Robert Byrd
Ken Fortenberry
Almighty, Sears Roebuck, Carter’s Little Liver Pills and Robert
C. Byrd.”
-- Robert C. Byrd 1917-2010
magilla
<everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote:
> On 2010-06-28 20:29:06 +0900, band beyond description
> <everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> said:
>
> > On 2010-06-28 20:27:00 +0900, band beyond description
> > <everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> said:
>
> >> On 2010-06-28 20:19:57 +0900, Ken Fortenberry
>
> >>http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/Robert+Byrd+longest+serving+me...
>
> Sen.
> Robert
>
> Byrd,
>
>
>
>
>
> >> longest serving member of U.S. congress, dead at 92
>
> >> Reuters/Jonathan Ernst/Files
> >> “I’m not any president’s man. I’m a Senate’s man,” Mr. Byrd, shown here
> >> in 2009, said in a 2006 interview
>
> >> Reuters · Monday, Jun. 28, 2010
> >> WASHINGTON — Senator Robert Byrd, who evolved from a segregationist to
> >> a civil rights advocate in becoming the longest serving member ever of
> >> the U.S. Congress, died on Monday at age 92, a spokesman for the West
> >> Virginia lawmaker said.
> >> Mr. Byrd’s death is not expected to change the Democrats’ current
> >> majority in the Senate. West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin, a Democrat,
> >> is expected to appoint a Democrat to serve the remainder of Mr. Byrd’s
> >> current six-year term, which expires in 2012.
>
> > little-known fact from same wire story -- he was a bluegrass fiddler:
>
> > With his death, which follows the death in August of Edward Kennedy,
> > the Senate has lost towering historical figures.
>
> > One of the few times an often ailing Mr. Byrd spoke or appeared in the
> > Senate in the last year was to deliver an emotional farewell to
> > Kennedy. When Mr. Byrd did appear at the Senate, he was in a wheelchair.
>
> > Mr. Byrd was first elected to the House of Representatives in 1952, and
> > served six years in that chamber before moving to the Senate. His early
> > campaigns were punctuated by his skills as a bluegrass fiddler that
> > helped draw big and enthusiastic crowds for the self-described West
> > Virginia “hillbilly.”
>
> he really came around, in a good way:
>
> Mr. Byrd was an early and eloquent opponent of the Iraq war, which
> began in 2003 with popular support but within a few years was widely
> condemned. He also warned against a buildup of U.S. troops in
> Afghanistan.
> --
> Peace,
> Steve
His speech against the Iraq war was incredibly stirring, and uncannily
prescient:
http://www.prorev.com/byrdtalk.htm
Chris
Jay Man
"Ken Fortenberry" <kennethfo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:i0a0gu$r4u$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Neil X
His speeches against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were also stirring,
but uncannily disquieting.
Peace,
Neil X.
Ray OHara
>"Neil X" <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:14c787cb-d8bd-4d52-891d->
>http://www.prorev.com/byrdtalk.htm
>His speeches against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were also stirring,
>but uncannily disquieting.
>Peace,
>Neil X.
he was a one KKK member, but as others have noted he saw the error of his
ways and repented.
while many of the old "Dixiecrats" switched parties because of the Dems
embracing Civil Rights , men Strom Thumond , Trent Lott, Phil Gramm, Byrd
dropped the old ways and joined the modern world.
Rogues Island's finest
Ain't political expediency grand?
He's a fine poster child for term limits.
Mark
Ken Fortenberry
> "Ray OHara" wrote:
>>> "Neil X" wrote:
>>> His speeches against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were also stirring,
>>> but uncannily disquieting.
>>
>> ways and repented.
>> while many of the old "Dixiecrats" switched parties because of the Dems
>> embracing Civil Rights , men Strom Thumond , Trent Lott, Phil Gramm, Byrd
>> dropped the old ways and joined the modern world.
>
> Ain't political expediency grand?
He was a product of his time and place. My old man, may he
rest in peace, was quite a bit younger than Byrd and he never
had any "grand expediency". Byrd endorsed Obama for the Dem
nomination the week after Hillary won the West Virginia primary
in a landslide. There was absolutely no upside for Byrd to do so.
> He's a fine poster child for term limits.
The term limit in the US Senate is six years.
--
Ken Fortenberry
Ray OHara
research has shown when people talk of term limits they mean for your guy
not mine.
Ray OHara
>"Rogues Island's finest" <mth...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:d8e44765-4247-44ec-8b3c-
>Ain't political expediency grand?
that's what politic is.
x...@xxx.com
"Ray OHara" <raymon...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:i0as81$ij2$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
Thats why we should be thrilled by GW Bush's conversion to born again
christianism, it makes his past go away. If only Cheney could convert we
could praise him for his wonderful humanitarian work. When politicians
disavow everything they've been involved with pre-election, you MUST
believe they have dropped all of their pre election involvements.
Try to explain to us how the KKK wasn't so bad back when the Dixiecrats
were hanging negroes from trees. They did it with heart? They weren't
big fans of the hangings? I can't find a reason that should stop the
world from celebrating the deaths of these scumbags. If you can think of
one, feel free to share.
Good riddance to a filthy stain on US history, let's hope he left a
diary behind so his friends and family can get convicted one day.
MalcolmO
No. IINM, the model for Foghorn was a politico named Claghorn (or similar).
--
Malcolm
"They should know they're the Grateful Dead now." -- Phil
volkfolk
Sorry, once a member of the KKK, always a member of the KKK. You don't
get a pass. Byrd dropped the membership because it was politically
expedient, not because "he saw the error of his way" (except that
seeing the error of his ways got him reelected)
Scot
volkfolk
<everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote:
> On 2010-06-28 20:27:00 +0900, band beyond description
> <everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> said:
>
> > On 2010-06-28 20:19:57 +0900, Ken Fortenberry
> > <kennethfortenbe...@gmail.com> said:
>
>
> Peace,
> Steve
Don't forget he was also a member of the KKK at one point. What a
great guy######
Scot
highgreenchilly
Perhaps elected officials should not get a pass, but I have to believe
that people can make positive, lasting changes to their beliefs and
actions. That being said, I don't think I could vote for a former
klansman; it is a deal-breaker for me now and was 20 years ago.
volkfolk
Whether or not he actually repented is between him and his maker,
however I find the Klan so repugnant that it doesn't make any
difference to me. Once you've embraced such a blatantly racist group,
you can never get the stain out of your nice white sheets........
Scot
Ray OHara
<x...@xxx.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9DA5E05D4...@81.169.183.62...
> [posted and mailed]
>
> "Ray OHara" <raymon...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:i0as81$ij2$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>>
>>>"Neil X" <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:14c787cb-d8bd-4d52-891d-> http://www.prorev.com/byrdtalk.htm
>>
>>
>>>His speeches against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were also stirring,
>>>but uncannily disquieting.
