One of my favorite targets is the senior Senator from West Virginia, Robert Byrd, about whom there is a nice little expose in the Washington Post. Here is a great excerpt:
The 770-page book is the latest in a long series of attempts by the 87-year-old Democratic patriarch to try to explain an event early in his life that threatens to define him nearly as much as his achievements in the Senate. In it, Byrd says he viewed the Klan as a useful platform from which to launch his political career. He described it essentially as a fraternal group of elites — doctors, lawyers, clergy, judges and other “upstanding people” who at no time engaged in or preached violence against blacks, Jews or Catholics, who historically were targets of the Klan.
His latest account is consistent with others he has offered over the years that tend to minimize his direct involvement with the Klan and explain it as a youthful indiscretion. “My only explanation for the entire episode is that I was sorely afflicted with tunnel vision — a jejune and immature outlook — seeing only what I wanted to see because I thought the Klan could provide an outlet for my talents and ambitions,” Byrd wrote.
The KKK- Just like a Rotary Club, but with costumes!
And yes, I know he has apologized, and no, I don’t care.
Mike S
Curious. Why don’t you care if he has appoligized? Is there no room for people to realise a huge mistake and attempt to make amends?
John Cole
Because, as the story tells, he has never come fully clean and still treats as a simple ‘youthful mistake.’ He even continues to downplay his involvement, saying he just wanted to ‘lead people.’
If I felt he were apologizing for really being wrong, it would be another matter.
KC
I guess some people just can’t apologize enough.
John Cole
KC- He could apologize a million times, but he won;t come clean on what he did. I would never say another word if he would just be honest about his involvement. Read the story.
Mike S
Hmm. Ok, you have your opinion. I think he has made ammends where possible and take him at his word.
Hannity is full of shit whe n he attacks him though. Endorsing Hal Turner’s run for congress is all you need to see.
John Cole
Hannity is full of shit whe n he attacks him though.
Does anyone even debate this anymore?
Mike S
Good point.
Thanks for the link. I see your point after reading the article but don’t fully agree. I think the end of the article has something you don’t see much of anymore.
Last week, Byrd said: “I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times . . . and I don’t mind apologizing over and over again. I can’t erase what happened.”
Most people would just say “I’ve appoligized, it’s time to move on.”
Jeff Harrell
Based on what I know of the Klan
demimondian
You know, John (Cole), there are people who do need to debate Hannity’s crap, if only to point out that it’s not an endorsement of a stopped clock to observe that it’s right twice a day.
That’s true in particular for people like me. I’m a democrat. I know that Byrd’s apologized, and, no, I don’t really care, either. I won’t care until he comes out and says “I joined the Klan because it was convenient. The ideals for which Klan stood were, and still are, a vile and despicable blight on the United States. Worse, I truly believed in what I was saying back then. I’ve changed my mind since — but that doesn’t change my history.”
And Sean Hannity is still a hypocritical dirtbag when he uses his mouth, still filthy with the currently useful bigotry, to criticize Byrd — who has, at least, worked to undo some of the harm he once did. even if he hasn’t grappled fully with how bad it was when he did it.
Stormy70
Please, this guy only gets a pass because he’s a Democrat. He hasn’t come clean, and still uses the N-word in public. “White N-word”, anyone? He needs to retire, and his apology rings hollow. The Klan is a hateful group, no matter how many food drives they have.
KC
Off topic but I just noticed this real stick-in-the-ass:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=5&u=/ap/20050619/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_bush_backfire
Apparently, the Iranian conservatives just “thanked” president Bush for their successes in the recent elections. I’d like to say something keen about the Durbin flap now but honestly, I’ve got nothing to say.
Birkel
It’s okay, Stormy70. You see Sec. Rice, Justice Thomas, Gen. Powell and others are Uncle Toms because they’re with the wrong side.
And Sen. Byrd gets a pass because he’s with the right side.
So it all makes sense and there is no double standard. M’kay?
KC
Got a point there, Stormy70, I’ll concede that.
Birkel
KC,
I’ll bet you believed Baghdad Bob too. (‘Cause those conservative Iranians wouldn’t lie. Would they?)
