Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The courage to do the right thing. Not the possible things.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 06:32 AM
Original message
The courage to do the right thing. Not the possible things.
Sometimes a man just has to stand up and do what's right. Not to do what he thinks he can get done in the present. Not the path of least resistance. Not the politically expedient thing. Not the big compromise. Just stand up for what's right, and fight for it. Make a stand and take it to the people. Damn the consequences.

I was thinking about a man of just such convictions the other day. He's forgotten for the most part these days, but he left an irreversible mark on history during his lifetime. I'm thinking about a man named Hubert Horatio Humphrey.

I got to remembering him when I had my flabby ass on the treadmill at the gym. After I turned off the tv in front of me, with the obligatory Faux News on, I pulled out the e-reader my lovely wife bought for my birthday, and opened up a book by one of the most inspirational men I've ever listened to. It was "Moyers On Democracy", a collection of some of his speeches over the years. I highly recommend it to everyone.

Moyers calls Humphrey's speech at the 1948 Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, the first thunderclap of the coming storm that was going to reverberate across America. The South had change little since the Civil War. Institutionalized racism was the rule of law in the South. Lynchings were still commonplace. I still remember hitch hiking through the Carolina's in 1972, and still seeing billboards along the highway, advertising for the Ku Klux Klan.

In July, 1948, the Republicans had just nominated Thomas Dewey for President. Truman was foundering. Earlier in 1948, Truman had demanded that Congress pass strong civil rights legislation, but he was backing down because Dems in Congress were afraid of pissing off the South, and kill Truman's slight chance to win the election. The last thing they wanted was a big divisive fight on the convention floor. Especially since this was the first time a convention would be televised. The party leaders backed away from a strong civil rights plank, and instead wanted to offer something more acceptable to the South.

Humphrey, the 37 year old Mayor of Minneapolis disagreed. Strongly.

After graduating magna cum laude at the University of Minnesota, Humphrey and his wife went to Louisiana to earn his Masters Degree. They were shocked at the "daily deplorable indignities" heaped upon blacks in the South. These experiences shaped his future views on racial relations in America. He returned to Minneapolis and was elected Mayor on his second bid. Under his leadership, the city formed the first enforceable Municipal Fair Employment Practices Commission. He sent 600 volunteers door to door, and to businesses, schools, and churches to expose discrimination previously ignored. They exposed discrimination against Indians, Jews, and Blacks. He established a human relations course for police officers.

"What Hubert Humphrey preached about civil rights, he practiced. And what he practiced, He preached".




He arrived at the 1948 Convention as a spokesman for the liberal wing of the party, and was named to the Platform Committee. After a ferocious fight the Committee voted down a strong civil rights plank, in favor of a weaker one, inoffensive to the South, and supported by the Truman White House.

"Humphrey agonized over what to do. Should he defy his party, and carry the fight to a showdown on the convention floor? The leadership of the Democratic Party said no. "Who does this little pip squeak think he is"?, asked one powerful Democrat. Truman refered to him as "one of those crackpots", who couldn't possibly understand what would happen if the South left the party. If Humphrey forced the convention to amend the platform in favor of a stronger civil rights plank, the delegates might refuse, not only setting back the fledgling civil rights movement, but making a laughingstock of Hubert Humphrey, and spoiling his own race for the Senate later that year. On the other hand, if he took the fight to the floor and won, the southern delegates might walk out, and cost Harry Truman the Presidency."




Humphrey, in his diary, said the decision should have been easy. His plank was both morally and politically right and it would have "grave repercussions on our lives". It would make many people political outcasts and it could have ended his career in politics and public service.

He didn't want to split the party. He didn't want his career to end, as he called it, "from Mayor, to pipsqueak, to oblivion". But, he also understood that he had to make a clear cut commitment to civil rights.

This was "radical" back in 1948. The plank read "We call upon Congress to support our President in guaranteeing these basic and fundamental rights: 1) The right of full and equal political participation. 2) The right to equal opportunity of employment. 3) The right of security of person. 4) The right of equal treatment in the service and defense of our nation."