>>
>>>Peace,
>>>Neil X.
>>
>> he was a one KKK member, but as others have noted he saw the error of
>> his ways and repented.
>> while many of the old "Dixiecrats" switched parties because of the
>> Dems embracing Civil Rights , men Strom Thumond , Trent Lott, Phil
>> Gramm, Byrd dropped the old ways and joined the modern world.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Thats why we should be thrilled by GW Bush's conversion to born again
> christianism, it makes his past go away. If only Cheney could convert we
> could praise him for his wonderful humanitarian work. When politicians
> disavow everything they've been involved with pre-election, you MUST
> believe they have dropped all of their pre election involvements.
>
> Try to explain to us how the KKK wasn't so bad back when the Dixiecrats
> were hanging negroes from trees.
who said it wasn't so bad?
what was said was he learned and repudiated it.
.
Neil X
Yeah, I tend to agree with that. Byrd is head and shoulders above
folks like Thurmond and Helms, who repudiated racism yet continued to
cast every vote indistinguishably from the way a racist would cast
their vote. Byrd should get credit for actually walking the walk in
addition to talking the talk. But still, it begs credulity to think
that he suddenly got religion and saw the light of racial tolerance.
Peace,
Neil X.
frndthdevl
Byrd dropped the membership because it was politically
> expedient, not because "he saw the error of his way" (except that
> seeing the error of his ways got him reelected)
>
> Scot
You changed your mind on Fish,or was that political expediency so you
would not offend your fish lovin phriends? To say Bryd could not have
changed over the years is an assumption you do not know enough about
to make.
Ken Fortenberry
> volkfolk wrote:
>> highgreenchilly wrote:
>>> Perhaps elected officials should not get a pass, but I have to believe
>>> that people can make positive, lasting changes to their beliefs and
>>> actions. That being said, I don't think I could vote for a former
>>> klansman; it is a deal-breaker for me now and was 20 years ago.
>>
>> Whether or not he actually repented is between him and his maker,
>> however I find the Klan so repugnant that it doesn't make any
>> difference to me. Once you've embraced such a blatantly racist group,
>> you can never get the stain out of your nice white sheets........
>
> Yeah, I tend to agree with that. Byrd is head and shoulders above
> folks like Thurmond and Helms, who repudiated racism yet continued to
> cast every vote indistinguishably from the way a racist would cast
> their vote. Byrd should get credit for actually walking the walk in
> addition to talking the talk. But still, it begs credulity to think
> that he suddenly got religion and saw the light of racial tolerance.
I think that but for an accident of birth you guys might be
able to see a touch of gray in your black & white view of
West Virginia's recent past. That is, if you were born ten
years earlier and grew up 500 miles to the south. Just sayin',
walk a mile and all that shit.
--
Ken Fortenberry
JimK
wrote:
Except for some rare and unusual circumstances, I don't think anybody
"gets religion" when it comes to any moral or ethical issues. But I do
believe that people can change over time, especially those who hold
certain beliefs when they're young, impressionable, and highly subject
to peer pressure. Young people haven't really had time to think
through their beliefs and they haven't had the experience to fully
realize the consequences of those beliefs. And I admittedly put myself
into that category. When I was young, many, many years ago, open
racism was much more widespread and accepted as the norm. My views on
racism have changed dramatically since then and, hopefully, I think
that's true of most of my generation.
So yes, I do think people can make the changes that Byrd claims to be
made, just not overnight. Whether he really changed or was just being
politically expedient, only he knew for sure.
JimK
Neil X
wrote:
There were *plenty* of people in WVa who were never members of the KKK
and who were not racists. Remember, WVa refused to join Virginia in
joining the Confederacy during the civil war. And there were plenty
of racists in Chicago when I grew up in the 70s. Sorry, you can't
blame WVa for Byrd being a Klansman, you have to blame Byrd for that.
Peace,
Neil X.
Ken Fortenberry
> Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>> Neil X wrote:
>>> volkfolk wrote:
>>>> highgreenchilly wrote:
>>>>> Perhaps elected officials should not get a pass, but I have to believe
>>>>> that people can make positive, lasting changes to their beliefs and
>>>>> actions. That being said, I don't think I could vote for a former
>>>>> klansman; it is a deal-breaker for me now and was 20 years ago.
>>
>>>> Whether or not he actually repented is between him and his maker,
>>>> however I find the Klan so repugnant that it doesn't make any
>>>> difference to me. Once you've embraced such a blatantly racist group,
>>>> you can never get the stain out of your nice white sheets........
>>
>>> Yeah, I tend to agree with that. Byrd is head and shoulders above
>>> folks like Thurmond and Helms, who repudiated racism yet continued to
>>> cast every vote indistinguishably from the way a racist would cast
>>> their vote. Byrd should get credit for actually walking the walk in
>>> addition to talking the talk. But still, it begs credulity to think
>>> that he suddenly got religion and saw the light of racial tolerance.
>>
>> I think that but for an accident of birth you guys might be
>> West Virginia's recent past. That is, if you were born ten
>> years earlier and grew up 500 miles to the south. Just sayin',
>> walk a mile and all that shit.
>
> There were *plenty* of people in WVa who were never members of the KKK
> and who were not racists. Remember, WVa refused to join Virginia in
> joining the Confederacy during the civil war. And there were plenty
> of racists in Chicago when I grew up in the 70s. Sorry, you can't
> blame WVa for Byrd being a Klansman, you have to blame Byrd for that.
Beautiful non sequitur. What is it supposed to mean ?
Byrd was elected to the US Senate from West Virginia, repeatedly,
so you can certainly credit/blame West Virginia for making an
ex-Klansman a US Senator. Perhaps if you were a few years older
and from West Virginia you might better understand why.
--
Ken Fortenberry
octoad
> Yeah, I tend to agree with that. Byrd is head and shoulders above
> folks like Thurmond and Helms, who repudiated racism yet continued to
> cast every vote indistinguishably from the way a racist would cast
> their vote. Byrd should get credit for actually walking the walk in
> addition to talking the talk.
Well, Thurmond spawned a child with some black babe, so he walked some kind
of walk too.
As for political expediency, remaining openly racist in W. Virginia, a truly
backward place loaded with gritty coal miners and toothless dirt farmers,
would seem to me to have been more expedient for the vast majority of Byrd's
tenure than it would have been being some kind of n****r lover.
