Who Was the Most Racist Modern President? 5 Surprising Candidates Who Fit the Bill

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/who-was-most-racist-modern-president-5-surprising-candidates-who-fit-bill



1. Woodrow Wilson

Let’s start with a progressive Democrat, so our conservative critics don’t accuse us of right-wing bashing. Wilson is not on this list as a token, though. He earned the right to be called a racist. As president of Princeton University, he said, “The whole temper and tradition of the place [Princeton] are such that no Negro has ever applied for admission, and it seems unlikely that the question will ever assume practical form.”

2. Theodore Roosevelt

Next up, a progressive Republican. Teddy Roosevelt makes a surprise appearance on our racist list. Despite representing everything progressive Democrats see missing in today's Republican Party, Teddy failed the test of tolerance. He was a devout follower of eugenics, the belief that there are superior and inferior strains of humankind, and that it is best to filter out the inferior brand in order to foster the development of mankind. “Society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind.... Some day, we will realize that the prime duty, the inescapable duty, of the good citizen of the right type, is to leave his or her blood behind him in the world; and that we have no business to permit the perpetuation of citizens of the wrong type,” he said.

3. Franklin Roosevelt

Not to be outdone by his famous uncle Teddy, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, considered by many to be one of our greatest presidents, was a racist in his own spectacular way. Under his orders, more than 100,000 Japanese Americans were relocated and imprisoned during World War II for the crime of having Asian heritage.

4. Richard Nixon

Nixon burnished his racist credentials in the 1968 campaign for the presidency by adopting the “Southern Strategy,” which entailed appealing to the racist nature prevalent at that time among white Southerners, insinuating that the Democrats sold out their interests to the African-American community via Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs. In adopting this strategy, Nixon turned a formerly Democratic South into the Republican stronghold that exists to this day, and secured the ultimate prize for himself, the presidency.

[Yo_Mama]

1. Wilson was a genuine knock-down racist, responsible for a huge racial injustice

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_events_segregation.html

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5719/

http://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/

http://postalmuseum.si.edu/AfricanAmericanhistory/p5.html

[lovemydog]

2. This is a great reminder to stop romanticizing the past.

It truly sucked for a lot of people, especially minorities.

Yes, we can do much better now. But let's move forward in a positive direction, and also celebrate the tremendous advances we have made.

[bhikkhu]

20. Yes, its a good reminder that racism was almost universal

part of the problem was that the science we have now didn't exist. DNA was only discovered in 1953, and it took a great deal of research to get to the point now where we can say - we are all essentially and profoundly equal on a genetic level, one big closely related family. Most people back then, even if they had strong religious or humanist beliefs leading to ideals of equality, had no scientific means to dispute longstanding notions of racial "qualities". Eugenics was an institutionally supported and popular idea for a long time, and took some solid work to debunk.

Before WWII it was different world and the bulk of people, virtually everywhere, held perspectives that we would find repugnant and wrong today. The same goes for LGBT issues, though you only have to go back 30 years or so for that. Science there was what made the difference as well.

[jwirr]

23. I assume that you are referring the being an FDR Democrat as romanticizing the past? If so you are

wrong. What most of us are interested in is his economic policies. We are telling you that we want that kind of policies back. Not that we want you to run out and grab a bunch of people and but them in a camp. That was wrong.

[whathehell]

28. Thank you..

FDR's action came at a time of war -- It was wrong, no doubt about it, but I think

casting his as a "racist" because of one mistake is in itself a mistake.

He did a LOT of good for this country.

[LordGlenconner]

31. Spot on

A lot of people have trouble processing nuance. For example, FDR put Japanese people in camps ergo FDR is an evil racist.

The world is not, has not been and will never be black and white.

FDR's status as one of our 2-3 greatest presidents is unassailable (for my money he's 1B with Lincoln and only because Lincoln had to deal with the very literal fight for survival of the republic but that is a debate for another day).

[whathehell]

33. "A lot of people have trouble processing nuance"

You got that right -- It gets very, very tiring here at times.

[lovemydog]

41. No, I agree with you that we should return to FDR's economic policies.

I believe we should also return to taxation rates on the top 2% to the Eisenhower era, when the top marginal income tax rate was 85%. I'm one hundred percent in favor of new deal era social programs at home. I'm a democratic socialist. Not some third way person.

