Democratic bigotry in denouncing the "Southern Strategy"

[Scylla]

“The Houston Review - A conservative student monthly serving the Houston area.” From thier front page.

You’re kidding, right?

Somehow I doubt Krugmam is going to go into detail about Democratic racism.

I don’t see how the fact that they are conservative invalidates them.

If you wish to take issue with the cite do it by demonstrating its factual errors, if it has any.

[elucidator]

Just on a hunch, I went over to the Free Republic web site, known affectionately amongst the sane as the Freepers. Seems they have a poster named Scylla as well. Isn’t that just the darndest coincidence?

[Scylla]

*Originally posted by elucidator *
**Just on a hunch, I went over to the Free Republic web site, known affectionately amongst the sane as the Freepers. Seems they have a poster named Scylla as well. Isn’t that just the darndest coincidence? **

Yes, it is. I have no knowledge or connection with them that I’m aware of, and I do not post there under this or any other name.

What does this have to do with anything?

[Sterra]

Certainly that link contains what I consider homophobic material. But now I’m confused. Is there or is there not an overt ban on homosexuals?

Similarly is there or is there not an overt ban on interracial dating?

Yes, but it isin’t on their website. I linked earlier the ad they bought in defense of banning interracial dating.

Their religious beliefs are ok, because it’s not up to me or you to judge. These are consenting adults going to the school of their choice to learn the tenets of their religion as they see fit.

No matter how repulsive, wrongheaded, or ignorant you and I may find them, they should not be persecuted.

I agree that they should not be persecuted, but I don’t believe that that makes their beliefs ok.

Similarly, I don’t know what Dubya’s intentions were when he spoke at BJU.

It is unwise to assume them.

I can’t know Dubya’s intentions, but in a political campaign it isin’t so unwise to assume that his intentions are to win. Similarly I assume that when Bush associates himself with a college like BJU his intentions are to appeal to people who would approve of the school.

Can we assume that they’re anti-semites, because they didn’t condemn anti-semitism when they met with Sharpton?

Possibly. Though the idea that he is actually an anti-semite seems to come from the fact that he did street demonstrations in a Jewish neighborhood. I could not find any evidence that he actually is an anti-semite. Al Gores example is probably a much better example of racism.

[Scylla]

Sterra:

Possibly. Though the idea that he is actually an anti-semite seems to come from the fact that he did street demonstrations in a Jewish neighborhood. I could not find any evidence that he actually is an anti-semite.

He’s been cited with anti-semitic remarks as well.

Al Gores example is probably a much better example of racism.

Honestly, I don’t think it’s an example of anything. All I have is a link that says there is such a case.

But, the capacity to build a smear is there. Clinton has links to two major Arkansas segregationists both of which he’s spoken glowingly of in recent years, and one he awarded a medal too. Al Gore’s dad is another segregationist.

We could do a Star Trek thing “Democratic racism: The Next Generation”

Look at his attack on Sistah Soldjah, and his backstabbing of JJ and the rainbow coalition. Combine that with Al Gore’s lawsuit (sure looks like pandering to racists to get votes, don’t it) talk a little bit about Byrds high ranking positions in the Senate, and you got a nice big juicy smear campaign suggesting that there’s a pattern of bigotry and pandering in the highest levels of the Democratic party.

Then, I could run with this bag of shit, pretending it proves something.

I just don’t beleive it, though. The fact is if you look hard enough for something you can generally construct it. All it proves is your agenda.

[Scylla]

Just looking at out of curiosity and this Gore thing has more substantiation implicating Clinton as well:

http://www.mugu.com/pipermail/upstream-list/2000-August/000115.html

http://www.alamanceind.com/newfol~1/algore_23.html

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/secretservice000830.html (that AL Gore would allow this kind of thing to occur in his presence is interesting.

[GIGObuster]

I see Scylla is just throwing more smoke screens.

I think Josh Marshall hits the nail in the head:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

We’ll be saying more about the particular fooleries, dishonesties and tendentiousness involved in these arguments. But for the moment, let’s note a broader assumption that underlies almost all of them. That is the premise that there is a basic equality between appeals to racism and charges of racism. It’s a equation which is as morally vacant as it is logically flawed.

Of course, when Republicans play race politics conservatives seldom even concede that that’s what’s being done. But for the sake of argument let’s assume more conservatives were candid enough to admit that George Bush’s visit to Bob Jones University was a play to race politics. That would be playing the race card. And Democrats calling him on it would also be playing the race card.

This doesn’t mean that Democrats can do no wrong on race or that they can’t on sometimes egregiously step over the line. (Stephen F. Hayes has an example of Jesse Jackson doing this, in a new article in the Weekly Standard which, I’m sorry to say, wholly buys into the equation above.) They can. And false or overstated charges of racism are wrong and damaging. But calling people on their bias, their playing to racist sentiment, or their indifference to the consequences of racism isn’t ‘playing the race card.’ If it is, then the phrase is meaningless.

