Eh, [quote=“abierce, post:36, topic:14885”]
That implies both that LBJ was complicit with Hoover AND that he was helping to obstruct the civil rights movement.
[/quote]
No, it doesn’t - it implies that Johnson, for all his bravery, did not have the balls to rein in Hoover. Whether he could have successfully done so is a matter of conjecture, but that said, I never suggested that Johnson did not stop Hoover in order to stymie the civil rights movement, only that he did not, in fact, stymie Hoover.
1 Like
I of course did not say that Johnson ¨let¨ Hoover harass MLK (and others); I said that Johnson didn’t stop Hoover from doing so. This is an historical fact, don’t you agree?
2 Likes
True, but for accomplishing what he did with human greed in full rampage in 1960’s he was pretty darn close.
IMO, I would guess if LBJ could’ve reined in Hoover successfully he prolly would have. Hoover was a maniac.
2 Likes
While we may disagree over the details, LBJ was prescient though erring on the low side when he said his actions will cost Democrats the South for a generation. On that there can be no dispute.
The man spent some major league political capital in the interest of justice. That doesn’t mean he was without flaws; the Gulf of Tonkin comes to mind…
1 Like
Not necessarily. To “stop” someone from doing something, one must know they intend on doing it, and actually be able to exert authority over them. Was LBJ so informed in advance? Did he have such authority over this rogue? I don’t know, but I would doubt it given Hoover’s nature.
Would we fault Obama for not stopping Tom Vilsack from throwing Shirley Sherrod under the bus?
2 Likes
I’m sure that Johnson knew the general outline of Hoover’s faults and flaws, if not the particulars of King’s harassment. I don’t fault Johnson for not reining him in, inasmuch as other presidents didn’t either, but the fact remains that he did not.
I find it interesting that this reporter'' - and the TPM editors - would use the wordscreed’’ to describe Califano’s op-ed piece. It was a piece written by an eyewitness to history, certainly not a ``long, tiresome speech’’ offered by someone with scant knowledge of the actual events.
Raises hand. I actually did fault Obama for that…
1 Like
Context my friend, context. In my original comment, I said that Joseph Califano was pissed, asserting that the movie falsely implied that LBJ and Hoover worked to obstruct KIng. I also said it’s absurd to think that LBJ’s commitment to Civil Rights was less than genuine.
You rebutted with a single phrase from Califano’s column that claimed that Selma was LBJ’s idea. And you said that while you did not believe LBJ directed the FBI’s harassment of King, he certainly didn’t stop it.
Why say that, except to dispute what I was saying? Like I said, you can try to be as cute as you want, but you can’t have it both ways.
In your many subsequent responses, you’ve admitted that a) LBJ was sincere in his commitment to the movement, and b) that Hoover acted alone in his harassment of King. So, given the transcripts of the phone conversation in which LBJ encourages King to find a way in Selma or somewhere else to highlight the most ridiculous examples of voter suppression, what exactly has Califano said that was wrong?
Despite what I said earlier, I’m going to damn sure see this movie to see what the guy’s talking about. If he’s correct that it shows LBJ and Hoover working together against King, I’d expect a mea culpa from you in this space.
But that is a big thing. A very big thing. And it makes it seem that LBJ was directing MLK, not just being a supporter.
ETA. I’m, overall, a fan of LBJ.
3 Likes
I am not sure I can see how this is helping? Are the producers of this film saying LBJ did nothing for Blacks or just not enough? The man is synonymous with the largest advance in Civil Rights since the adoption of the Bill of Rights. Frankly, its doubtful these folks would be in a position to make this film if it weren’t for LBJ.
OK…if that’s how they want to play it…OK.
Yes, context is important. That’s why ¨Selma was LBJ’s idea…¨ was so provocative: it was the very first ¨statement of fact¨ in his argument that the film essentially slanders LBJ and that it should therefore be boycotted. (BTW, Califano never writes that he’s actually seen the film.) Do you really think that King had not already thought of an action to underline the issue of voter registration discrimination in the South? Do you really think that an organization that had precipitated the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in '63; that had organized the Birmingham Bus Boycott; and that had delivered Bull Connors dogs and fire hoses to America’s televisions; do you really think that LBJ’s toss-off one-line suggestion gave King the idea for Selma? Do you see why the very notion might be insulting to the hundreds of thousands of people who put themselves on the line back then, to the point of death? That’s the context I’m talking about.
Oh, and you’ll get a mea culpa from me if when I see the film there’s a hatchet job on Johnson that justifies the boycotting of the film. If it’s anything less than that, I’ll be looking for one on your part.
2 Likes
Well, it’s a movie about Selma and MLK. The march. It’s not about LBJ and that’s okay It doesn’t have to be a contest.
I’m trying to think of a good comparison and I 'm not sure I can. If we made a movie about Cesar Chavez legally being able to organize the UFW, should a movie about CC and the immigrant workers and what they faced, or is this somehow disrespectful of Jerry Brown who signed the law and isn’t getting enough credit?
2 Likes
Oh get over it. He said she said. I’ve seen my LAST black movie. Turn the page…I’m over all these pity parties.
Well, Nick Katzenbach did, and he was closer to the action than Califano.
Johnson respected the power of the movement. His inner demons and his political decorum were negotiable. Big news.
1 Like
In any case, whatever his personal views, it was the civil rights movement that got him to act. That’s why Califano’s to credit Johnson for Selma is so maddening to me.
1 Like
I know, right? Enough crying over discrimination, even if it is still rampant from employment, to education funding, government services, etc. And don’t get me started on those Jews and their fixation on the Holocaust! And people still crying about those kids killed at Newtown! I mean, get a life already!!
/s