What I meant (besides what I said in the post) is that some things have gotten better. Overtly racist policies, lynchings, the way women and asians and minorities were treated - that sucked! I hate overly romanticizing the past. As Sartre said, nostalgia is a form of depression.

I believe we need a new, economic populist message that appeals to working people in a positive manner. I see way too much infighting here at DU over semantics for me to feel that democrats overall have done enough soul searching in terms of the image they project. It's too negative, it's too backbiting, and it's too focused on the past. I believe progressives need to focus more on the present and future. What specific legislation will do to help the family that is working full time yet still barely able to pay their monthly bills, let alone save for a home or for retirement. I think democrats need to buckle down and demand doubling taxes on the rich. And put up candidates who will do that. Come up with a bold five point program of legislation they intend to pass. Get rid of the old corporate dead wood. Out with the old. In with the new. Put up candidates from occupy wall street. Likable candidates who are genuine socialists or left wing liberals. That economic agenda should appeal not only to democrats but also to working class republicans who are sick of wall street cronyism, handouts to big banks, seeing their paycheck buy less that it did last year.

Hope you enjoy a good evening.

[jwirr]

46. That sounds good. There does need to be a new economic philosophy with looks at today and the

future. One reason many of us look back to FDR is because his policy was and is about government involvement in solving the problems that face us today and in the future. On the other hand Rs think that we need less government involvement. So they cut everything that they do not like.

The other thing from the past that we look at is the way that he implemented that idea. Instead of using trickle down disaster capitalism he spent money to solve the problems of the great depression and that is what is needed again. Saving some of his program such as the Social Security Program and improving the health care programs to include all. But the programs do work - at least the Medicaid/Medicare ones. We need to model some of the others more on their line. Unfortunately the current economic philosophy is still trickle down disaster capitalism even though it has failed.

And finally Rs do not want business to have any regulations and at least many of us believe the opposite. I would love to see Glass Steagall returned to protect the individuals money from the speculators. I want the banks broken up like they were when I was younger and I wanted that long before I heard Elizabeth and Bernie talking about it. And I want labor unions strengthened. They are our only voice in the economy when others will not speak up.



When I worked for George McGovern I was continually labeled communist and if they wanted to be nice they called us socialists. That is when I decided they were right - I was a socialist. Unfortunately voting for the socialist candidates is not a winning equation so I am in the Democratic Party.

Have a good day.

[lovemydog]

47. Yes, we need a new economic philosophy.

We agree on how it looks. We learn so much from the past. That's why I love reading history. I'm reading a biography on Teddy Roosevelt, The Bully Pulpit by Doris Kearns Goodwin. TR really went after smashing up the big banks. It appears every generation in modern history faces this problem and similar obstacles. It's up to the people to vote for individuals with the courage of their convictions, who will break up big banks and tackle other obstacles with optimism and determination to work for their constituents.

Last night I spoke with a friend and we got to discussing things we can do. Something we agreed upon is getting rid of credit cards with big banks. Another is voting and encouraging and helping others to vote for the most progressive candidates available. And working with younger people to help them understand the value of history and economic policies that work for them.

I'm very respectful of what FDR accomplished. I also feel we should work in the present and celebrate the ways we've improved as a society and people. While fighting for the good things that we've abandoned, like taxing the rich at levels more in line with European countries and new deal era economic programs.

I love reading labor history and political economy. We don't have to allow the current policies. There's a better way. One that returns to the economic principles of the great democrats of the past, while continuing the social advances that our society continues to demand. We can set up our economy in a way where our great wealth works to the benefit of all the people, via higher wages and single payer health care.

I wonder how we get a Congress to advocate and implement these policies that benefit all of us. I'm encouraged that many young people publicly support Warren's policies. Now we need a Congress that will help implement them. And it's time that all Americans understand that trickle down disaster capitalism is an abject failure. We should have zero people in Congress who still follow that nonsense.

We must share the wealth in a more just and useful manner. We need more democrats like Sanders & Warren in Congress. We need a majority of them! We need to put them up to run for office and support them in their candidacies. On local, state and federal levels everywhere.

[jwirr]

50. Agreed with you one hundred percent - especially regarding our elected officials. You know I think

that one of the biggest problems with getting rid of trickle down is not so much the people as it is the business owners, corporations and especially the banks. They still believe that it will work and it is for them. Just not for the rest of the world. They are the ones who are buying our representatives. So it is not so much finding and electing the right congress as ending the influence that the 1% has on them. How to do that I am not sure.