For conservatives who have a hard time grasping the difference, try the HRASST, the Honest Republican’s Anti-Semitism Substitution Test. If a certain politician makes an anti-semitic statement or appeals to an anti-semitic constituency and then the ADL calls them on it, are both sides playing the anti-semitism card? Of course, not. Only the foolish and the immoral would say so.

Or as long as we’re taking the HRASST topic out for a spin, if a given politician gives an interview to a magazine known to espouse anti-semitic views, is that okay? Is it a sufficient answer to say that you don’t happen to agree with their anti-semitism but you give interviews to a lot of magazines? I doubt that would cut it.

Try the HRASST out. It’s great at cutting through a lot of malarkey.

[DMC]

*Originally posted by Scylla *
**Not to mention good old Marion Barry

“Civil rights do not apply to white people.”

Al Sharpton’s “I am in hell. I’m in Israel.”

JJ’s “Hymietown.”

And if actions speak louder than words

Philly Mayor John Street to an all black audience “The Brothers and Sisters are in charge now!!!”

Cynthia McKinney and her father’s execrable comments.**

Okay, we have low level politicians, some party sideliners, and someone’s dad. If you want to make the pool that big, I don’t have to leave my own county to come up with a list of racist Republicans that long.

California Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante with his occasional “slip of the toungue” when he calls black people Niggers.

Big mistake. He might very well even be a racist. Of course, if you’re going to be anti-black, but your voting record shows lots of support for black needs, he’s at least a racist who helps those he despises. Personally, based on his actions, I think he’s an idiot who needs to watch himself, but not a racist. Either way, we’ve got one semi-high up the food chain politician, who no one has ever heard of outside of his state until the blunder.

How about the law suit filed by black secret service agents against Al Gore after this past presidential campaign. Al reportedly told them to stay away from him so they wouldn’t appear with him in photographs. No. That’s not pandering.

Nope, that’s not what the lawsuit is about. There is a discrimination lawsuit, but even the plaintiff’s lawyer says “neither President Clinton nor Vice President Al Gore were involved in the alleged discrimination.”

http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/02/24/secret.service/
**

Like I said in the OP, it happens in both parties. This is why I don’t think specific examples prove anything. It’s selection. You can find all you want.**

It does indeed happen in both parties. In fact, a large number of Democrats in the south are probably racist. Most of them are jokingly referred to here as closet Republicans (Mary Landrieu, for instance, differs from Republicans mainly in her semi-pro-choice stance, but little else). There’s a difference between having a few racists in your ranks, and having an actual agenda that is designed to appeal to racist voters. Neither are good, but the second is downright evil. To be fair, I’ll happily denounce the atrocious behavior of the Democratic party back in the Dixiecrat days. Those were some vile people.

It is just the height of ignorance to blindly search for one parties infractions selectively, post them, and claim that they represent that party.

When the party has had an actual strategy that was based on these infractions, they DO represent the party. I’m willing to admit that they seem to be trying to get away from that strategy and I don’t believe the GWB is personally a racist, but you don’t show your desire to change by speaking at BJU and wrapping yourself in the confederate flag.

[minty_green]

Oh good god, the Secret Service lawsuit? That is supposed to be an example of Democratic bigotry? That’s not even laughable, it’s just stupid. What’s next in the propaganda campaign, going after the relatives of Democratic politicians?

Oh, wait. Bill McKinney. You’re still babbling about that, aren’t you? Never mind.

[elucidator]

As much as it pains me, Minty, I must disagree. Citing the Secret Service lawsuit is laughable.

And Scylla is not babbling. He is merely demonstrating, once again and strictly for the purposes of our edification and instruction, how not to conduct rational debate.

[Scylla]

*Originally posted by minty green *
**Oh good god, the Secret Service lawsuit? That is supposed to be an example of Democratic bigotry? **

No. It’s disturbing. Gore reportedly told black secret service agents to stay away because he didn’t want them to be photographed with him. He sat there in the company of racist jokes and did nothing about it.

Laughable and stupid would be making an issue of BJU. This was during campaign, and if you’ll recall from “Journeys with George” George had little if any control over his itinery, and he made the exact same speech several times a day. Somedays he would stop in 6-7 places and make the speech.

Stopping there might have been and outright attempt at pandering by his campaign manager, but it might simply have been a mistake, a place between important destinations with the promise of a large crowd.

You don’t know. You just assume you know.

---

But anyway, I sense a trend. When Democrats do it, it’s ridiculous and stupid to talk about it because it indicates nothing.

When Republicans do it, it’s very important because it’s part of a pattern.

:rolleyes:

[Scylla]

*Originally posted by minty green *
**Oh, wait. Bill McKinney. You’re still babbling about that, aren’t you? Never mind. **

I believe that’s the first time I mentioned it.

[minty_green]

*Originally posted by Scylla *
**No. It’s disturbing. Gore reportedly told black secret service agents to stay away because he didn’t want them to be photographed with him. He sat there in the company of racist jokes and did nothing about it.

You’re lying again. Your sources say no such things.

No. Such. Things.