But the old goat should have retired many years ago; besides being absent
most of the past few years his practice of moving the federal government
piece by piece to W. Virginia didn't do anybody any good. But while he
wasn't exactly my favorite senator, its too bad that none, repeat none,
zero, of today's blowdried soundbite spouters can quote Roman emperors and
Greek historians at length, without notes (or quote them at all, or have
ever heard of them, or have even heard of Rome or Greece). Having a little
knowledge of what happened in the world prior to your own immaculate
conception and miraculous arrival onto the political scene, complete with
instant answers to everything, is a good thing. It helps put things into
context, and maybe enables one to consider the possibility that you didn't
invent a goddamn thing in politics, and that just because you heard it on
the radio or read it in a talking points paper circulated by your party
leader doesn't mean its automatically brilliant.............
Cicero may have disagreed.
O
Neil X
wrote:
Non sequitur? You stated that Byrd was a product of his state, and I
would be able to understand why he was who he was if I had "wlaked a
mile" in his shoes. My response was that lots of people who were born
there and "walked the mile" in his shoes were nothing like he was.
Seems pretty relevant to me.
> Byrd was elected to the US Senate from West Virginia, repeatedly,
> so you can certainly credit/blame West Virginia for making an
> ex-Klansman a US Senator.
Now that's a non sequitur. No one, until your post right here, had
made any comments about the whys and wherefores of the reasons he was
re-elected repeatedly.
> Perhaps if you were a few years older
> and from West Virginia you might better understand why.
Seeing as you aren't from WVa, how would you know?
Peace,
Neil X.
Neil X
>
> Well, Thurmond spawned a child with some black babe, so he walked some kind
> of walk too.
What kind of walk was that? Did Thurmond marry the woman and raise
the child as his own?
> As for political expediency, remaining openly racist in W. Virginia, a truly
> backward place loaded with gritty coal miners and toothless dirt farmers,
> would seem to me to have been more expedient for the vast majority of Byrd's
> tenure than it would have been being some kind of n****r lover.
WVa is not North or South Carolina. It's a Democrat state through and
through. By 1970, being openly racist was not something a Democrat
could be. His political career in WVa depended on him making nice
with minorities. Again, I'm not saying that's why he did what he did,
but remaining openly hostile to blacks was going to be political
suicide.
> But the old goat should have retired many years ago; besides being absent
> most of the past few years his practice of moving the federal government
> piece by piece to W. Virginia didn't do anybody any good. But while he
> wasn't exactly my favorite senator, its too bad that none, repeat none,
> zero, of today's blowdried soundbite spouters can quote Roman emperors and
> Greek historians at length, without notes (or quote them at all, or have
> ever heard of them, or have even heard of Rome or Greece). Having a little
> knowledge of what happened in the world prior to your own immaculate
> conception and miraculous arrival onto the political scene, complete with
> instant answers to everything, is a good thing. It helps put things into
> context, and maybe enables one to consider the possibility that you didn't
> invent a goddamn thing in politics, and that just because you heard it on
> the radio or read it in a talking points paper circulated by your party
> leader doesn't mean its automatically brilliant.............
Yes, it's true, even Klansmen can read the classics.
Peace,
Neil X.
Lfh
> Seeing as you aren't from WVa, how would you know?
>
> Peace,
> Neil X.
The internets, dude. I mean, really.
Fred
Ken Fortenberry
> Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>> Neil X wrote:
>>>> I think that but for an accident of birth you guys might be
>>>> West Virginia's recent past. That is, if you were born ten
>>>> years earlier and grew up 500 miles to the south. Just sayin',
>>>> walk a mile and all that shit.
>>>
>>> There were *plenty* of people in WVa who were never members of the KKK
>>> and who were not racists. Remember, WVa refused to join Virginia in
>>> joining the Confederacy during the civil war. And there were plenty
>>> of racists in Chicago when I grew up in the 70s. Sorry, you can't
>>> blame WVa for Byrd being a Klansman, you have to blame Byrd for that.
>>
>> Beautiful non sequitur. What is it supposed to mean ?
>
Yeah, big word. Look it up.
>> Byrd was elected to the US Senate from West Virginia, repeatedly,
>> so you can certainly credit/blame West Virginia for making an
>> ex-Klansman a US Senator.
>
> Now that's a non sequitur. ...
C'mon, I said look it up.
>> Perhaps if you were a few years older
>> and from West Virginia you might better understand why.
>
> Seeing as you aren't from WVa, how would you know?
I'm a whole lot smarter than you ?
People are not born racists, they learn it. They learn it from
their parents, their relatives, their peers, their culture, their
society. Those things which people can learn they can also learn
to regard as wrong. The premise, "once a Klansman always a Klansman"
is not true. I know this. You apparently do not.
I have no idea what was in Robert Byrd's heart or mind. I judge
his race relations by his actions and by that criteria in his
later years he was a friend of civil rights.
--
Ken Fortenberry
Ray OHara
People can change ,he learned.
some folks can, some won't.
octoad
> octoad wrote:
>
>> Well, Thurmond spawned a child with some black babe, so he walked some
>> kind
>> of walk too.
> What kind of walk was that?
A bowlegged one?
>> As for political expediency, remaining openly racist in W. Virginia, a
>> truly
>> backward place loaded with gritty coal miners and toothless dirt farmers,
>> would seem to me to have been more expedient for the vast majority of
>> Byrd's
>> tenure than it would have been being some kind of n****r lover.
> WVa is not North or South Carolina. It's a Democrat state through and
> through. By 1970, being openly racist was not something a Democrat
> could be. His political career in WVa depended on him making nice
> with minorities. Again, I'm not saying that's why he did what he did,
> but remaining openly hostile to blacks was going to be political
> suicide.
Goodness gracious, how quickly we forget.
In 1972, 2 years after you claim being a racist was "political suicide" in
Democratic politics, George Wallace won primaries in Florida (winning every
single county), North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, MARYLAND, and MICHIGAN.
Busing was a HUGE issue. Before he was shot down during the campaign, he'd
garnered 23.5% of the total primary vote. He was on a roll when he was shot
too, just having won Michigan, and winning Maryland after he was gunned
down.
I have no clue where Byrd stood on the race issue in those days, but
standing with George Wallace would hardly have been political suicide.
> Yes, it's true, even Klansmen can read the classics.
Somebody needs to.
O
Ray
>
> Sorry, you can't
> blame WVa for Byrd being a Klansman, you have to blame Byrd for that.
My dad was raised in a racist family - not KKK-level racist but racist
nonetheless. As such I always wondered how my dad turned out to be
the only non-racist of his family.
Well after my father passed on I learned that he actually had been a
racist until he became involved with my mom - early in their
relationship she really did get him to see the error of his ways. That
my dad was ever a racist is still quite hard for me to fathom - he was
definitely not in any sense a racist by the time I and my siblings
came along, all of whom he (and my mom) instilled a strong aversion to
racism.
