you really need to put them paint cans behind you.

nothing i've quoted above is true by any stretch of the imagination.

ford is still a democrat and he wasn't eased outa office any more than he was forced outta the party.

he decided to give up his seat in the house when he ran for a senate seat in 2006. 

he was ahead in that race until (and i quote here from wikipedia altho i remember it clearly and, if you spend a lil time reviewing my posts from that year, you'll see i was outraged by how his campaign was sabotaged by the republican party):

On August 3, 2006, Ford overwhelmingly won the Democratic primary. After the primary, Ford's supporters held a large victory celebration at Nashville's LP Field. Among the speakers was former U.S. President Bill Clinton.

Ford faced Republican Bob Corker in the November 2006 election. Not long after Corker's primary victory was assured, Ford challenged Corker to seven televised debates across the state. In response, Corker said he would debate Ford, though he did not agree to seven debates.

In October 2006, as polls indicated that Ford maintained a slight lead in the Senate race,^[21] the Republican Party ran a television advertisement^[22] where a white woman, played by Johanna Goldsmith, talks about meeting Ford, who was unmarried at the time, at "the Playboy party."^[23] The ad was denounced by many people, including former Republican Senator and Secretary of Defense under Bill Clinton, William Cohen, who called it “a very serious appeal to a racist sentiment.” Corker himself asked the Republican leadership to pull the ad, which it refused to do. Corker subsequently pulled ahead in the polls.^[24]

Corker and Ford participated in a televised debate in Memphis on October 7, in Corker's hometown of Chattanooga on October 10, and in Nashville on October 28. In January 2006, NBC's Meet the Press extended an open invitation for the candidates to debate on the nationally-televised show. Ford accepted the invitation, stating that "any weekend would work for him." The Corker campaign did not agree.^{[citation needed]}

how you like your blue-eyed boy now, mr death?

Good for you, you take a statement used for political purposes rather than taking what I wrote in context. I remember this election, I remember the family laughing and making jokes like I have to Goldwater, when they had to pee, The same lies were told that he was a racist, "The only thing a negro can do for me is shine my shoes" that quote went through New York and then spread across the nation. a pity it was a lie. Let us ignore the fact that LBJ was a member of the KKK. The difference was that LBJ was an ego maniac, and made it a point to get legislation passed that the democrats refused to pass for Kennedy. In his mind that would make him a greater president than JFK. So all that good legislation that the democrats refused to pass for the racist Kennedy they would pass for the racist LBJ. Ego was what got the 1964 civil rights act, the first civil rights act in 100 years, and only with the majority support from the republicans even when the democrats had the majority and could have passed it without a single republican vote. But the racist democrats refused to go along with the bill and the republicans had the honor of casting the deciding votes.

Bee, you fail to see any of this and hold fast to your racist masters and you think I am deluded. The progressives and liberals were in charge when they hosed Negros down in the streets for wanting equal rights. Show me where republicans or conservatives have accepted open racism? I have already pointed out the racists actions on the liberal side, the best you can come up with is a speech delaying integration of schools from President Nixon.

Lynching’s, firebombing churches, is okay as long as we integrate the schools on time.

i don't recall hearing or reading that particular statement--or anything similar--attributed to goldwater during the 64 campaign or afterwards.  nor do i recall goldwater being labeled a racist despite his opposition to the 1964 civil rights act.  while i never missed an opportunity to express my support for the 1964 civil rights act (or an opportunity to get my ass kicked for doing so) i was also actively campaigning for goldwater (knocking on doors, block after block after block for months prior to that election, reminding people to register and urging them to vote for barry).  i understood his reasoning then as i do now and truly believe his position had nothing at all to do with racism and everything to do with principle. 

unfortunately my perception wasn't widely shared. those closest to him have described goldwater--whose early career included aggressive promotion of local civil rights ordinances--as being horrified to discover how his principle was intentionally corrupted by those racists--including george wallace--who prospered by proclaiming themselves 'conservatives'.

as the national democratic party was actively marginalizing its dixiecrat racists, what would soon become today's republican party was openly recruiting them at the behest of richard nixon and support of ronald reagan. 

nixon strategist, kevin phillips, openly stated in 1971:

"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."

republicans should be fuckin ashamed of the fact that reagan's first official campaign event in 1980 was staged in the same county in which three liberal civil rights workers gave their lives in the cause of equal voting rights some 16 years earlier and included a speech in which reagan pandered to mississippi's white racists with this kinda codespeak:

"Programs like education and others should be turned back to the states and local communities with the tax sources to fund them. I believe in states’ rights. I believe in people doing as much as they can at the community level and the private level" as well as a promise to "restore to states and local governments the power that properly belongs to them."

Exactly right, well left. liberal thinking and logic, while you promoted Goldwater, I promoted LBJ, our side said some nasty things about him, What i find interesting is that most of the time the democrats eat thier own. what i mean to say is that they will destroy someone for shor term goals that they could have used in the long term.

Mr. Ford was told he was not going to get support for re-election, they put up someone to run against him so he ran for the senate, funding dried up. he lost not because of that ad but because the party no longer needed him.

Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut was originally thought to be a shoo-in, but his reelection prospects were complicated by political cross-currents. Lieberman drew fire from the more anti-war elements within the Democratic party for his continual support for the foreign policy of President George W. Bush and for statements in which he has criticized other Democrats for "undermining the President" during a time of war. Greenwich telecom-networking businessman Ned Lamont declared his candidacy for the Democratic nomination in March, and while the Democratic state convention in May overwhelmingly endorsed Lieberman, Lamont's 33.4% support was more than twice the 15% needed to force a primary.

So they try to get rid of Senator Lieberman but needed Ford?