By the way I am from MN and I am proud of Al Franken. I think that he is with us. Given his outspokenness when he was a comedienne I am surprised that he is not more so now. I also love Alan Grayson.

[wyldwolf]

52. Most presidents took racist actions in decades past. FDR was no exception

However, let's not gloss them over. They extend beyond (and before) the Japanese internment camps.

[Bucky]

3. It's hard to believe the author couldn't come up with more dirt on Wilson

Wilson, the first post Civil War Southerner to be president, is notorious for his racist opinions. He's the chap who referred to "Birth of a Nation" as "history written with lightning" after holding a screening of the movie in the White House. He resegregated the US Civil Service and undid what few reforms remained from the Reconstruction period. His inclusion on the list is not surprising.

The indictment of Teddy Roosevelt is historically myopic. Although he embraced the "White Man's Burden" view of imperialism, he made a lot of strides toward improving the lives of African Americans and was a strong ally of George Washington Carver. Many many progressives supported eugenics in the early 20th century. It was seen as scientific and forward minded at the time. Yes, today we see it as a failed philosophy, but remember this is long long before the Nazis came along and revealed the monstrous extremes of the belief. Other proponents of eugenics at the time included Margaret Sanger and Nicola Tesla.

Lyndon Johnson, however, is the biggest headshaker on that list. The author is apparently unaware of the difference between prejudice (which all humans suffer from) and racism.

Sorry, but big thumbs down for the ignoramus who wrote this article.

[JonLP24]

8. No matter how many and who were racist doesn't mean they still weren't racist

LBJ opposed Harry Truman's civil rights proposals which Johnson claimed "farce and a sham--an effort to set up a police state in the guise of liberty."

Many many people were racist in the early 20th century.

[jwirr]

24. As one of a family who were victims of the eugenics movement in the early 1900s I find it amusing

that you think that it was just a failed philosophy and only got worse after Hitler decided to use it. The extremes that were used in this country were also monstrous if you happened to be the ones they were using them against.

As to being supported by liberals. I don't think there was a dividing line and if there was it was more between the educated rich and the uneducated poor. It was not a political issue as much as it is today. It was rich vs poor.

[Midwestern Democrat]

45. Wilson was undoubtedly a racist, but the "Birth of a Nation" quote attributed to him all these years

is almost certainly a fabrication - it didn't appear in print until more than a decade after his death. The only first hand record of Wilson's opinion about the film is in a letter he wrote three years after the film's release - and his opinion was negative. He wrote, "I have always felt that this was a very unfortunate production and I wish most sincerely that its production might be avoided, particularly in communities where there are so many colored people."

[rogerashton]

4. Been reading a biography of TR

His personal convictions about African-Americans seem to have been more a feeling of cultural superiority than genetic -- he seems to have felt that dark-skinned people could in time become the "leading races." But he thought it would take a long time, and that's a pretty convenient viewpoint for a politician who is trying to minimize the opposition to him in the "solid south." The biography didn't say anything about eugenics, probably because it was not an issue then. Roosevelt clearly regarded the Japanese as a "leading race" and was afraid of them. Mostly, Teddy had a deep conviction of the superiority of - Teddy Roosevelt.

[Boomerproud]

15. TR always hid his prejudice under the terms "civilized" and "uncivilized".

But putting Wilson on the top of the list was correct. He was a "loyal son of the South" and hated everything that wasn't white. What he did to the leaders of the women's rights movement was unconscionable as well.

[RiverLover]

5. #3 wasn't racism. We had just been attacked by the Japanese & there was no

phone-tapping available to figure out who was on our side.

It was a sad wartime decision based on the need to protect the US.

[JonLP24]

7. So you argue that since they couldn't warrantless (it would have to be) wiretap

Japanese citizens so they detained them without due process wasn't racism?

In any case, he appointed Harry J. Anslinger to Federal Bureau of Narcotics who said things like "Most marijuana smokers are Negroes, Hispanics, jazz musicians, and entertainers. Their satanic music is driven by marijuana, and marijuana smoking by white women makes them want to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and others. It is a drug that causes insanity, criminality, and death — the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."

If he didn't know he either had a terrible vetting process or was indifferent to his constant use of racism to favor drug laws (FDR later signed the Marihjuana Tax Stamp Act of 1937 and if he did it without his thoughts, well, I don't know what to say.