James Emerson
The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree does it? I suppose it would be better in this case to that the cracker doesn’t fall very far from the box, but you catch my drift…
The KKK label is stuck on Senator Byrd for time immemorial in the small minds of Democrat haters. Maybe in another twenty or so years, the rightwingers will still be uttering smears such as “Nazi Durbin,” and even manage to work up a little spittle on their long ago failed party hacked chins in doing so. Too bad really, too bad that their present leadership and policies spell doom to their party. Too bad that Senator Byrd has offered up some of the most remarkable speeches in the history of the Senate, and still gets whacked by the wingers. I admire him for his intelligence and work ethic. I’ve long ago forgiven him for his ertwhile KKK connection, just as I’ve forgiven Prescott Bush for dealing with the Nazis…
Durbin will have to work harder for his rhetorical embellishments to create the same small minded pack mentality as does Byrd. I can hardly wait for his next speech…
KC
I don’t remember me saying anything about believing anyone. I just posted that article because I thought it was interesting in light of what’s being said about Durbin’s comments. Take from it whatever conclusions you want to.
Birkel
KC,
Ah, so you don’t know about the truth of the matter. Wonderful. You mighta mentioned that in the first place. Seems important somehow.
James Emerson,
I suppose you’ll be the first to tell me that former Senators Helms and Thurmond should be forgiven too. And don’t forget Senator Lott. He apologized too.
Refer to my 4:33pm post for my feelings on your likely forgiveness.
ppgaz
Well, apology puts Byrd at least one half of one notch above, say, Nixon.
Nixon, on why he (did a particular bad thing while running for Congress):
“Well, you have to win.”
He and Byrd seem to belong to the same club of “elites.”
The apology helps Byrd in my eyes a little. But Nixon seems more fascinating in his assholeness.
KC
Jesus, Birkel, I specifically refrained from saying anything about the matter because . . . well . . . why should I say anything? I thought the article was interesting in light of the big flap over Durbin’s comments. However, I’m tired of the Durbin thing so I figured I’d avoid making stupid comparisons.
I’m well aware of the fact that the Iranian hardliners would likely say anything to boost their election prospects and secure their reign. Lets face it: they would have said “thank you” to a Democratic president too. They gain their power by running against us regardless of who our president is. It just puts us in a hard spot because while we oppose the Iranian hardline regime, we’d prefer to see the democratic reformers take control. So our rhetoric denouncing the incivility and despicable actions of the Iranian government can unfortunately feed the political impulses of the hardliners.
Bottom line: your accusation that I probably believed Baghdad Bob was just that, an accusation. And a baseless one at that.
Birkel
Ah, yes.
That’s why you posted it on two separate comment threads. ‘Cause it’s not really that important and they’re probably lying anyway.
Now I get it.
KC
Well, Birkel, I put it on the other thread because I realized that that was where it probably belonged. Sorry if the dual posting offended you. I’ll take care to be more sensitive next time.
Bob
Racism is just another weapon in the arsenal of the right either way they use it, so when Mr. Cole here brandishes it I see more performance than conviction.
James Emerson
Birkel – Generally I forgive ’em when they admit they were wrong. Forgive but verify to paraphrase Reagan.
In the case of Prescott Bush, I forgave him because he had already been dead for some time when I found out about his dealings with the Nazis. Having said that, I believe that anyone who dealt or consorted with the Nazis in the manner of Prescott Bush’s business dealings or otherwise should have been convicted of crimes against humanity.
bg
Really Stormy? He said, “white N-word?” That doesn’t sound nearly so bad at all. We’re all adults here. The guy said nigger.
Barry
“Please, this guy only gets a pass because he’s a Democrat. He hasn’t come clean, and still uses the N-word in public. “White N-word”, anyone? He needs to retire, and his apology rings hollow. The Klan is a hateful group, no matter how many food drives they have.”
Posted by Stormy70
James has already weighed in on this, but: stop lying. Right-wingers *love* link the Klan and Byrd.
Far North
This should be classified under “Robert Byrd Stupidity” rather than Democrat Stupidity. This is one man, not the party.
And I agree, Bryd needs to come clean.
Kimmitt
If one were to use an adjective to describe a member of the Democratic Party, then it would be “Democratic.” The existence of the “Democrat Stupidity” category is similar to the putative existance of a “Rethuglican Stupidity” — both are derogatory terms derived from the actual terms. I think you should show members of the Democratic Party the courtesy of calling them by the proper name of their Party.
p.lukasiak
In 40 years, people like John Cole will be apologizing for being a member of the Republican Party in the year 2005….