[Scylla]

For Minty, who’s quick to call others a liar on the thinnest of grounds in an egregious attempt to discredit me:

From the first cite on the issue:

"Democrat Vice-President Al Gore ordered Black Secret Service agents to stay away from him during his Presidential campaign so they wouldn’t appear with him in photographs, according to a lawsuit filed by Black Secret Service agents. "

From the final:

"Attorney Ron Schmidt said black agents assigned to protect Gore complained about the racial atmosphere on the detail, but the agency would not divulge its report on the complaints. "

But apparently the racial jokes were in the company of Marilyn Quayle, so you’re right on that part.

Now apologize sincerely for calling me a liar, please.

[minty_green]

Incidentally, if anyone still thinks Trent Lott got unfairly screwed for his comments about Strom Thurmond’s 1948 presidential campaign, check out the pro-Thurmond “Official Democratic Ticket” at the link below. In case there’s any question what Thurmond stood for in 1948, there’s this lovely reminder:

REMEMBER

A vote for Truman electors is a direct order to our Congreemen and Senators from Mississippi to vote for passage of Truman’s so-called civil-rights program in the next Congress. That means the vicious FEPC–anti-poll tax–anti-lynching and anti-segregation proposals will become the law of the land and our way of life in the South will be gone forever.

If you FAIL to VOTE you are in fact casting a vote for Truman and his vicious anti-Southern program.

Get in the Fight for STATES’ RIGHTS – Fight for THURMOND and WRIGHT – Be Sure to Vote on NOVEMBER 2nd – and Vote the STRAIGHT OFFICIAL DEMOCRATIC TICKET

Good riddance to bad rubbish, I say.

[Scylla]

Good riddance to bad rubbish, I say.

Absolutely. Got rid of him just in time. We didn’t make him Majority Leader, nor did we make him President Pro Tempore.

The Democratic record on dealing with their bigots is not so good by comparison. Byrd is the word.

Maybe Clinton can give him a medal. That seems to be the Dem way of dealing with its bigots.

[minty_green]

Crap, missed the link: http://mshistory.k12.ms.us/features/feature7/ms_demo_ballot.html

Scylla, I will apologize for missing your initial cite re: the photographs, but not on the racial jokes. Your willingness to misstate the facts when it suits your purposes in this thread leaves me not in a mood to forgive on that one.

Plus, quit with the bloody useless blog cites. Good god, you can find a blog to prove anything, and they’re all equally useless. Primary sources and legitimate news organizations only, please. Though I realize that will put a significant dent in your ability to continue posting in this thread. Sheesh, we cite CNN, you cite web loonies. WTF?

Off to find out if the lawsuit alleges any such thing re: the photography, which I strongly suspect it does not, since no news source I can find makes the slightest mention of it–and even an unsupported allegation in a lawsuit would have been big freakin’ news.

[minty_green]

*Originally posted by Scylla *
Absolutely. Got rid of him just in time. We didn’t make him Majority Leader, nor did we make him President Pro Tempore.

Jeez, I thought Strom was happily encamped in your party for the last 40 years or so, even as President Pro Tempore. You mean he’s been a Democrat all this time? 'Fraid I’m gonna have to ask for a cite on that one, honey chile.

[Scylla]

Minty:

Your willingness to misstate the facts when it suits your purposes in this thread leaves me not in a mood to forgive on that one

You can stick that where the son don’t shine. You come after me for every little misstatement, yet your absolutely silent on Sparticus’ shit. You support every slam and slander on Republicans no matter how thinly stretched, and complain about the quality when I return the favor to demonstrate a smear campaign can work both ways.

You’ve repeatedly ignored requests to make a studied analysis of the data, but continue to post bullshit single incidents as if they’ve proved the larger.

You’ve sat there quietyly while Elucidator coyly accuses me of being a troll from another board.

Now you try to impugn not based on their content but because you don’t like where they come from.

You employ a double standard when examining incidents. Every Republican slight or perceived slight is proof of a pattern, while every Democratic one is somehow an exception.

You’r transparent hypocrisy is getting old, but that’s your business. Your attempts at high-handed moralizing go to far, when you jump out and call me a “liar,” at the least innacuracy.

In 11 pages I have posted two things that were incorrect. When pointed out I corrected them immediately in the following posts.

To this you respond:

"Your willingness to misstate the facts when it suits your purposes in this thread leaves me not in a mood to forgive on that one. "

When you’re in the mood to act like a decent human being without seeing the need to cast aspersions at the barest opportunity, come back apologize and we’ll talk.

Until then why don’t you do what you said you would do 5 pages or so and go talk to December, because he didn’t lie like me?

Why didn’t you do that? Could it be that that was a lie?

Take your double standard hypocrisy and self-righteoussness and step off.

[minty_green]

Hmm, nope, nothing about Al Gore nixing photos with black Secret Service agents anywhere in this long story from the Washington Post about the lead plaintiff and his claims. I’ll keep looking, but it doesn’t look promising. So far, I’m still of the conclusion that Scylla is simply repeating someone else’s lie on the Al Gore photography thing.