Back to Bird: I know little about his circumstances but I'd wager he
was raised in a racist - heavily racist - family and general
environment, and thus he too thought that that's the "way things are"
and didn't know any better. And yeah his being in the KKK was
certainly going the extra racist mile, as it were, but I can
nonetheless believe that he too really learned the error of his ways -
people can and do learn and change and grow.
x...@xxx.com
>> Thats why we should be thrilled by GW Bush's conversion to born again
>> christianism, it makes his past go away. If only Cheney could convert
>> we could praise him for his wonderful humanitarian work. When
>> politicians disavow everything they've been involved with
>> pre-election, you MUST believe they have dropped all of their pre
>> election involvements.
>>
>> Try to explain to us how the KKK wasn't so bad back when the
>> Dixiecrats were hanging negroes from trees.
>
>
> who said it wasn't so bad?
> what was said was he learned and repudiated it.
> .
>
>
>
If he did, then I can give him credit for that, but he NEVER paid his
debt to society. If he honestly saw the error of his ways he would have
exposed the KKK and used his knowledge of the group to have them
disbanded and/or arrested. He should have testified against his old
gang.
Saying he repudiated it and going on to live the life of a US Senator
while his friends were able to continue their Klan activities doesn't
make him a hero. I don't forgive his years of KKK membership just
because he said he learned better (when it helped his career). WVA
elected a member (leader) of a criminal organization to the US senate.
Imagine Senator Gotti from NY.
If he learned what 99% of the US already knew about Klan membership his
conversion would have included the indictment and incarceration of his
fellow KKK members. Apparently he didn't feel duty bound in this way.
This is one reason I don't buy these politically convenient conversions
or give him a pass on his klan membership.
Ray
> >> Thats why we should be thrilled by GW Bush's conversion to born again
> >> christianism, it makes his past go away.
I believe Dubya is probably a real born-again, as opposed to doing it
just for political expediency as a 'cover' for his past.
> >> Try to explain to us how the KKK wasn't so bad back when the
> >> Dixiecrats were hanging negroes from trees.
>
> > who said it wasn't so bad?
> > what was said was he learned and repudiated it.
>
> If he did, then I can give him credit for that, but he NEVER paid his
> debt to society. If he honestly saw the error of his ways he would have
> exposed the KKK and used his knowledge of the group to have them
> disbanded and/or arrested. He should have testified against his old
> gang.
Was the branch of the KKK that Bird belonged to involved in criminal
activity while he was there? I don't know if that's true or not; if
so however you have a point there.
x...@xxx.com
Ray <ray...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:f3c23035-09cb-402a-8825-
a9e23a...@w9g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
The "branch" he was involved in was started recruited and organized by Byrd
himself. He was privy to everything and everyone involved. This was during
a time of steep decline for the klan so he worked hard to keep them alive.
At that time the klan was involved in a lot of the same activity that make
them famous, including the Detroit riots and supression of evidence from
klan friendly law enforcement.
it has also been shown that his klan activity continued at least 5 years
after he claims to have quit the group. So I remain cynical about his
conversion.
Ray
> [posted and mailed]
>
> Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:f3c23035-09cb-402a-8825-
> a9e23a7a3...@w9g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> > who said it wasn't so bad?
> >> > what was said was he learned and repudiated it.
>
> >> If he did, then I can give him credit for that, but he NEVER paid his
> >> debt to society. If he honestly saw the error of his ways he would have
> >> exposed the KKK and used his knowledge of the group to have them
> >> disbanded and/or arrested. He should have testified against his old
> >> gang.
>
> > Was the branch of the KKK that Bird belonged to involved in criminal
> > activity while he was there? I don't know if that's true or not; if
> > so however you have a point there.
>
> The "branch" he was involved in was started recruited and organized by Byrd
> himself. He was privy to everything and everyone involved. This was during
> a time of steep decline for the klan so he worked hard to keep them alive.
> At that time the klan was involved in a lot of the same activity that make
> them famous, including the Detroit riots and supression of evidence from
> klan friendly law enforcement.
Again *if* Byrd's branch was involved in criminal activity while he
was there then I agree you have a point with respect to his not
"paying his debt to society." If.
Ken Fortenberry
> The "branch" he was involved in was started recruited and organized by Byrd
> himself. He was privy to everything and everyone involved. This was during
> a time of steep decline for the klan so he worked hard to keep them alive.
> At that time the klan was involved in a lot of the same activity that make
> them famous, including the Detroit riots and supression of evidence from
> klan friendly law enforcement.
>
> it has also been shown that his klan activity continued at least 5 years
> after he claims to have quit the group. So I remain cynical about his
> conversion.
And I remain convinced you don't know what in the hell
you're talking about. You spew a lot of vague nonsense
which you insist is evidence of criminal activity, but
in fact no evidence of criminal activity exists or, so
far as I know, has even been alleged.
You do know that membership in the Klan, as odious as
it is, is not in itself illegal ?
--
Ken Fortenberry
sparksfly
> [posted and mailed]
>
> Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:f3c23035-09cb-402a-8825-
> a9e23a7a3...@w9g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> >> >> Thats why we should be thrilled by GW Bush's conversion to born again
> >> >> christianism, it makes his past go away.
>
> > I believe Dubya is probably a real born-again, as opposed to doing it
> > just for political expediency as a 'cover' for his past.
>
> >> >> Try to explain to us how the KKK wasn't so bad back when the
> >> >> Dixiecrats were hanging negroes from trees.
>
> >> > who said it wasn't so bad?
> >> > what was said was he learned and repudiated it.
>
> >> If he did, then I can give him credit for that, but he NEVER paid his
> >> debt to society. If he honestly saw the error of his ways he would have
> >> exposed the KKK and used his knowledge of the group to have them
> >> disbanded and/or arrested. He should have testified against his old
> >> gang.
>
> > Was the branch of the KKK that Bird belonged to involved in criminal
> > activity while he was there? I don't know if that's true or not; if
> > so however you have a point there.
>
> The "branch" he was involved in was started recruited and organized by Byrd
> himself. He was privy to everything and everyone involved. This was during
> a time of steep decline for the klan so he worked hard to keep them alive.
> At that time the klan was involved in a lot of the same activity that make
> them famous, including the Detroit riots and supression of evidence from
> klan friendly law enforcement.
>
If you are talking about the Detroit riots of 1967 I believe that
started after the police raided an after hours joint and attempted to
arrest some 80 or more people. Bystanders took over from there. I
wonder how Byrd or the KKK had anything to do with that?
Mike
dtom...@aol.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
At a minimum you can apply the current RICO standards if you aren't
convinced. Do you think he recruited and ran his own branch of the
klan and remained completely ignorant about their activities? Of the
150 or so klansmen recruited by him, do you think they all joined up
before the cold war (while russia was our ally) to combat communism
like Byrd has claimed? If he ever did disavow the kkk and their beleif
system it happened in the mid 60s, not in the 40s like he claims. I
bet John Gotti could have won a seat in the House as a representative
of Brooklyn at one point, no matter what he said to get elected he
would still be a mobster.
dtom...@aol.com
wrote:
Despite your strawman I didn't claim to have evidence of criminal
activity by Byrd at the time, merely evidence of his involvement with
the kkk. Not criminal in itself but more than enough for me to not
believe a word he said about anything.