Really radical stuff there. The South was a different country back then. It still is in many ways. South of the Mason-Dixon line, or as some blacks called it back then, The Smith-Wesson line, segregation was the law of the land. Upheld, and protected by violence, whether necessary or not.

Humphrey knew he would be strongly opposed. But, he said that Southern Whites needed to hear his words as much as Southern Blacks. He had a reputation for giving many long winded speeches. Moyers said that when God passed out glands, Hubert got two helpings. He set records for subjects he could approach simultaneously with an open mouth. This one took less than ten minutes. His conscience took over. He knew that the way to get ahead was not to go against your party. He decided to appeal to the best instinct in man, instead of basest instinct.

"To those who say we are rushing this issue of civil rights, I say we are 172 years late". "For those who say this is an infringement on states rights, I say this, the time in America has arrived for the Democratic Party to get out of the shadow of states rights, and to walk forthrightly in the bright sunlight of human rights".

When he finished, there was a deafening roar. Delegates cheered and shouted. A 40 piece band marched the aisles, playing. Order was only restored when Sam Rayburn ordered all the lights dimmed. The delegates overruled the Platform Committee by a wide margin.

Mississippi's entire delegation walked out along with half of Alabama's. They moved on to form the Dixiecrat Party, with a platform for "segregation, and racial integrity". They nominated Strom Thurmond for President, and he carried South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana.

Even by losing the South, Humphrey so energized the Democratic Party, that Truman won the election, which he was supposed to lose badly.

What Hubert Humphrey teaches us, is what real leadership and vision can accomplish. You don't have to compromise your morals to get support from the amoral. Why do we have to kow-tow to racists, corporatists, and criminals to get their support.

If you make a stand on moral principal, the people will back you all the way. Even if it's not the most politically expedient thing to do. Their talking heads and apologists, and various corporate subversives might say nasty things about you. Make up lies, or even make jokes about you. But, when you want to do what's right. Take it to the people, and they'll have your back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 06:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. I went to America but all I got was Rahm Emmanuel. Thanks for the excellent post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
21. +1 - And Rahm should have taken Humphrey's stance
Pisses me off, does Rahm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #21
29. Exactly! Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ozymandius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
2. That is a fine example of bottom-up leadership.
Edited on Sun Sep-05-10 07:15 AM by ozymandius
Rahm Emmanuel and the coterie of DLC ass-kissing acolytes in the Obama administration can learn something from Hubert Humphrey's example.

The examples are many. I am so sick of hearing the same phrase multiple times to describe the timidity of even introducing the raft of progressive legislation that was to accompany this administration into office.

Labor, by way of 'card check', was supposed to be strengthened through this administration. It is not. "We just don't have the votes," they say.

The Public Option had 70% support - among the American public fer fuck's sake! That is 70% inclusive of people who are registered Republicans. But we still "don't have the votes" in Congress to get it done.

DADT - part of the modern era civil rights movement - as an issue has been ceded to the Republicans and Secretary Gates to compromise the social justice out of it because we "don't have the votes" in Congress. Shamefully, we have an Executive branch that is too timid to twist arms to get solidly progressive legislation introduced. Instead of being brave - our timid Democrats with huge majorities not seen since the Ford administration abdicate power to a bigoted minority.

I'm so grateful that the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were passed when they were because these two landmark pieces of legislation would not have had any Hope of passage with cowards like these in office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. You are so wrong about rahm and obama....they already
KNOW EVERYTHING!

At least in their mind. I think they are just taking care of themselves and screw the rest of us. Thin about this, they are both young and at the end of their political careers, they need somewhere to go in two years and they've made the friends that can and will support them in the future. They haven't done too bad for themselves, that they got there on their knees to the military/industrial complex and lying their asses off to the public doesn't seem to concern them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ozymandius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. I believe their political temerity is all about winning elections.
I have witnessed a desire to:
• Triangulate;
• Seek consensus;
• Pursue bipartisanship even when it compromises core ideals.
The desperate circumstances we face have no resonance within the Washington bubble. It is as though there is absolute resolve not to be too controversial even when bold controversial moves are warranted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. And isn't it interesting that they seem well on the way to losing instead?
Nothing like doing the same stupid over and over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Didn't take Nostradamus to predict that would be the result, either
What's impressive is that the administration not only didn't seem to care about that- by repeatedly insulting or backhanding their own constituencies they've invited it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #9
25. Lest we forget: every major election cycle in which the DLC has been in charge, they have lost
Edited on Mon Sep-06-10 01:03 AM by liberation
... or barely won by default.

