Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by LadyEagle, Jan 14, 2003.
How true. How true.
Thanks for the information.
It seems double standardism is a snow-ball, which only rolls on one side.
...and Trent Lott had to resign? You're right, there is a double standard. Rick Sr.
Wouldn't it be even if we just keep Byrd from being speaker? Lott wasn't asked to leave congress or anything like that, just not to be speaker any more
Well, Lott was not a member of a group that kills people. He made a stupid comment, he did not join the Klan. Really people, there is a difference.
Double standard indeed.
The right speaks out against racism in Byrd and Lott.
The left only against Lott.
The line that racism is okay in senators as long as they're not the speaker is ridiculous and lame left wing spin.
Jesse Jackson got away with calling Jews "Hymies."
Imagine if he'd been a Republican.
I see where Byrd will be in an upcoming movie where he portrays a slave-owning southern Civil War general.
Not word from anyone.
Imagine if this had been Lott.
Anyone who thinks the uproar from the left would not have been deafening is a fool.
There is indeed a double standard.
I saw on Fox where conservative authors get the cold shoulder from most publishers claiming that it is a business decision.
The story should also have pointed out that the Clintons got 7 mill for a book that hasn't even been written yet.
And that Al Gore's new book barely sold.
So much for business decisions.
Sales were so poor that he apparently took it as a sign that he did not have enough support in his bid for president and dropped out.
I'm not trying to pick an argument with you, Brother, but I saw the video where Senator Lott made his comment, and I don't think that I would call it a stupid comment. It honestly looked like he was just joking around, not genuinely serious. The worst thing that that I could say about that comment is that it was a joke that went over like a pork chop in a synagogue.
Now really, in my own way of thinking, I believe that Senator Lott's comment was correct. Strom Thurmond was running against Harry Truman, in 1948, and it is a matter or record that the Truman administration was infested with Communist opperatives (most noted of all - Alger Hiss). The Korean War (a war fought against Communist aggression) happened on the Truman watch and with Communists opperating at the executive level of our government, what chance did we have of winning that war? My guess is that the outcome of that war would have been drastically different with Strom Thurmond at the helm. I believe that fewer U.S. servicemen, including Black ones, would have died in that campaign.
I, too, saw the video and I agree with you. Really, the only reason I worded it that way was to keep it short.
Looking back on it, I'm sure that he thinks it was stupid to say too. After all, he knows that the liberals are always waiting to pick apart everything that the conservatives say.
You are right though. It was not a stupid comment, but he should have known that it would be perceived as one by the lefties. Therefore, whether the actual comment was stupid or not, it turned into one. OR, rather the left-wing turned it into one.
God Bless. Bro. James
P.S. I don't think anyone, left or right, should pick apart everything said by anyone like this, whether J. Jackson, Byrd, or Lott. People get so torn up over little harmless comments made by people.
Sure, I've used the "n" word a few times, but does that make me a racist? No, because the word has been spoken in my family and most families that I was raised around. It was never intended to be a racist remark, just part of speech. That is the word that grandma grew up calling them, and it was not offensive to them then, so why should it be now?
In twenty years, they'll say we can't call them black because that is racist. Well, as far as I'm concerned, they can call me honky and I can call them black. It is not offensive on either side, it is just part of our language.
I read on a post on another thread that we can't call people from Mexico Mexicans. What are they then? Hispanics was the answer. Well, in that case, I'm not an American, I'm an Anglo-saxon. Really people, aren't there more important things that need to be dealt with besides our speech?
I don't want to get into the very real problem of Communist infiltration of the Executive Branch during the 40's and early 50's.
What gets my goat is Senator Lott forgot who surrendered to whom at Appomatox. Senator Thurmond at the time of his Presidental campaign was running on a Jefferson Davis platform. In his remarks, Senator Lott betrayed the memory of Abraham Lincoln who fought to keep the Union together.
[the Squire goes his way quietly whistleing a medley of "Marching Through Georgia", "John Brown's Body", "Rally 'Round the Flag, Boys"...]
I am a fan of Honest Abe also. In almost any civil war, the vanquished will almost surely suffer a blood bath at the end of the conflict. Because of Mr. Lincoln, it did not happen following the American Civil War. Had Mr. Lincoln been around in 1948, I suspect that he would have endorsed the Dixiecrat candidate; after all, he had the band strike up "Dixie" during his second inaugural ceremony.
On a serious note, I think that the president torpedoed Senator Lott because the senator had recently stated that he was in favor of sending troops to patrol the Mexican border, and he had also remarked that he would like to proceed with a bill to ban partial-birth abortions. An abortion ban is only something to talk favorably for vote-getting purposes - not something our president really wants.
Well, first of all, Lincoln was not even around at the end of the Civil War. He had already been assassinated.
Secondly, I believe the President didn't back Lott for one reason. Lott told the media that they were going to write a bill to end partial birth abortion. He then said that the President was going to sign it.
The President didn't like this too much. Not the bill, but being told what to do. This is why he didn't back Lott.
Of course we are drifting away from the topic of Senator Byrd's KKK involvement, but Bro. Reed, you need to know that Lincoln died six days after Lee's surrender. Lee surrendered on April 9, 1865, and Lincoln died on April 15, 1865. He obviously wasn't around to oversee the implementation of his post-war policies but, Andrew Johnson was, and he was impeached because (in keeping with Abe's wishes) he refused to punish the South.
I wish I could speak more highly of our Texas president but, he is just another New World Order guy. Texas does have a really good man in congress, and he could possibly be your congressman - Ron Paul - but Bush just isn't very impressive as a conservative.