But you may not like your political dogma being challenged.

Explain the Dixiecrats.

According to Grolier, the Dixiecrats were:

Dixiecrats, a splinter group of Southern DEMOCRATS in the U.S. elections of 1948, who rejected President Harry S. TRUMAN's civil-rights program and revolted against the civil-rights plank adopted at the Democratic National Convention. A conference of states' rights leaders then met in Birmingham and suggested Gov. J. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina for president and Gov. Fielding Wright of Mississippi for vice president. The group hoped to force the election into the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES by preventing either Truman or his Republican opponent, Thomas E. DEWEY, from obtaining a majority of the ELECTORAL votes.

The plan failed. Although Thurmond electors ran and won as the official Democratic candidates in four states -- Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina—other Thurmond electors running as "States Rights Democrats" lost to Truman slates. Thurmond polled 22.5% of the total Southern vote to Truman's 50.1%. Nationally, Thurmond obtained 39 electoral votes with 1,169,032 popular votes. The Dixiecrat movement encouraged Northern blacks to vote for Truman, but it ultimately strengthened the Republican party in the South, for many Dixiecrats became Republicans.

Note that many is not the same as the implication of all that you made here.

Looking back on this era, it seem like it was from another planet. As an example, this links shows what is said to be the official 1948 Democratic Ballot for Mississippi.

Explain the voting record of both parties on civil rights legislation in the 1960s, and what that indicates concerning the change in party orientation at that time.

Oh, this is a good one. According to Democrat Dogma, Republicans were against civil rights legislation in the 1960s. However, that simply isn't true. A far higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the one that's most accessible to online searches). From CongressLink: (with emphasis added by me)

The House of Representatives debated the bill for nine days and rejected nearly one hundred amendments designed to weaken the bill before passing H.R .7152 on February 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11. A bipartisan coalition of Republicans and northern Democrats was the key to the bill's success. This same arrangement would prove crucial later to the Senate's approval of the bill.

From the same linked article:

When the House-passed bill reached the Senate floor in March 1964, three groups of senators formed: pro-civil rights Democrats, southern Democrats opposed to the bill, and Republicans. Senator Hubert H. Humphrey led the Democrats who supported the bill and worked actively for its passage. As Senate majority whip, Humphrey enjoyed the support of Mike Mansfield, Senate majority leader. Together they were determined to pass the legislation and even arranged grueling twelve-hour daily sessions to wear down the opposition. Humphrey's task was to line up supporters to defend the bill in debate, to persuade reluctant members of his party to vote for passage, to encourage publicity, and to count votes. The Senator from Minnesota labored hard for passage and sought cooperation from many sources, including the Republicans.

Senator Richard Russell, Democrat from Georgia, led the so-called opposition forces. The group was also known as the "southern bloc." It was composed of eighteen southern Democrats and one Republican, John Tower of Texas. Although a hopeless minority, the group exerted much influence because Senate rules virtually guaranteed unlimited debate unless it was ended by cloture. The "southern bloc" relied on the filibuster to postpone the legislation as long as possible, hoping that support for civil rights legislation throughout the country would falter. The Democratic leadership and Humphrey could not control the southern wing of the party.

...

The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue. Only one Republican senator participated in the filibuster against the bill. In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96% of the votes.

...

Under the Senate rules, after cloture is invoked each senator may speak for one hour on the bill or pending amendments. Although southerners called up many amendments between June 10 and June 17 to stall action further, the Senate leadership allowed only those it wanted to be adopted. Most of the amendments were defeated by large margins. On June 17, the Senate voted by a 76 to 18 margin to adopt the bipartisan substitute worked out by Dirksen in his office in May and to give the bill its third reading. Two days later, the Senate passed the bill by a 73 to 27 roll call vote. Six Republicans and 21 Democrats held firm and voted against passage. In all, the the 1964 civil rights debate had lasted a total of 83 days, slightly over 730 hours, and had taken up almost 3,000 pages in the Congressional Record.

If you read the article, or this one, it becomes apparent that there would've been no Civil Rights Act of 1964 had it not been for the leadership of Senator Dirkson, a Republican.

Explain Bush the First's voting record on civil rights legislation in the 1960s.

This one will require some research. He served for 4 years in the House of Representatives from 1967 through 1971. I'll have to see what I can find out about his civil rights voting record. He apparently ran in 1964 against the Civil Rights Act but wasn't elected. It'll take some digging to find out how he voted on civil rights legislation while serving in the House.

But while that waits, why not consider the voting record of some prominent Democrats on civil rights legislation, particularily the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Many prominent Democrats like Clinton's mentor Senator Fullbright voted against the bill. matter for the people of South Carolina to decide. How quaint. Why wasn't the man who raised the flag there in the first place, now Senator Hollings (D-SC), held to account?

Why is Senator Byrd (D-WV) given a pass for being a member of the Klan and for actively working against the CRA passage including a 13 hour long fillibuster?

Explain the political biography of George Wallace.

George Wallace lost the election of 1958 for Alabama governor because he didn't accept the support of the Klan. When he ran again in 1962,

This devastating loss forced Wallace to significantly adapt his socio-political ideologies to appeal to the state's voters.

That's putting it mildly. George Wallace was a Democrat when he stood in the schoolhouse steps trying to block admission of blacks to the University of Alabama. He looked the other way when Birmingham police commissioner Bull Connors turned loose the dogs and fire hoses on civil rights protestors. According to this source,:

A local judge issued an injunction making any marches illegal--and giving the police the authority to arrest anyone who headed downtown. In the Alabama state capitol, the governor George Wallace rushed to write a new law that raised appeal bonds for misdemeanors from $300 to $2,500--but only in Birmingham. They intended to sweep the protesters into jail, and bankrupt the movement.

Wallace was still a Democrat when he died several years ago. After he was shot in Laurel, Maryland in 1972 and left paralyzed, he did eventually moderate many of his earlier views on race. Reportedly, his views changed after he came to know blacks as real people while many of them took care of him. He ran again for governor (I think it was in 1983) and was reelected largely because of the support he received from black voters.

Why stop at Wallace? How about the recently deceased Lester Maddox, former governor of Georgia. He was a Democrat his entire life and never did back down very much from his racist views of the 1960s.

How about Orval Faubus, the Democrat governor of Arkansas who defied the "Brown v. Board of Education" desegration ruling? It was a Republican, Dwight Eisenhower, that sent in the 101st Airborne to enforce the law.

How about all those solidly Democrat controlled southern state legislatures who passed the Jim Crow Laws over a period of almost 100 years?

I could go on and will if necessary.