[RiverLover]

9. It was the times. And btw, Eleanor Roosevelt was a fighter for civil rights. One of the 1st.

Eleanor became an important connection for Franklin's administration to the African-American population during the segregation era. Despite the President's desire to placate Southern sentiment, Eleanor was vocal in her support of the African-American civil rights movement. After her experience with Arthurdale and her inspections of New Deal programs in Southern states, she concluded that New Deal programs were discriminating against African-Americans, who received a disproportionately small share of relief moneys. Eleanor became one of the only voices in the Roosevelt White House insisting that benefits be equally extended to Americans of all races.

Eleanor also broke with precedent by inviting hundreds of African American guests to the White House. When the black singer Marian Anderson was denied the use of Washington's Constitution Hall in 1939 by the Daughters of the American Revolution, Eleanor resigned from the group in protest and helped arrange another concert on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Roosevelt later presented Anderson to the King and Queen of the United Kingdom after Anderson performed at a White House dinner. Roosevelt also arranged the appointment of African-American educator Mary McLeod Bethune, with whom she had struck up a friendship, as Director of the Division of Negro Affairs of the National Youth Administration. To avoid problems with the staff when Bethune would visit the White House, Eleanor would meet her at the gate, embrace her, and walk in with her arm-in-arm..

...Roosevelt's support of African-American rights made her an unpopular figure among whites in the South. Rumors spread of "Eleanor Clubs" formed by servants to oppose their employers and "Eleanor Tuesdays" on which African-American men would knock down white women on the street, though no evidence has ever been found of either practice. When race riots broke out in Detroit in June 1943, critics in both the North and South wrote that Roosevelt was to blame.

At the same time, she grew so popular among African-Americans, previously a reliable Republican voting bloc, that they became a consistent base of support for the Democratic Party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_Roosevelt

[JonLP24]

11. The times doesn't let the racists off the hook

African-Americans also existed in the times and Radical Republicans were around a half century before arguing for full voting rights at the beginning of Reconstruction.

Eleanor Roosevelt was a good friend of Truman at least until the end of his Presidency based on the letters so I don't know have any known issues of racist views. Harry Truman strongly favored civil rights long before it was even politically conveinent

Harry Truman is a big reason(I'd argue the main reason) why support for Democratic Party grew so popular among African-Americans. This entire article is good but this part is my favorite--

While he’s in Independence, he receives a letter from a dear friend, a man named Ernie Roberts who he grew up with in Independence. Mr. Roberts has become an industrialist, highly successful and he writes his friend. I’m going to read you just an excerpt of this letter and I want you to know these letters were not letters that we often see today written for spin purposes, leaked. These were private correspondence that took decades before they saw the light. This is Ernie Roberts’ letter early August. He gets it in Independence. “Harry, you can win the South without the equal rights bill, but you cannot win the South with it. Just why? Harry, let us let the South take care of the niggers which they’ve done and if the niggers don’t like the southern treatment, let them come to Mrs. Roosevelt.”

Now, Harry Truman could write some nasty letters when he was irritated. He took a week before he answered this letter and I must tell you, this letter to me was one of the most instructive things I found in my research. I’ll just read an excerpt of a long letter. “Dear Ernie. I’m going to send you a copy of the report on my Commission on Civil Rights and if then you still have that antebellum, pro-slavery outlook, I’ll be thoroughly disappointed in you. The main difficulty with the South is that they are living 80 years behind the time and the sooner they come out of it, the better it will for the country and themselves. When a Mayor and a City Marshall can take a Negro Sergeant off a bus in South Carolina, beat him up, put out one of his eyes and nothing is done about it by the state authorities, something is radically wrong with the system. I cannot approve of such goings on and I shall never approve it as long as I am here. As I told you before, I’m going to try to remedy it and if it ends up in my failure to be reelected, that failure will be in a good cause.”

Bottom line--I found two black leaders of the time that put it in best perspective when you look at legacy. One is Roy Wilkins, 1953, the administrator of the NAACP. “Mr. President, no chief executive in our history has spoken so plainly on this matter as yourself or acted so forthrightly. As you leave the White House, you carry with you the gratitude and affectionate regard of millions of your Negro fellow citizens who in less than a decade of your leadership, inspiration and determination have seen the old order change before their very eyes.”

http://www.virginia.edu/uvanewsmakers/newsmakers/gardner.html

[whathehell]

29. Yup..

[Scootaloo]

51. He's arguing that it's only racist when the Republicans do it

Which, weirdly, is exactly what Republicans think that Democrats think

[joshcryer]

13. Bull fucking shit.

Don't get me started on Jesse Owens and Hugo Black.