For instance, he claimed he was a klansman for 1 year in '42 and '43,
later on letters from him written in 45 or 46 to the grand whatever of
the klan surfaced. You might want to look up the content of those
letters if you are interested in making your nonsense less vague. He
also claimed that his involvement in the klan was just an anti
communist move, despite the fact that Russia was our ally in 1942 - 3.
Again, I claim no evidence of criminal activity by him but I will
never be convinced that he joined the klan for humanitarian reasons.
The fact that he was a high ranking officer and a recruiter for his
own band of klansmen makes him culpable for things that happened
during that time Just like Carlo Gambino (who was "just a businessman"
according to his friends in Brooklyn).
Carry on with your "nothing to see here" argument, but you'd have to
be blind to believe it.
dtom...@aol.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, I am talking about the 1967 riots that happened in the 1940s when
Byrd was a klansman. Carry on with your study of timelines.
dtom...@aol.com
<everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote:
> --
> Peace,
> Steve- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
You can start by reading Byrd's own words. If you aren't scratching
your head when you read his justifications for his klan activity then
you aren't paying attention. If you are just blindly devoted to him
because he is a democrat, you can learn all you need to know from his
obituaries.
Ray
> On Jun 30, 1:13 pm, Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 30, 9:49 am, "x...@xxx.com" <x...@xxx.com> wrote:
>
> > > [posted and mailed]
>
> > > Ray <rayb...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:f3c23035-09cb-402a-8825-
> > > a9e23a7a3...@w9g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
>
> > > >> > who said it wasn't so bad?
> > > >> > what was said was he learned and repudiated it.
>
> > > >> If he did, then I can give him credit for that, but he NEVER paid his
> > > >> debt to society. If he honestly saw the error of his ways he would have
> > > >> exposed the KKK and used his knowledge of the group to have them
> > > >> disbanded and/or arrested. He should have testified against his old
> > > >> gang.
>
> > > > activity while he was there? I don't know if that's true or not; if
> > > > so however you have a point there.
>
> > > The "branch" he was involved in was started recruited and organized by Byrd
> > > himself. He was privy to everything and everyone involved. This was during
> > > a time of steep decline for the klan so he worked hard to keep them alive.
> > > At that time the klan was involved in a lot of the same activity that make
> > > them famous, including the Detroit riots and supression of evidence from
> > > klan friendly law enforcement.
>
> > Again *if* Byrd's branch was involved in criminal activity while he
> > was there then I agree you have a point with respect to his not
> > "paying his debt to society." If.
>
> convinced.
You can't retroactively apply laws, and why should I be "convinced"
about something that as far as I (and evidently you as well) know
there is no evidence of?
> Do you think he recruited and ran his own branch of the
> klan and remained completely ignorant about their activities?
Of course I think he was aware of what was going on in his own branch.
Re-read what I wrote, and try to understand it better it this time:
*If* Byrd's branch was involved in criminal activity while he was
dtom...@aol.com
<everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote:
> --
> Peace,
> Steve- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
again, read Byrd's own book. I doubt the entire thing is linked to a
webpage. If you are too lazy to read his memoirs, find the cliff notes
somewhere. If you are too lazy to do that I am sure the NY Times or
washington post articles about him can be found online somewhere. I
have them at my desk here, but I can't link you to my desk so you will
have to look it up yourself.
Next you might want to check the origin server for this post. You
might see that it is owned by Medgar Evers College. We have books and
articles here, not links.
Andrew
So you have those articles right there at your desk, but you won't
reference them... Names, dates, etc?
> Next you might want to check the origin server for this post. You
> might see that it is owned by Medgar Evers College. We have books and
> articles here, not links.
No Internet at Medgar Evers College? So, um, how exactly are you
posting from there? Either way, perhaps you could post the names of
those books and articles which you are referencing so the rest of us
living in this century can search for them?
dtom...@aol.com
> > At a minimum you can apply the current RICO standards if you aren't
> > convinced.
>
> You can't retroactively apply laws, and why should I be "convinced"
> about something that as far as I (and evidently you as well) know
> there is no evidence of?
>
No but you can understand my point if you applied RICO to this one.
John Gotti didn't kill all of those people, if he disavowed being a
member of the mob and declared himself a democrat should his election
night conversion wash away his past? He'd make a great senator, pro
union, good on camera, lots of friends ...... so maybe he was a
notorious gangster .... there is no evidence that he killed anyone.
Byrd lied in 1952, during a campaign, that he was in the klan for a
year to fight communism. So you have an admitted klan member who has
been caught in several lies regarding his involvement with the klan
yet you can't understand why someone would paint him with a broad
brush? But you can convince yourself that this klansman reformed in
1945 and should be considered a wonderful representative of the
people,..... D after his name? ....he's the best.... nothing to see
here.
There is evidence and many admissions that Byrd was a klan member,
there is also evidence that he supported the klan for a few years
after he claimed to be out of it. There is evidence that he voted
against civil rights bills right up until 1968. There is evidence that
the klan was raising money and supporting segregation with violence in
Detroit in 1943, Byrd's WVA klan was a big klan fundraiser, at the
very least he helped fund the interlopers and violence.
> > Do you think he recruited and ran his own branch of the
> > klan and remained completely ignorant about their activities?
>
> Of course I think he was aware of what was going on in his own branch.
> Re-read what I wrote, and try to understand it better it this time:
>
> *If* Byrd's branch was involved in criminal activity while he was
> there then I agree you have a point with respect to his not "paying
> his debt to society." If.- Hide quoted text -
>
Byrd was the LEADER of his branch, that made him a part of the KKK
congress. He was aware of what his branch was doing (raising money at
least) but as the leader he was also aware of what the rest of the
klan was doing because he was part of the upper levels. He delivered
the money his boy scout klan troop raised to those other EVIL KKK
leaders. But of course he was an eagle scout and had no idea what the
KKK was up to. Sorry, I'm not buying this version of KKK history. A
guy who refused to serve in WW2 and wrote letters decrying the
integration of the armed forces (I'd rather die a thousand
deaths ...etc) was a boy scout and had NOTHING to do with the racist
part of the KKK.
This is worse than guilt by association with the klan, it is guilt by
leading an entire branch of the klan (albiet the liberal progressive
boy scout wing of the klan)
Everything I know about him 1st hand (since Clarence Thomas would)
would support the claim that he was a reformed racist and a decent
senator, but I'd feel like an idiot trying to defend anything about
him up to 1970.
dtom...@aol.com
<everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote:
> pretty much what I was asking...Mr. Screen Name XXX assumed that I
> "love" Byrd, when all I was asking was for impartial links to back up
> his (non-impartial) assertions.
