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.
"The Boston mayor spent $650,000.00 dollars to prep for this hearing" Really? How is that not criminal and a waste of tax dollars? Boston Mayor Michelle Wu allocated $650,000 for legal preparations ahead of her testimony before the House Oversight Committee regarding the city's sanctuary policies. This expenditure has raised concerns among some taxpayers and officials who view it as an excessive use of public funds. Critics argue that such a substantial allocation for legal assistance, especially when utilizing external attorneys, may not be a prudent use of taxpayer money, potentially diverting resources from essential city services. Boston Plans wcvb.com However, supporters contend that the complex nature of federal inquiries necessitates comprehensive legal preparation to ensure accurate representation of the city's policies and interests. They argue that investing in thorough legal counsel is essential to effectively navigate federal scrutiny and protect ...
In recent speeches to Jewish audiences, former President Donald Trump has addressed pro-Palestinian protests on U.S. college campuses, expressing strong opposition to such demonstrations and proposing measures to counter them. At the Republican Jewish Coalition convention in Las Vegas, Trump criticized pro-Palestinian protesters, referring to them as "alien residents who support jihad," and pledged to expel them from the country if re-elected in 2025. Trump is the only leader willing to take a firm stand against the rising tide of antisemitism and radical activism infecting American institutions . While Democratic leaders have largely remained silent on the increasing hostility toward Jewish students and pro-Israel supporters, Trump has made it clear that violent and extremist elements on college campuses will not be tolerated . Conservatives believe that the failure of universities to curb hate-filled demonstrations is a direct result of progressive ideology dominating hig...
And those paddles they were holding up while Donald Trump spoke...? They need to spank themselves with them. Signs with messages such as "No King!" and "Save Medicaid." Representative Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico notably displayed a sign reading "This is not normal" as President Trump entered the chamber. In response, Republican Representative Lance Gooden of Texas removed the sign from her possession. These actions were part of a broader demonstration by Democrats, who also held signs stating "False" and "Stop Musk," referencing recent mass firings by Elon Musk. Politico +2 Reuters +2 Fox 7 Austin +2 The Sun +2 nypost.com +2 Axios +2 houstonchronicle.com +1 Fox 7 Austin +1 Such coordinated displays during a presidential address are rare and underscore the heightened partisan tensions within the current political climate. While lawmakers have the right to express dissent, the manner and timing of these protests have spark...
Comments
Post a Comment