[Number23]

44. This thread is an absolute classic. Beyond hilarious

and getting the knickers of the "FDR was a demi god" crowd just so twisted and tangled.

Suddenly, NUANCE is all the rage in this thread. The same nuance that this same crowd refuses to extend to our current president. Freaking CLASSIC.

[Lurks Often]

17. Utter Bullshit

Japanese-Americans that were taken from their homes, lost their business and much of what they owned, all without due process, came almost exclusively from the West Coast.

Japanese-Americans in the rest of the country were not relocated and sent to internment camps, so your argument is completely without merit.

If your argument had the slightest shred of credibility, then German-Americans and Italian-Americans should have been sent to internment camps in large numbers and Hawaii should have interned far more Japanese-Americans then the 1200-1800 people they did intern.

[Jetboy]

56. I agree. My Great-Grandfather was born in Japan and lived in

Chicago when Pear Harbor happened. My family would've been detained had they lived in California instead.

Great-Grandpa didn't complain about how his fellow Japaneese in California were treated. Instead he reacted with great shame at what Japan had done to the adopted country he had grown to love, America. Great Uncle joined the Marines, Great Aunt joined the WACS and my Grandma was married to my Grandpa who served in the Navy in the Pacific.

I don't believe for a second that Japaneese Americans in California were targeted due to skin color. They were targeted for having only recently moved to California from Japan, our enemy.

My dad's side of the family is mostly German. But they had been in America for generations. Had their been a large concentration of recently relocated Germans living on the East Coast, they would've been detained too. It was a security issue, not a skin color issue IMO.

[SidDithers]

21. Ask Jesse Owens if he thought FDR was racist...nt

Sid

[MisterP]

22. Sippenhaft ist ver-bo-ten!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sippenhaft

and it's based on one big admitted lie
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/24/nation/la-na-japanese-americans-20110525

and it's WRONG AT ALL LEVELS

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. Yeah. I remember all the camps for German/Italian Americans...oh, wait.

[MFrohike]

48. Actually there were some

Germans were detained in both World Wars and Italians during WW2. Of course, the numbers were nothing on the scale like the Japanese detention. Combined Germans and Italians detained during that war was a bit over 10% of the total Japanese detainee population.

[LWolf]

53. 62% of those in camps

were AMERICAN CITIZENS.

[JonLP24]

6. Not surprised

I even knew Teddy Roosevelt bought into eugenics.

[n2doc]

10. No mention of Ronnie Raygun? n/t

[Euphoria]

35. Talk about racist!!

[mmonk]

12. The first in my mind is always Wilson.

If you're throwing in the breadth of history, Jackson should be included. However, probably all until JFK and Johnson decided finally to take it on under the pressure of Dr. King's movement which showed the injustice for what it was.

[uponit7771]

14. Unnn, the FDR thing is kinda weak ... rounding up Japanese nationals doesn't mean he hated Asians...

.... this diffuses what the turn racist means.

The Wilson example is weak also, that's some crap he said as a kid... I don't see where Wilson distinctly brought that thinking into policy into the white


No conservatives, you guys own racism ... almost by nature of the word conservative

[brush]

16. You need to do some research on Wilson

He was an out and out racist.

[former9thward]

34. He said as a kid?

Wilson is obviously an important historical figure but he doesn’t seem to me to have been much of a president. For one thing, he was a huge racist. Noting racism on the part of past historical figures is sometimes a cheap shot—Abraham Lincoln said things that people would find repugnant today, but was very progressive for his time—but Wilson was a real racial reactionary who turned the clock backwards. He signed a bill banning miscegenation in the District of Columbia and segregating DC streetcars. He appointed white southerners to his administration who introduced segregation into their previously unsegregated departments, including the postal service which was a major employer. Grover Cleveland and Theodore Roosevelt had African-Americans appointed to federal office, but Wilson did away with that.

http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2009/12/11/195405/the-strange-case-of-woodrow-wilson/

In 1913, he ordered the racial segregation of the Civil Service and banned blacks from using the same restrooms, cafeterias, and office areas. He also removed a majority of the blacks in appointed positions from the previous administration and replaced them with white personnel. These acts made the Federal government and its agencies very hostile towards the black population, and many of the black leaders who supported the progressive ideas, soon revoked their support including the head of the NAACP


http://www.weatherimagery.com/blog/president-woodrow-wilson-racist/

When a delegation of blacks protested the discriminatory actions, Wilson told them "segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson

[joeybee12]

18. Unless Reagan is on there, this list is very suspect...nt

[Octafish]

27. Reagan set the nation back a century.

Even if he and his fans can't recall, Pruneface was a racist and a traitor.