John Cole
Will you guys stop defending Byrd.
He spent his entire life sliding through elections using race however it benefitted him, he has lied about his past, fought the civil rights movement, and now, years after he could have done anything to atone for his sins and when his racism has no political impact, he becomes the voice of the party that embraces civil rights by simply uttering meaningless apologies.
nd come live in the state of Robert Byrd for a while, where everything is named after the self aggrandizing fraud.
And Bob- go to hell.
Bruce Moomaw
Believe me. John, he did MUCH worse than that. A few years ago (can’t remember the detail, but it was in CNN’s website), a researcher dug up an impassioned letter the 19-year-old Byrd had written to Sen Theodore Bilbo shortly before the end of WW II declaring that if he thought an Allied victory would lead to racial integration here, he’s support the Nazis. (I’ve always thought Hitler missed a big bet by not proposing to resurrect the Confederacy if the South sided with him; he would have found plenty of takers.) Confronted with said letter, Byrd refused to comment.
Of course, it is true that Byrd has apologized (sort of) for this stuff, and in fact that he’s done a much more complete job of transforming himself than, say, Strom Thurmond ever did. This fact doesn’t count for nothing, but the fact remains that he has a hell of a lot to apologize for.
Mike S
Obviously looking at interest group ratings can be misleading. But comparing Byrd to Lott and Frist shows that Byrd’s are far better.
NAACP 2004
Bird 100
Lott 6
Frist 9
2003
Byrd 100
Lott 4
Frist 0
scs
Hey better to keep busy attacking Byrd than Nancy Grace.
Bob
When Republican leadership claims that Demo opposition to some of the judicial nominees must be because of “racism,” that’s using racism. I’m not sure how effective a use it is, but it’s racism.
I find this continual bashing of Byrd because he was in the KKK as a youth in the same vein. It provides a “holier-than-thou” cover for people proven not to give a damn about things like equality without having to abandon the policies and beliefs that create and perpetuate inequality.
And Byrd a self-aggrandizing politician? Is there any other kind? I guess there is, if you fall for that aw-shucks “I loves Christ and country” Bush hokum that passes for patriotism these days.
And John, maybe if you work hard enough you too can prove to us you’re not a racist. Byrd has a fifty-year headstart on you.
Kimmitt
That’s grotesquely unfair.
KC
Bob, that last sentence was just stupid.
KC
Sorry, “that last sentence” should’ve been “those last two sentences.”
John Cole
And John, maybe if you work hard enough you too can prove to us you’re not a racist. Byrd has a fifty-year headstart on you.
Considering I am not a racist, not a member of the KKK, have no racist background, coupled with the fact that 40 years ago Robert Byrd was filibustering civil rights legislation, that won’t be too much of a problem for me.
Idiot.
James Emerson
40 years ago, I might have agreed with you, but I don’t remember Senator Byrd from 40 years ago, although I remember Martin Luther King Jr quite distinctly.
He was the first black man I could call both principled and heroic, but then he was the first black man whose image was frequently pasted on the local newspaper.
Rick
But comparing Byrd to Lott and Frist shows that Byrd’s are far better.
LOL! Yeah, 2003 and 2004 were chock-a-block with Civil Rights legislation, Blacks just then getting voting and housing rights through Byrd’s intrepid leadership.
The scorecard is reflective, basically, of willingness to piss away large amounts of the treasury on feckless spending schemes.
Cordially…
Bob
That’s the point, Kimmitt. It’s not about fairness. Is it fair to call someone opposed to Bush’s nominees to court a racist? According to many of those elected Republicans who get near a microphone, and their collaborators in the media, it’s perfectly fine to do so. As long as John picks up the same cudgel and swings it the same way as those thugs he proves the point.
You want to criticize Byrd for his opposition to the war, for his opposition to parts of the Patriot Act, you want to criticize him for his support of Social Security, for his long-windedness and his wrinkly skin, go right ahead. When you keep regurgitating what an old man did as a teenager to prove him a racist, well, you are using racism like Bull Turner used his police dogs.