> --
> Peace,
> Steve- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I assumed that you were tossing red herrings into a conversation
because you either already know the facts or are just too lazy to form
your own hypothesis. Jumping into an exchange of opinion to say "got
links" is what you did, you were not asking anything.
Yes, there was a good klan and a bad klan, byrd belonged to the KKK
Boy scouts who baked cookies and built integrated libraries. How silly
of me to mix those 2 branches of the klan up.
Forget links and read a book. Byrd wrote his own memoirs, there are
several ridiculous lies about his KKK membership in there. If you are
really interested you would have found it already. One lie, in 1952
when running for office he claimed that he cut his ties to the klan
after a year, a letter from him to the grand wizard was leaked to the
press by JFKs camp later on showing that he was still involved with
the klan for a few more years. Another lie, he claims he was a klan
memeber to fight communism in the US, except in 1942 Russia was our
ally, in addition he wrote a letter to his senator decrying the
integration of the military by Truman. Excuse me if I'm not buying
his anti commie story.
dtom...@aol.com
<everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote:
> lie behind aol domains. continuing with the crickets, or will you
> provide links for the assertions you weighed in with please? this is
> the Internet, not some crusty library. thanks, Mr. Screen Name.
> --
> Peace,
> Steve- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
It is not behind an aol domain, it is directly linked to mec.edu, you
will have to go to google and find this info for yourself. Start with
Byrd's memoirs and do some research. Again, "got links" is not much of
a contribution to an exchange of ideas. If you find any of my info
incorrect when you do your research I will gladly check my sources and
reply. I'll turn my crickets on until you show me where anything I've
stated is incorrect, don't worry, if you find something in a book, I
am pretty handy with the Dewey decimal system and this "crusty
library" happens to have an entire building devoted to black american
history.
Is this smug "got links" and "crickets" thing just a cop out so you
don't have to think? or do you already know you have nothing to add to
this topic?
dtom...@aol.com
>
> So you have those articles right there at your desk, but you won't
> reference them... Names, dates, etc?
>
I have a washington post article that you can find very easily online
if you wish. I had Byrd's memoirs which I read a while ago.
> > Next you might want to check the origin server for this post. You
> > might see that it is owned by Medgar Evers College. We have books and
> > articles here, not links.
>
> No Internet at Medgar Evers College? So, um, how exactly are you
> posting from there? Either way, perhaps you could post the names of
> those books and articles which you are referencing so the rest of us
> living in this century can search for them?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Show me where I said I had no internet access, I got my info from
papers and a book, not a link to salon.com. Got anything to add to the
conversation or are you just here for absurd usenet technicalities?
Seems for some people, overuse of the internet has rendered them
unable to have a conversation or an exchange of ideas. FYI "got links"
is not an idea, nor are strawman arguments like "No internet ..."
You too are welcome to show me where anything I've written is
incorrect. I'm sure you can find some links that make you feel like
you have an opinion.
Ray
You still don't seem to be getting it. I'm not defending Byrd's
history and association with in the Klan, which I find to be
reprehensible. What I'm not buying without supporting evidence,
however, is your assertion here:
------------------------------------
> he NEVER paid his
> debt to society. If he honestly saw the error of his ways he would have
> exposed the KKK and used his knowledge of the group to have them
> disbanded and/or arrested. He should have testified against his old
> gang.
------------------------------------
Again:
Was the branch of the KKK that Bird belonged to involved in criminal
activity while he was there? I don't know if that's true or not; if
so however you have a point there.
Hope that helps.
Ok, I'm outta here to the High Sierra Music Festival for the long
weekend - have a great 4th, everyone.
JimK
>On Jun 30, 10:05 pm, Andrew <amur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So you have those articles right there at your desk, but you won't
>> reference them... Names, dates, etc?
>>
>
>I have a washington post article that you can find very easily online
>if you wish. I had Byrd's memoirs which I read a while ago.
>
>> > Next you might want to check the origin server for this post. You
>> > might see that it is owned by Medgar Evers College. We have books and
>> > articles here, not links.
>>
>> No Internet at Medgar Evers College? So, um, how exactly are you
>> posting from there? Either way, perhaps you could post the names of
>> those books and articles which you are referencing so the rest of us
>> living in this century can search for them?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
>Show me where I said I had no internet access, I got my info from
>papers and a book, not a link to salon.com. Got anything to add to the
>conversation or are you just here for absurd usenet technicalities?
>
>Seems for some people, overuse of the internet has rendered them
>unable to have a conversation or an exchange of ideas. FYI "got links"
>is not an idea, nor are strawman arguments like "No internet ..."
>
Book snob.
JimK
Andrew
> On Jun 30, 10:05 pm, Andrew <amur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> So you have those articles right there at your desk, but you won't
>> reference them... Names, dates, etc?
>>
>
> I have a washington post article that you can find very easily online
> if you wish. I had Byrd's memoirs which I read a while ago.
>
>>> Next you might want to check the origin server for this post. You
>>> might see that it is owned by Medgar Evers College. We have books and
>>> articles here, not links.
>> No Internet at Medgar Evers College? So, um, how exactly are you
>> posting from there? Either way, perhaps you could post the names of
>> those books and articles which you are referencing so the rest of us
>> living in this century can search for them?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> Show me where I said I had no internet access,
Well you did say you had no links add Medgar Evers College. I didn't
guess you were talking about the lack of a golf program.
> I got my info from
> papers and a book, not a link to salon.com. Got anything to add to the
> conversation or are you just here for absurd usenet technicalities?
I was hoping that you would add any type of citation for the claims you
are making in the hopes that I might learn more about the topic without
heading down to the already closed library this evening, but clearly you
aren't interested in helping out your readers by providing any evidence
for your claims...
> Seems for some people, overuse of the internet has rendered them
> unable to have a conversation or an exchange of ideas. FYI "got links"
> is not an idea, nor are strawman arguments like "No internet ..."
Where does failing to provide any citation for your statements rank in
your hierarchy regarding "the exchange of ideas"? I have an idea that
you're full of shit, but I'm not gonna to bother citing this here thread
as evidence of my "idea"... Too much trouble.
x...@xxx.com
>> Show me where I said I had no internet access,
>
> Well you did say you had no links add Medgar Evers College. I didn't
> guess you were talking about the lack of a golf program.
>
So y9ou can't show me where I said that, gotcha. Got any opinions?
>
> Where does failing to provide any citation for your statements rank in
> your hierarchy regarding "the exchange of ideas"? I have an idea that
> you're full of shit, but I'm not gonna to bother citing this here
> thread as evidence of my "idea"... Too much trouble.