He should be on the back of a dime, all right.

[Bjorn Against]

30. Agreed, it makes no sense that LBJ made the list and not Reagan

LBJ had his faults, but he also signed the Civil Rights Act into law and in doing so he did more to combat racism than any other President with the possible exception of Lincoln.

Despite his faults LBJ moved us closer to equality, while Reagan moved us backwards. Johnson should not be on this list and Reagan should take his place.

[Bluenorthwest]

19. Wilson was a giant racist. Reagan should be on the list for many reasons, from rhetoric to strategy

to his drug war to his inaction toward AIDS which was as racist as it was homophobic.

[rewinn]

25. "Most" Racist? Nope, not even close ....

1. Where is Hoover and his "Lily White Policy"?

2. If the rule is eugenics=racism (which it may be) then Taft should be first on the list. As Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, former President William H. Taft voted *for* the most important eugenics case in American history (Buck v. Bell).

Anyone can *talk* about eugenics, but Taft *did* something about it.

[JI7]

32. I would replace lbj with reagan

Lbj actually did things to help minorities .

[madinmaryland]

36. Pretty pathetic shot at Democrats. Just about any white president before Bill Clinton

was a racist (except for Jimmy Carter).

What a stupid fucking article.

[uponit7771]

38. +1, The bigger issues is how much the president PROGRESSED America in the area of race and there

... are few if any reThugs who did that

[great white snark]

55. Nothing "pathetic" about the true history of our party.

Own it and enough of the poo pooing-it only serves as a slap in the face of our brothers and sisters of many colors who, despite the history, call the Democratic party their own.

[alphafemale]

37. Wilson was my immediate first guess. nt

[AZ Progressive]

39. Here's a document of Theodore Roosevelt on eugenics

http://www.dnalc.org/view/11219-T-Roosevelt-letter-to-C-Davenport-about-degenerates-reproducing-.html

[AZ Progressive]

40. One could say why progressives were more successful pre-civil rights than post-civil rights...

Is that progressivism was largely limited to the white majority, and when everyone else wanted in on the benefits of progressivism in the 60's, that's when progressivism started declining in power due to the increasing revolt of the white majority. Democrats have had it harder to hold on to power without the original southern base.

[harrose]

42. Where are W and Reagan?

No collection of racists is complete without them.

[yeoman6987]

54. Reagan yes, Bush no

Bush was very aware of Hispanics and helped them as much as he could and wanted to do more.

[harrose]

57. I'm not sure that I believe that...

... but even if you're right, just being aware of Hispanics doesn't mean that he's not racist. He's a Rethug. That means that, absence strong evidence to the contrary (and, perhaps in his case, even despite it), he's probably a racist.

[Ex Lurker]

43. Warren G Harding

initiated into the KKK in a private White House ceremony.

[MFrohike]

49. Johnson

I'm not sure he should be on this list because of just how hard he is to pin down. He used racial slurs like it was his job. He was a solid member of the Southern Caucus, it was actually a thing, during his time in Congress. He voted, and spoke, against just about every civil rights measure introduced until the Civil Rights Act of 1957. He was definitely seen as "one of us" by the leaders of white supremacy in the national government.

He was also the senator who flipped out when told a funeral home in Texas refused to bury a Mexican-American war hero. He promised to have the man buried in Arlington if Texas felt he wasn't good enough. He did. He reduced John Stennis to stammers by describing the humiliations suffered by his black staff, when he was VP, when they drove from DC to Texas. He rammed through the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act, and the Great Society. He always spoke of the Mexican-American children he taught while a teacher in Cotulla. The poverty he'd seen there, and experienced in his own life, always infuriated him.

Like I said, Johnson is a complex case. I don't know that I'd call him a racist, but I can't say he wasn't a racist, either. The tiny paragraph in this article really didn't do justice to the complexity of the man. I can't say I really did justice in fully describing it either. All I can really figure about him is that he did some truly great things and maybe that's enough of an epitaph.