I’ve been away and haven’t been watching US news, BUT, as a born-and-bred “Southerner” (geographically and physically, if nothing else), I thought Strom Thurmond’s daughter was the first good thing I’ve ever heard about him. She’s smart, polite, and chose to lie for him. Her picture should be under “loyalty to family” in the dictionary. Unless it goes under “self-respect.”
BTW, I heard about his “black” daughter in law school. That’s the worst kept secret – ever.
I liked what Jon Stewart had to say about it on The Daily Show: for Strom Thurmond to have such a gracious daughter as Essie Mae Washington-Williams, “it proves sometimes the apple doesn’t just fall far from the tree, it falls on the other side of the world from the tree.”
Now, if everyone would look to the left, you’ll see a not-so-rare example of a drivebyum postica, more commonly known as a Drive-By Post. Please note the lack of plummage, as scavengers tend to hide in the background and feast on the scraps left by the larger hunters.
I gained a shred of respect for Strom Thurmond. He managed to compartmentalize his relationship with his daughter to, eh?, do the right thing. A little?
Put more clearly, if it turned out he was lying about some of his early views – for him – that’s a plus. He later claimed to represent people of “all races and creeds.”
Given the famous soundbite which explains what he thought about the ???(?) race in 1948, It’s hard to reconcile his views. Hypocrisy to some degree is almost universal. If he took sufficient care of his daughter – which he apparently did – kudos to him, rankest hypocrite though he was.
Importantly, we should not forget, he was a real racist in both a functional or formal sense. He was in a position of authority and did what he could to use it to advance racist policies. But, good to his daughter. As I love irony and paradox, this is wonderful! At least Strom finished on the side of the good guys, if you take him at his word.
Those that claimed to “defend”? the honor of Strom quoted in the OP do him a great injustice. Oh well. She’s there, and probably smarter than you. Fucking deal with it.
To be clear, any Archie-Bunker-type can spout crap, where Strom put his money where his mouth was. OTOH, I tend to believe his conversion in later years a bit more. Perhaps that was God’s punishment to Strom – giving him such a wonderful but “scandalous” daughter. There is nothing like an object lesson to make one realize that a philosophy is garbage, that is, if one is capable of learning.
Oh, for goodness sake, no one here was defending Strom Thurmond—where in the world did you get that idea? We were trying to give an even break to his family, which is a very different thimg.
Do you want to be judged for things your father—or your great-uncle—did?
Check that again.
I was talking about those “quoted in the OP”. That would be the nimrods in the family or the church that said it was a shame, or whatever.
I tried to make it clear that I was going back and disagreeing with shit like this:
That’s pretty clear to me. YMMV. Hint: they aren’t talking about his sleeping with a 16 year old.
[bolding mine]
Fuck them. That would have been a great chance to tell those people to “fuck off.”
Why not invite the relatives that covered your (Strom’s white family) pampered asses for so many years over for a picnic?
Ah—OK.
Though I would have bolded “because public criticism would not have been as harsh” rather than “had the secret daughter been white, it would be a whole other situation.”
Possibly. But out of context, that could also very well mean that his shame is due to his father keeping it a secret for so long. There is nothing explicit or pretty clear there in the least.
I’m with Eve on this. In fact, the statement itself looks suspicious because, for whatever reason, the reporter thought it necessary to include seven whole words that were actually said and paraphrase the rest. I think it’s reasonable to guess that the meaning is that public criticism would not have been as harsh had the daughter been white, and therefore it would have been a different situation. One situation — less criticism. Other situation — more criticism. Different situations, just like the person said.
Well, as long as he isn’t out nailing the coolies…
They are family and on equal footing, whether the “white” family can deal with themselves, their hero, their friends, or the church they attend.
I should have bolded “white”, true.
How long was this woman supposed to keep her secret? That’s the argument from the family. It should have been handled privately. 78 years is not long enough? The only “shame” is in rejecting newly found family for old (not) friends.
That would be shameful if it were the case.