By the way, I am curious to what purpose this would be, to prove Byrd’s heart to be evil. Is this to defend the dismantling of Social Security? Is this to support the war? Why wasn’t the right rising up to shout down Strom Thurmond over the last fifty years? Why?
It’s not about what Byrd did as a youth. It’s about what he’s doing now.
I think that Mike S’s statistics inform the debate.
And John can’t forgive him because years ago Byrd was among plenty of people joining the KKK? Excuse me if I find that a little hard to swallow.
Like I said, performance, not conviction.
Bob
Rick, you write as if the NAACP and its constituents don’t have any more concerns which might find remedy in the legislative process. How curious. It’s as if they are not real people with real needs anymore.
And the last line, about feckless spending schemes. You do realize you are putting yourself on the side of the guys who’ve given us the biggest deficit in history in order for the ultra-rich to fart through even more layers of silk, don’t you? Feckless spending. I’ll Remember that one. Rich.
S.W. Anderson
John Cole comments: “Because, as the story tells, he has never come fully clean and still treats as a simple ‘youthful mistake.’ “
He’s a very old man. Time changes all things, including perceptions, maybe moreso when it’s so subjectively about oneself.
“. . . He even continues to downplay his involvement, saying he just wanted to ‘lead people.'”
Those were very different times. Even so, Byrd made a poor choice as a young man. He says he’s learned better. A whole bunch of people, from what I’ve read, dabbled in communism back during the 1930s. They wised up, became conventional middle class types and no doubt were deeply embarrassed about the indiscretion of their younger years. Such happens.
John, maybe your youthful years were jampacked with good, clear-headed decisions, virtuous behavior and commendable outcomes. Your medal is surely in the mail. The rest of us had to pick ourselves up and straigten ourselves out a few times, even maybe acquiring a little humility in the process.
Lastly, I notice you filed this post under “Democratic Stupidity.” Seems to me what you’re beating up on is something you consider a very personal failing by an invdividual.
S.W. Anderson
John, I don’t know how to make your message type smaller, but I wish while your finding out and making changes you’d find a way to make the comments type bigger. As it is now, they look like the rebate requirents in a newspaper ad
John Cole
Those were very different times.
Now is now. He can honestly admit what he did, or he can continiue to lie about it and his involvement. One, I will accept, the other I won’t.
That is no problem for Bob, who just likes the way he votes on issues.
Mike S
Rick
Are you saying the GOP doesn’t care about civil rights legislation. Interesting.
Bob
The way it works is you show that John is a racist. I think you’d be hard pressed to find a single post that would lead you to believe he is.
Kimmitt
I think that this:
My only explanation for the entire episode is that I was sorely afflicted with tunnel vision — a jejune and immature outlook — seeing only what I wanted to see because I thought the Klan could provide an outlet for my talents and ambitions
is a pretty damning self-indictment, to be frank. “I saw what I wanted to see because I wanted to have power.” Talk about brutalizing one’s own motivations.
W.B. Reeves
As a southerner I’ve had to deal with the legacy of the Klan all my life. I did so by opposing them whenever I could. I was fortunate in that was born at a time when the Klan’s political power was in the process of being broken. Otherwise I might not be here to tell the tale.
The ugly truth is that the Klan was a dominate factor in southern politics from the twenties, when it had been a national force, right up until the early sixties. You’d be hard pressed to find a successful southern politician from this period who didn’t collude to one degree or another with the Klan. There were a few, such as Georgia’s Governor Ellis Arnold but they were the exception, not the rule.
Should Sen. Byrd be held accountable? Sure. But if we’re going to hold up dalliances with white supremacists as a reason for denouncing politicians, I would think that we would focus on those playing footsie with such groups within say the last twenty years or so up to the present, rather than digging up examples from 50 years ago.
As disgusting as the Byrd episode is in retrospect, it was hardly remarkable at the time. The fact is that white supremacy was official doctrine in a large portion of this country right up through World War II. The armed forces of the U.S.A. remained segregated until Harry Truman abolished the practice through executive order. Truman, need I add, had briefly been a member of the Klan himself. He quit not because of the Klan’s white supremacy but because of it’s anti-Catholicism.
