How did the opponents pf the civil right act of 1964 use the filibuster to try to block its passage

But when Mansfield made the first motion about the bill in the Senate, the well-organized filibuster attempt started. And had it been successful, the Civil Rights Act would have been finished for that Senate session.

A year earlier, President John F. Kennedy told a nationwide audience that the Act was a necessity. A prior bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1957, was important but it had a limited impact and it was difficult to enforce. It also had survived a 24-hour filibuster from Senator Strom Thurmond.

As Senate Majority Leader, Lyndon Johnson has been involved heavily in the fight for the Civil Rights Act of 1957, and as President, he was committed to honoring his own values and Kennedy’s legacy in the fight for the much-more comprehensive 1964 act.

Committed to the filibuster effort were the powerful Senators Richard Russell, Thurmond, Robert Byrd, William Fulbright and Sam Ervin. Russell started the filibuster in late March 1964, and it would last for 60 working days in the Senate.

Behind the scenes, two opposing leaders were working to find a way to get 67 votes: the Democratic Senate whip, Hubert Humphrey and the Senate Minority Leader, Everett Dirksen of Illinois.

At first, Dirksen opposed the House version of the bill because of certain passages, even though he was a long-time civil rights supporter. Humphrey, a Democrat, worked together with his Republican colleague to make the bill more acceptable to Republicans, while not weakening its powers.

On June 10, 1964, Dirksen made a powerful speech that served to bring more Republicans onto his side in the fight.

Dirksen made his case and then quoted the author Victor Hugo: “Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come.” The Senator then reminded his colleagues that the Republican Party stood for equality since its founding in the years before the Civil War.

That same day, the Humphrey-Dirksen group got 71 votes to end the filibuster, four more than needed, as 27 Republicans had decided to support the Act.

During the vote, the terminally ill Senator from California, Clair Engle,  was brought to the floor in a wheelchair. Unable to speak because of a brain tumor, Engle pointed to his eye to signify his Yes vote.

a.opium

hope this

answer:   migrations were important in the neolithic period. "two major migrations passing through southeastern europe were confirmed by the means of archaeo-genetic studies."

the first migration was the early neolithic period -- 6,000 before common era (bce) -- when the first farmers, from anatolia -- asia minor -- spread through europe. the second migration occurred during the early bronze age (3,000-2,500 bce) when the so-called "steppe population," from the eurasian steppe, replaced much of northern europe's previous population.

the first farmers of northern and western europe passed through southeastern europe with limited hunter-gatherer genetic admixture, which occurs when two or more previously isolated populations begin interbreeding. however, some groups that remained mixed extensively -- without the male-biased, hunter-gatherer admixture that prevailed later in the north and west, according to latest discoveries. southeastern europe continued to be a nexus between east and west, with intermittent genetic contact with the steppe people up to 2,000 years before the migrations that replaced much of northern europe's population.

"in some places, hunter-gatherers and incoming farmers seem to have mixed very quickly," says iain mathieson, a geneticist at the university of pennsylvania, who was first author of the paper. "but, mostly, the two groups remained isolated, at least for the first few hundred years. these hunter-gatherers had been living there for thousands of years, and it must have been quite a shock to have these new people show up -- with a completely different lifestyle and appearance."