Look at Dean's 50 state strategy: boom clear Dem wins.

During the 90s, the DLC triangulation brought forth Gingrich and his minion's contract on America. And if the DLCers keep bringing Nader to excuse the clusterfuck which was their 2000 campaign, then it is fair to mention the Perot facto in 92 and 96.

These people could not manage their way out of a wet paper bag, and yet they think their strategy is indisputable regardless of the constant validation towards the opposite.

Look at how Rahm conducted the healthcare "reform" debacle. Since he "learnt" what happened during the 90s with the whole "hillarycare" brouhahah... in true "visionary" fashion he decided to surrender to the GOP before a single shot was fired in order to "win."


It is sad. The fact that there are people who not only defend, but excuse any and every action by these amateurs almost to the death... borders the pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ozymandius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
5. K&R
Paul Wellstone carried on in the HHH tradition
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
6. So true, nice read, thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. Well done.
I've been thinking about how much can you compromise with the amoral (evil) before the compromise itself loses its morality and because amoral (evil) itself?

As you've written, the people will back you all the way if you make a stand on moral principle. At least enough people so that you will win! The majority of Americans still want to believe that we hold the moral high ground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. big f'n k and r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. Wouldn't it be great if something like that happened now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I don't think it could happen now.
Remember, this was in 1948. The infancy of television. Conventions today are tightly controled production spectacles. All unity. All perception.

I think the last time anyone was allowed to go off the rails, was Al Sharpton in 2004. They tried to limit his time and censor his speech. He agreed, then went out and did what he planned on doing all along. It was a great speech.

I don't think they'd let Kucinich on stage today. Maybe not even Franken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Actually, they barely let Kucinich on the stage in '08. It was one of those
off-hours situations where very few were watching and listening. I was watching and listening. Dennis Kucinich was powerful and hit it out of the park.

For 2012, you're probably right.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #16
35. democratic leadership fear Dennis...
almost as much as the Cleveland mafia did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
givemebackmycountry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
13. Take it to the people, and they'll have your back.
Sadly, the people are poorly represented on K street and Wall Street.
And that my friends, is where the problem lies.

"If I had a rocket launcher" indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
14. Thanks for this post.
'You don't have to compromise your morals to get support from the amoral. Why do we have to kow-tow to racists, corporatists, and criminals to get their support'. We don't, unless we actually have no problem with them.

Which is why I am very concerned about the Democratic Party as it is operating today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
15. "corporate subversives might say nasty things about you"
Edited on Sun Sep-05-10 09:37 PM by Amonester
CorpoRate subveRsives will say nasty things about you whether you make a stand on moral principles and fight for what you believe is the best for The People who elected you, or whether you compromise your morals to (try to, and obviously, always fail) to get their support.

There is no other way around it, so why not acknowledge that, and work to keep your 65-70% approval, instead of choosing to compromise at every turn, ending up losing almost half of that support (and more to come?).


Thanks for the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
17. We have a President who showed that he has the oratorical skills to sway
the debate with his words.

The Bully Pulpit is sometimes the President's most powerful tool--especially in the age of TeeVee.

Unfortunately, Rahm Emanuel has hidden the Bully Pulpit somewhere in the bowels of the White House Storage Building.

Excellent piece.

REC.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
metapunditedgy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #17
24. Obama had it all. It's hard to think of a more promising scenario than November 2008.
Obama had not just a large majority of the US, but much of the world, lined up behind him. Unstoppable majorities in both houses. A personal story that would have let him win a staredown with any Republican within 100 miles of DC. Charisma. Everything.

That's what's so damn frustrating. He could have had anything he wanted, at least for a time. He would have burnt a few bridges, but he had the ****ing Golden Gate in his back pocket.