The Democratic Party’s historical connection to the Klan is a continuing source of shame. However, its not news that the dixiecrat wing of the party migrated over to the GOP. I know from personal experience that the southern GOP continues the ugly tradition of stealth appeals to racist sentiment in the present day. I’ll be more interested in criticism of Byrd’s past sins when I see the critics express equal concern for the sins of the present day.
Bob
John, the way he votes on issues now, in the last, say, twenty years, IS more important than having joined the Klan in his youth. You don’t like the man. Fine. I probably wouldn’t choose him for someone to share a cross-country car trip.
Bashing him for what he did as a youth, what he apologized for, to wave the red flag of racism, is unfair. The question here is not Byrd’s character, it’s yours, why you use the chant of “racism” to attack him when a goodly portion of our ruling party’s elected officials find themselves comfortable sharing banquet tables at citizens’ groups that are the heirs of the Klan.
Racism is an historical fast in this country. All of us have felt its tendrils. But this discounting of the term by reactionaries only blurs the lines. Rabid hatred for Byrd’s decisions as a teen seem pale, if you will, with all the rest of the sewage that has passed down the river over the intervening years. You reduce yourself when you go Sharpton on us.
Rick
Are you saying the GOP doesn’t care about civil rights legislation. Interesting.
Mike S,
No, I’m mocking the NAACP legislative scorecard for the late dates of 2003 and 2004 as having anything to do with civil rights, and everything to do with wasteful spending–farting through polyester!– and income transfer schemes. ‘xcuse me: risky schemes.
“Sins of today” are as nothing to Jim Crow. Segregationists are practically extinct through the workings of Father Time, not migration to another party. Otherwise, Byrd would be R-WV.
I celebrate the great, century-long overdue clean-up of racism that the Democrats managed to effect on the party 40 years ago, but go peddle celebrations of Byrd elsewhere.
Cordially…
JBD
Why on earth do you people equate youthful transgressions with a senator’s racist past?! Taking a candybar from the local store or TP’ing a neighbor’s house when you’re 15 is NOT the same as truly believing (enough to write a letter to a senator) that you’d rather “stomp on Old Glory than fight alongside a Negro” and go on to talk of hopefully losing WWII for fear the US would turn to “a nation of race-mongrels”. That kind of talk is from the heart, deeply held in the mind, and obviously, deeply disturbing and not easily erased from the mind of the beholder.
reallygone
There are parallels between Byrd and Bush. They both have names that start with “B”. They both have made “youthful indescretions” (Bush drank and Byrd joined the KKK). Both have reformed. Bush doesn’t drink anymore, and Byrd doesn’t lynch blacks anymore.
Compuglobalhypermeganet
It’s a hilarious look at their pathology to examine to what lengths the Democrats will go to absolve one of “their own” of fairly obvious charges of hypocrisy and racism.
Byrd in the Klan is just exactly like Prescott Bush doing business with the Nazis.
Ignoring Godwin for a moment, sure…it’s exactly the same, except Prescott Bush was not symathetic to the Nazi party in any way (unlike Joe Kennedy, for example), nor did he INITIATE and RECRUIT for a chapter of the Nazi Party in his home state. Besides that, he’s exactly the same as Byrd. I think both Prescott Bush and Robert Byrd should be thrown out of the Senate today!
Byrd was a racist “in his youth…”
or even more ludicrous,
“you keep regurgitating what an old man did as a teenager to prove him a racist,”
When does youth cease to be an excuse for a Democrat (but not a Republican — the Dems self-righteously blasted Bush for his Vietnam War record)?
When Byrd organized, recuited, and founded a chapter of the KKK, he was 24.
Byrd vowed never to fight, “with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds” when he was 28 (older than Bush when he left the National Guard).
“The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia,” Byrd wrote when he was 29.
During his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 1958, when Byrd was 41 years old, Byrd defended the Klan. He argued that the KKK had been incorrectly blamed for much of violence in the South.
He filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act when he was 47 years old.
If you want to remain young forever, just be a Democrat, I guess.
Compuglobalhypermeganet
Oops! Sorry, I didn’t mean to offend Democrats by calling them “Democrats.” We all know that that’s just like saying “Rethuglican” or “Dumbocrap Child Molester.” I meant, “registered member of the Democratic Party of America (and probably a crackhead).”