>
You can look up and verify everything I wrote, feel free to do so and
tell me where I am wrong. Either that or you can be less of an internet
geek and formulate an opinion that isn't someone else's opinion.
Here is a link for you: One of the teachers at the school believes that
Byrd never cut his ties to the klan, his opinion is that Byrd was a full
klan supporter until the 70s when the klan fell apart and splintered
into militias and prison gangs. He believes that he operated with full
support of the klan (and vice versa) until the klan was powerless, broke
and unable to help him anymore.
His strong opposition to the 64 civil rights act and 68 fair housing act
would be his evidence of this. He is currently dissecting Byrd's 14 hour
filibuster of the civil rights act and looking for similarities printed
in klan literature at the time. He thinks it will show that Byrd in 1964
was doing the klan's bidding in the senate. Unfortunately for you, none
of this can be found in links so you might have to wait 10 years for any
conclusions he makes.
Ken Fortenberry
You are wrong in asserting that Robert Byrd owed a debt to society,
as a person never convicted of a crime he owed no such debt. You
are wrong to assert that Robert Byrd had knowledge of criminal
activity, you cannot even state what crimes were committed or who
committed them, much less prove that Byrd had knowledge of them.
Like I said earlier in the thread, you don't know what in the hell
you're talking about. You're just making a lot of noise about vague
nonsense which you cannot prove or verify.
Not that I'd expect anything more from an anonymous screen name that
calls itself Mr. xxx.
--
Ken Fortenberry
x...@xxx.com
> You still don't seem to be getting it. I'm not defending Byrd's
> history and association with in the Klan, which I find to be
> reprehensible. What I'm not buying without supporting evidence,
> however, is your assertion here:
>
> ------------------------------------
>> he NEVER paid his
>> debt to society. If he honestly saw the error of his ways he would
>> have exposed the KKK and used his knowledge of the group to have them
>> disbanded and/or arrested. He should have testified against his old
>> gang.
> ------------------------------------
>
> Again:
>
> Was the branch of the KKK that Bird belonged to involved in criminal
> activity while he was there? I don't know if that's true or not; if
> so however you have a point there.
>
The entire klan was a criminal organization and Byrd was the leader of
the wva branch, so yes he was involved in criminal activity if only by
supporting it financially.
I am applying 1990 legal standards to a 1950 situation, so unless
evidence of criminal activity surfaced he wouldn't be convicted of a
crime. But his membership in the KKK, if viewed by current legal
standards would make him as guilty as it made John Gotti.
My opinion is that his kkk membership was exposed in 1952 during an
election and he minimized his involvement, years later letters surfaced
which show that. I think he admitted to the tip of the iceberg and I
don't believe that a grand cyclops of the kkk can get that position
without proving himself to the kkk with some evil kkk activity.
Hope that helps.
>
> Ok, I'm outta here to the High Sierra Music Festival for the long
> weekend - have a great 4th, everyone.
>
Enjoy
x...@xxx.com
band beyond description <everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote in
>
> I'm not about carrying on with this yada-yada exchange with you beyond
> this post waiting on you to back up your assertion with supporting
> evidence, as requested.
Of course not, you can't formulate an opinion, you can post stuff other
people said and say "what he said" If you don't bother to learn
something on your own, I don't have much interest in your opinion.
> So, was Byrd's Klan branch involved in
> criminal activity while he was there?
Yes it was, the entire klan was a criminal organization and nobody
joined a secret society to fight the commies. If his involvement was
ONLY financial support his branch was financially involved in illegal
klan activity. Since segregation and institutionalized racism were legal
at the time, a lot of what he was doing was racist, yet not illegal
until much later. But the reason people joined the klan was because they
weren't happy with the legal racism, they wanted a secret society and
anonymity in order to perform illegal acts.The minimum, financial
support for the klan, was admitted by Byrd himself. The activities of
the klan at that time (Detroit riots of 43) were well documented and
required financial support from people like Byrd's hooded boy scout
troop.
I'd be curious and would like
> to know, because your assertion, if true, would make for an
> interesting, fact-based element and add value to this conversation
> (rather than you kicking it back at me as if I had some
> "responsibility to disprove" what you assert).
All I told you to do was read Byrd's book. I'm not going to dig through
excerpts for you. You'll find what I found and may have a different
opinion after reading it.
> Like Ray, I don't seek
> to defend Byrd's reprehensible history and association with the Klan,
> just want to ferret out and confirm what you are trying to put out
> there as fact.
>
> Thanks, infundibulum/XXX.
>
Again, read his book and see. The artile below supports some of what I
said by the way.
> By the way, the black Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, whose
> home state is South Carolina of all places (and which I have no doubt
> shaped his world-view on racism issues), had no problem acknowledging
> Byrd's change and redemption; why can't you?
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR20100
> 62803119.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
If I was talking to Eugene Robinson I would be interested in his
opinion, but he's not posting here.
>
> Robert
>
> Byrd: A story of change and redemption
> By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, June 29, 2010; A19
>
> "End of an era" is an overused trope, but in this case it's
> appropriate: The last of the old Southern Democrats is gone.
>
> Sen. Robert Byrd had long since repented, of course. The West
> Virginian, who died Monday at 92, deeply regretted his segregationist
> past, which included a year as a member of the Ku Klux Klan and at
> least several more years as a Klan sympathizer. He eventually became a
> passionate advocate for civil rights, and he was one of the most vocal
> supporters of legislation making the birthday of the Rev. Martin
> Luther King Jr. a national holiday.
>
He accepts byrd's contention that he was involved with the klan for 1
year and later on in the article mentions the letter he wrote 3 years
after he claims to have cut his ties. Obviously I need to write to Mr.
Robinson and ask him to clarify this. Unless you speak for him.
>
> In Byrd's first campaign for the House in 1952, his opponent released
> a letter that Byrd had written to the Klan's imperial wizard in 1946.
> The date is important because Byrd claimed to have cut ties with the
> racist organization -- today we would call it a terrorist group -- in
> 1943. "The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to
> see its rebirth here in West Virginia," Byrd wrote.
>
Otherwise a nice obituary, obviously Robinson wanted to keep a positive
spin on this, following the "wait until he is in the ground" rule.
Nothing in this article that contradicts any of my stated opinions.
Andrew
> [posted and mailed]
>
> band beyond description <everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote in
>> I'm not about carrying on with this yada-yada exchange with you beyond
>> this post waiting on you to back up your assertion with supporting
>> evidence, as requested.
>
> Of course not, you can't formulate an opinion, you can post stuff other
> people said and say "what he said" If you don't bother to learn
> something on your own, I don't have much interest in your opinion.
>
>> So, was Byrd's Klan branch involved in
>> criminal activity while he was there?