It hurts just to think of this stuff... I feel like I've been stabbed in the back by a hundred slavering little banksters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #24
32. Exactly.
The worst of it is that I feel as if he suckered me. Personally. Intentionally. Like he knew all along he was gonna punk us. And like he's still doing it and still laughing at us. And really doesn't give a shit at all.




Tansy Gold, NTY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
metapunditedgy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. It's hard to tell what really going on... it's so mystifying. I prefer to think that Obama is not
the one laughing... I'd like to think that he is an unwilling participant in much of this. But a few other top names in the administration, yeah, I can imaging them laughing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-07-10 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. I think you're right, metapunditegy. I've heard the suggestion offered that
every Democratic President since Johnson is ushered into a top-secret security briefing hours after his inauguration. The usual heavy hitters are present--CIA chief, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Vice President, FBI Director. The lights are dimmed and a movie rolls. It is the "official videos" of the JFK assassination as filmed from several different angles and clearly shows that the President was hit by three different shooters. It IS NOT the Zapruder film.

Then, the lights come on and the CIA chief asks "Are there any questions?"

That's when THE Decision is made by each President as to whether he wants to be President for the People or for the Powers That Be.

It is obvious by now which way this President went.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
18. + a bazillion, Doc
:yourock:



(but you know that already!)




TG, NTY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
20. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
22. Leadership and vision have been replaced by kissing the asses of
corporate donors and making decisions based on the financial interests of the top 1% - hardly the stuff that will lead the Dems to victory or keep them in power. Give people a reason to vote and they'll turn out. Pull a bait and switch on them and they'll tune out.

Humphrey had a sound moral compass and the courage of his convictions. Obama, sadly, listens to the likes of Rahm Emanuel and Tim Geithner. Therein lies the difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-05-10 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
23. At least give it a try on one issue. And
I don't mean the mosque.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sunnyshine Donating Member (698 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 02:24 AM
Response to Original message
26. Dem leaders: drop the shovels and quit eagerly digging our graves. GOP is THE hypocrisy party.
Edited on Mon Sep-06-10 02:38 AM by Sunnyshine
Not us.

I ask myself...WHY is the Democratic Party leadership refusing to put forth efforts and money for the excellent Democratic candidate challenging John Boehner? We are outright ignoring Justin Coussoule. Independent district with a good Dem. base, so WHY aren't we shouting out in a show of big support for OUR guy in the ring, courageously fighting for our party principles, by taking on ringleaders like Boehner?

HELLO???? That's exactly what we should be doing. Taking them on! Strong and purposely! We concede nearly everything to the GOP. Both in representation and policy.
We are doing the opposite, so much so, that it seems we are not challenging them intentionally.

Even when Dems are running things, the Republicans still seem like they are in charge. Here we are wondering where all our hard work went. We secured majorities in both legislative bodies AND the executive, but then they leave the greedy/guilty trouble makers in charge. I consider that evidence of their non-interest in truly fixing problems by effectively addressing the causes. Wasting time and knowing why.

We are not fighting to take them on. We allow them to distort who we are and what we are about, yet again. That must change.

/spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. Repukes make it a policy to target our leadership.
They went after Tom Foley a few years ago. Then Daschle. Now Reid.

You'd think that Boner would have a great big target on his back. He's already colored in hunters orange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sunnyshine Donating Member (698 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. Honestly, they do. I see it all over the place in local races. We have to ask ourselves why?
Why not aggressively seek to fill the voids and gaps caused by Republican failures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 03:46 AM
Response to Original message
27. Huberts have a funny name but they ain't stupid...
Rahm has a funny name but he ain't smart.

Rahm is as wrong as the neocons were wrong about Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
30. Humphrey was an actual Democrat, not a religionist dogma
based discriminationist. Obama and the administration, they favor legal discrimination, two sets of laws, one for themselves, and another for minorities they do not like, because of the 'faith' they share with Palin and Bush. The very opposite of Humphery who fought for equality for all, they fight to preserve divisions and discrimination, and they do so in the name of a religion that the Obamas do not practice, at least not very well, in the name of a teacher who never once said a word against gay people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike r Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-06-10 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
31. A true progressive and a great American
Thanks for posting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC