs initiatives wxii12.com +3 foxnews.com +3 timesofindia.indiatimes.com +3 en.wikipedia.org . They argue that this level of sustained funding enables privately driven social change without public oversight. Major targets include voter protection efforts, criminal justice reform, and humanitarian assistance for...
Conservative fringe theorists and other skeptical commentators argue that Iran's growing nuclear capability isn’t just about bomb-making—it’s a full-spectrum strategy aimed at reshaping global geopolitics. Below is an unfiltered breakdown of the hottest claims stirring unease -- 1. Iran's Enrichment Surge: From Energy to Arsenal? Officially, Iran claims its uranium enrichment is for peaceful civilian use, but reports show the Islamic Republic is stockpiling highly enriched uranium—now exceeding 60% purity—far beyond the limits set in past deals en.wikipedia.org . Fringe voices suggest this rapid breakout isn’t accidental—it’s a war-prep strategy cloaked in energy rhetoric. In the evolving nuclear narrative surrounding Iran, one key issue continues to trigger alarm across both mainstream and fringe commentary circles: the nation’s rapid uranium enrichment, now reportedly reaching levels above 60% purity. While Tehran insists its program is for peaceful energy development, the ...
Comments
Post a Comment