>
> Yes it was, the entire klan was a criminal organization and nobody
> joined a secret society to fight the commies. If his involvement was
> ONLY financial support his branch was financially involved in illegal
> klan activity. Since segregation and institutionalized racism were legal
> at the time, a lot of what he was doing was racist, yet not illegal
> until much later.
So it was illegal activity, even though it was legal at the time...
Gotcha... You're making a ton of sense in this thread.
Got any opinions on barbershops playing music?
Neil X
> "Neil X" <nei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:a1766952-2a9c-4ca0...@k39g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > octoad wrote:
>
> >> Well, Thurmond spawned a child with some black babe, so he walked some
> >> kind
> >> of walk too.
> > What kind of walk was that?
>
> A bowlegged one?
>
> >> As for political expediency, remaining openly racist in W. Virginia, a
> >> truly
> >> backward place loaded with gritty coal miners and toothless dirt farmers,
> >> would seem to me to have been more expedient for the vast majority of
> >> Byrd's
> >> tenure than it would have been being some kind of n****r lover.
> > WVa is not North or South Carolina. It's a Democrat state through and
> > through. By 1970, being openly racist was not something a Democrat
> > could be. His political career in WVa depended on him making nice
> > with minorities. Again, I'm not saying that's why he did what he did,
> > but remaining openly hostile to blacks was going to be political
> > suicide.
>
> Goodness gracious, how quickly we forget.
>
> In 1972, 2 years after you claim being a racist was "political suicide" in
> Democratic politics, George Wallace won primaries in Florida (winning every
> single county), North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, MARYLAND, and MICHIGAN.
> Busing was a HUGE issue. Before he was shot down during the campaign, he'd
> garnered 23.5% of the total primary vote. He was on a roll when he was shot
> too, just having won Michigan, and winning Maryland after he was gunned
> down.
Wallace is exhibit in for my point. Yep, he was able to garner
something under a quarter of the Democratic vote in the primaries.
That is exactly the problem.
Peace,
Neil X.
Andrew
He was also pulling between a quarter and a third of the black vote in
Alabama throughout the 70s, and even pulled 90% of the black vote in his
final election... So being a racist wasn't necessarily even political
suicide amongst the group you were racist against.
The duality of the southern thing, and all that...
JimK
wrote:
>[posted and mailed]
>
>band beyond description <everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote in
>>
>> I'm not about carrying on with this yada-yada exchange with you beyond
>> this post waiting on you to back up your assertion with supporting
>> evidence, as requested.
>
>Of course not, you can't formulate an opinion, you can post stuff other
>people said and say "what he said" If you don't bother to learn
>something on your own, I don't have much interest in your opinion.
>
Unless you have first-hand personal knowledge of a subject, isn't
forming an opinion based on what other people say or write the only
way possible? Did you know Robert Byrd personally, or is your
knowledge of him derived from what you've read in your books and
articles? If so, aren't you basing your opinion on "what he said"? And
are you saying that one can't learn something unless they look it up
themselves, as opposed to having it brought to their attention by
someone else? You seem to have a curious concept of learning.
<snip>
JimK
JimK
>
So you're basing your opinion on what someone else believes? Can't you
think for yourself?
JimK
octoad
************************************************************
Huh?
You claimed Byrd moved from Klanism to civil rights lover out of political
expediency, even going so far as to say that by 1970 being a racist was
"political suicide" in the Democratic Party. Yet in 1972, George Wallace
got a quarter of the total Democrat primary vote despite being shot down and
forced to withdraw barely halfway into the process. At the time he was
shot he had just won that bastion of the KKK, the state of Michigan, and won
Maryland after he was shot. He didn't compete in any further primaries, yet
he got less than a percent fewer total primary votes than did the eventual
nominee, McGovern, who of course finished the entire process. Busing was a
HUGE issue at the time, and if Wallace hadn't been shot, who knows how many
more non-southern states he would have won? After all, he did win every
single county in Florida, even the ones with all the old Jews and lots of
blacks.
I have no idea why Byrd changed his stripes, but it clearly wasn't because
being considered a racist was "political suicide" in the Democratic Party at
the time.
BTW, how's that booming economic recovery working out? (since I have your
attention I thought I'd just drop into this topic right here). I thought
that those six people your company hired heralded the end of double digit
unemployment and the return of millions of high paying jobs. But of course
tomorrow we will probably find out that the country lost jobs in June,
ending the 5 straight months of anemic job gains. Europe remains a
ginormous problem, the housing market continues to get worse with no end in
the downslide even in sight yet, manufacturing growth is slowing, the stock
market has been plummeting for months, and all of that is causing consumer
confidence to go in the tank, thereby reducing spending.
Hell, even China is pulling back because of the teetering world situation.
Financial reform is now in doubt in Congress thanks to Byrd's death, which
could mean that absolutely nothing will be done to prevent future financial
collapses. Even if it does pass the bill is so weak as to only delay
another disaster for a few more years as Wall St figures out ways to
manuever around it.
I still think we will see a slow, weak recovery, but there is no way that
unemployment will go below 8 or 9% in the next year, and maybe not for many
years. A while back I wrote about the economy being weighed down by all the
dough wasted in trading and leveraging by our financial institutions, well,
hows about that record 1.5 trillion dollars now being hoarded by
non-financial corporations in the US? They are scared to death about the
banks, the world financial situation, and government policy possibilities.
So instead of hiring people, they're sitting on mountains of money, waiting.
The rich are hitting record levels of wealth, banks and corporations have
more money than ever, yet few are adding any jobs at all.
You can't have a solid recovery, complete with good high paying jobs, if
companies are cowering in fear and acting like Scrooges. The fact that
millions of state and local government employees are and will be losing
their jobs over the next couple of years isn't exactly going to be helping
the unemployment rate either...............
Times are tough, and times are going to remain tough, 6 gene splicers
notwithstanding.
O
x...@xxx.com
band beyond description <everybody's.d...@that.rag.com> wrote in
news:8945cp...@mid.individual.net:
>>
>> Nothing in this article that contradicts any of my stated opinions.
>
>
> oh, so now you're "lower-case xxx/infundibulum" screen name. unless
> you now also work for the Southern Poverty Law Center and are able to
> stop utilizing this toilet-swirl argumentative form of reasoning, I'm
> done here.
You were done when you proved you were incapable of an exchange of ideas
without "links". Try this link ... www.google.com
x...@xxx.com
JimK <jkez...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:7shp26dr9prpnkmo3...@4ax.com:
You seem to be arguing with a voice in your head, got an idea or an
original thought to add to this? You don't help your causes when you
defend them like an idiot. Do you require that I post my own opinions or
link you to other people's? So far you seem to have an emptyheaded
response to both.
JimK
wrote:
What are your "opinions" based on? Did you conjure them out of thin
air?
JimK