But as Eve has been pointing out from the get-go, people are spinning the little snippet that the OP said was in the New York Times article the way they please without any evidence that they are spinning it the way it actually was said.
The fact of the matter is that Essie has not been rejected by the family. The snippet quoted seven words from one family member, a niece named Mary Thompkins Freeman, that knee-jawed people are interpreting to mean that she is ashamed of Essie’s mother’s race. But it is entirely possible that what Mary is ashamed of is her uncle’s part in producing an illegitimate child — of any race.
The same article, which I found at a non-subscription site, and which is cited below, contained a quote from another of Thurmond’s nieces, Ellen Senter. The OP did not provide us this information. I had to track it down.
I don’t see why it cannot be the case that the other niece has the same problem that this niece has, namely, being ashamed of the man’s trist. Ellen obviously thinks highly Essie. Maybe Mary does too.
In fact, Strom Thurmond, Jr. has called for a meeting of the entire extended family so they can get to know one another. He has stated that he wants to establish a relationship with his half-sister. The family had immediately acknowledged the validity of Essie’s claim, without any sort of challenge, in a public press release.
I realize that it might seem odd that the family could be ashamed of their uncle in an era when presidents are jacking off on their interns’ dresses, but these are old people with old values. Trying to interpret what they’re feeling through the lens of an entirely different mind-set is just plain stupid.
As for Essie, it is not inconceivable that she is releasing this “news” (it has been common knowledge to a lot of people for many years) for the purpose of financial gain. She is presently looking to sell her story. Her attorney has already met with film producers, TV executives, and a book publisher.
There isn’t anything at all in the family’s reaction that is objectively racist. The charges of racism are being made by people who are assuming that the whole family is racist based on Thurmond’s own early political career. The charges are baseless, mean-spirited, and ignorant.
Cites:
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/7539431.htm
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/news/7542645.htm
http://michnews.com/artman/publish/article_2037.shtml
http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=1186
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world/view/62642/1/.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/12/16/state0302EST0003.DTL
Libertarian and I, standing side by side, in defense of Strom Thurmond’s family.
. . . The end times are upon us.
You know, it just occured to me, that the ultimate kicker would have been if his illegitimate daughter was also a lesbian.
You know what the very worst of all this is?
It means that jackass Belowjob was at least partially right!
I tried to limit my criticism to what was quoted. The NYT, spinmeisters?! :o Fell for it again. Doh. If it wasn’t free to register, I’d cancel my subscription.
One clue I always look for is a mixture of quotes and paraphrases — pockets of partial quotes within commentary. This fairly screams that the context could have been altered. For example:
Beagle Expresses support for the New York Times
In a stunning development today, Beagle endorsed the New York Times. Fondly refering to it as “The NYT”, he said that any criticism he might have is limited, and that, as an added bonus, it is “free to register”.
Lib, your point is well taken, but I feel like you’re ignoring some obvious things in order to give benefit of the doubt. If I was hanging out with a friend who said, “gee, my uncle was just discovered to have an illigitimate child, and as if that wasn’t burden enough, she’s black,” my jaw would drop. And that, in effect, is what I understand is said when I put together:
<i>I went to a church meeting the other day and all these people came up to me and you could tell they didn’t know what to say. . . For the first time in my life, I felt shame."</i>
and
<i>Ms. Freeman also said that had the secret daughter been white, “it would be a whole other situation,” because public criticism would not have been as harsh.</i>
You say, Lib:
Well, there are other “old” values that aren’t so wonderful. Are you saying I should judge them by Gov. Faubus’ of Gov. Wallace’s values instead of Clinton’s? Would that be less stupid?
But this…
Ms. Freeman also said that had the secret daughter been white, “it would be a whole other situation,” because public criticism would not have been as harsh
…can be read as an attack on race based criticism, especially in light of all the other evidence. Ms. Freeman is saying that the public criticism is harsher on account of the daughter being black. She is not talking about her own criticism of Essie, but of people who are criticising the family — i.e., the real racists.