W.B. Reeves
Compuglobalhypermagnet,
That is a pathetic response. No one is denying Byrd’s Klan past. I’m perfectly aware of his opposition to the Civil Rights Act. I’m sure others are as well. I’m also aware that Southern opposition to that Act, fueled by racism, was the primary factor in Goldwater’s winning 5 southern states in 1964.
What is being argued here, with varying degrees of effectiveness, is that focusing on Byrd’s racism of 60 years or 40 years ago is nothing more than a cynical diversion motivated by partisanship. An interpretation that I think your comment supports.
Your bill of indictment against Byrd ends in 1964 for good reason. Byrd subsequently made his political peace with the civil rights movement. Which is why most of the crocodile tears over Byrd’s racism are being wept by White Republicans rather than by African-American Democrats.
The Truth is that neither party has a spotless record on racism and white supremacy. Rutherford B. Hay’s sellout of black Republicans in the South in 1876 was certainly not the GOP’s finest hour. Likewise its decades of passive compliance with Southern white supremacy. Anyone who actually gave a damn about racism in this country would recognize these facts and wouldn’t reserve their indignation for partisan advantage.
Moreover, anyone sincerely concerned about racism and white supremacy would be more interested in which politicians are currently cosying up to racists, rather than events of 40 years ago that have long since been repudiated.
For the record, Sen. Byrd is a last representative of the old South’s political dynasties, representing some of the worst aspects of that society. I have no sympathy with the oligarchies of the past anymore than I have sympathy with the oligarchies of the present. My support for Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Libertarians or any other electoral party is contingent on tactical and strategic concerns. I do not consider any of these parties to be legitimate representatives of either my interests or the interests of the great mass of Americans. An opinion seemingly shared by an ever growing number of the citizenry. I put my efforts wherever I think it will do the most good in a given situation.
I do think that honesty has its benefits. I honestly believe that the true reason for the hue and cry over Byrd’s racism is his strident, high profile opposition to the current administration rather than any real concern for racial justice.
W.B. Reeves
“Segregationists are practically extinct through the workings of Father Time, not migration to another party. Otherwise, Byrd would be R-WV.”
Like, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, Trent Lott, ad nauseum.
Geoff T
Compuglobalhypermagnet,
OK, let’s see see your apology for the 12 present-day apparent KKK eannabees in your party who found it inconvenient to sign the lynching bill. If you don’t can’t come up with it, then it’s time for you to STFU on this topic.
Geoff T
Compuglobalhypermagnet,
OK, let’s have your apology for the 12 present-day apparent KKK wannabees in your party who found it inconvenient to sign the lynching bill. Or are you just another well-trained shameless wingnut hypocrite?
Bob
Compug, I’m ready to forgive Bush when he apologizes for going AWOL for three years while supporting the war. It seems we were talking about whether or not John was going to accept Byrd’s apology. But at this late date, that should be way down on his list of apologies.
Bob
Rick, in case you haven’t noticed, the Republicans have been coming up with plenty of income transfer schemes. That’s there agenda, and unless you’re richer than I suspect some of that wealth is being transferred up beyond your reach too.
Not that you’d get it.
Rick
Like, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, Trent Lott, ad nauseum.
Like I said, practically extinct. Like segregation is, except as a treasured memory in the heart of the KKKonscience of the Senate.
No, Bob–I got my effective tax bracket trimmed from 28% to 25% over the past few years. Not that you’d “get” the math.
Cordially…
wild bird
Why isnt there any whinning from jessie jackson for byrd to remounce his klan days?
Compuglobalhypermeganet
OK, let’s have your apology for the 12 present-day apparent KKK wannabees in your party who found it inconvenient to sign the lynching bill. Or are you just another well-trained shameless wingnut hypocrite?
OK, I’m sorry they didn’t sign the pointless bill that apologizes for something they didn’t do. I’m uncertain how the lack of this apology makes me a hypocrite, but hey, it’s your aimless rant.
Compuglobalhypermeganet
That is a pathetic response. No one is denying Byrd’s Klan past.
Of course, they are. Are you reading this page? Claiming that Byrd was only a racist as a young teenager is nothing but a revisionist denial of a career built on over TWENTY ADULT YEARS of overt racism and opposition to civil rights. That was my point, and my response was not only not pathetic, but it is unrefutable.
Compuglobalhypermeganet
Compug, I’m ready to forgive Bush when he apologizes for going AWOL for three years while supporting the war.
You Bush-haters sure love to make people pretend to apologize for things they never did. I’ll never understand that. Is it to make you guys feel self-righteous, or what? It’s befuddling to me.
It seems we were talking about whether or not John was going to accept Byrd’s apology.
No, I believe you were trying to whitewash (no pun) Byrd’s racist past as an indiscretion “in his youth.”
I await your (cough) apology for posting such rubbish.
By the way, if Byrd really had this alleged profound change of heart and was honestly sorry for his past racism, don’t you think that such a prolific writer and speaker would’ve done MUCH better when it came time for a real apology?
Instead, Byrd started half-apologizing in the 1940s (while still writing pro-Klan letters), kept half-apologizing in the 50s (while trying to paint the Klan as a victim of blame), continued half-apologizing through the 60s (while filibustering Civil Rights Acts and opposing Thurgood Marshall’s USSC appointment).
Byrd is good with words (well, before he got a bit addled, he was), but words are cheap, especially for a pol who knows that if he wants to move up in his party’s hierarchy, he must appear to change his longheld views. Painting the KKK as some sort of Oprah’s Book Club and ignoring the racist letters he sent years after he quit the KKK don’t make his apologies appear authentic.
And why are Republicans upset over Byrd? I can’t believe you have to ask. The GOP gets hammered over the head with Dem’s charges of racism every 4 years, but Bush has the most racially diverse Administration ever while the Democrats have the ex-KKK majority leader. You figure it out.
Rick
The GOP gets hammered over the head with Dem’s charges of racism every 4 years, but Bush has the most racially diverse Administration ever while the Democrats have the ex-KKK majority leader.
Compu,
Spot on. Though let’s be clear: Byrd majority leader days were in the past (where he dwells). Now it’s Minority Leader, and the nearly as repugnant Reid.
Cordially…
HH
Calling our soldiers comparable to Nazis, okay. Daring to mention that Byrd is still to this day a bigot (White n’s, anyone?) and has a Klan past, out-of-line. Got it.
Far North
Anyone want to guess how many of our fine U.S. Senators failed to co-sponsor the anti-lynching legislation?
That would be 15. Anyone want to venture a guess as to which party all 15 belong to? (Hint: It ain’t the party that Howard Dean is chair of).
Yep, that’s right. All 15 are republicans. Now, tell me that the republicans aren’t the party of racists, Robert Bryd notwithstanding.
Far North
HH,
Show me just where Durbin compare our troops to Nazis. Most of you damn well know Durbin made no such comparison. But that doesn’t matter does it. It makes for better outtrage by pretending he did.
The Nazis spread lies and half-truths to demonize the Jews, kinda of like the republicans are doing to Durbin. Therefore you, HH, are a Nazi.
Far North
HH,
Show me just where Durbin compare our troops to Nazis. Most of you damn well know Durbin made no such comparison. But that doesn’t matter does it. It makes for better outtrage by pretending he did.
The Nazis spread lies and half-truths to demonize the Jews, kinda of like the republicans are doing to Durbin. Therefore you, HH, are a Nazi.
Compuglobalhypermeganet
All 15 are republicans. Now, tell me that the republicans aren’t the party of racists, Robert Bryd notwithstanding.
OK — the Republicans are not the Party of racists, Robert Byrd notwithstanding (do the math — 44 Senate Republicans signed on with the silly thing — there are only 11 who haven’t addressed it yet, and no one voted against it). I thought it was cute, though, of Barack Obama to apologize for something that happened before he was in high school TO HIS PEOPLE.
What a ridiculous waste of time, only fit to give trolls another empty-headed whining-point.
Far North
Compu….net,
I have a few other things to whine about. Like my country being bogged down in an uneccesary war, 1700+ Americans dead, 12000+ wounded and a “commander-in-chief that doesn’t have a clue about what to do next. Unending deficit spending, out of control health insurance premiums, conservative christians on crusade, our military’s inability to recruit, US govt’ sponsored torture, Osama bin Laden still free, environmental requlation rollbacks, US Govt denial of climate change…………
And just about the whole fucking world hates us.
I know, a school opened in Iraq and freedom is on the march..