Virginia gov. yearbook page has Klan and blackface pictures

[spifflog]

@asahi

I accept that Northam is not a racist today, and as far as we know, he might never have been a racist. It doesn’t really matter; the offense is still serious enough that he needs to resign for the good of the Commonwealth. . . .

Let’s step back and consider this: it’s a blatantly racist photograph, not in his high school yearbook picture, not even in his college fraternity yearbook picture, but his medical school yearbook. He’s about to enter the professional world, and he thought somehow that this was acceptable to participate in. We’re talking about knowingly, willingly participating in a picture that makes light of an organization that murdered black people by the thousands from 1866 - 1979. I doubt that it’s the case that he had no say at all in what photographs he got ‘tagged’ in. He presumably thought it was okay, that it’s just a joke, and that it’s funny and doesn’t matter. He’s just edgy, politically incorrect, I guess.

We all agree that it’s a disgusting, offensive photo. And I’m on the fence, but I think he probably needs to go. It goes without saying that if he condones that today he’s a racist tool that needs to booted from office today. But . . .

I’m a 56 year old man. And I’m certain that I did something, said something or was tangentially evolved in something 25 to 35 years ago that by today’s standards would be offense. But things change, and social mores change. And I’m very uncomfortable that we are going to bring out actions from 35, 45, 55? years ago, judge them by today’s standards and take action on them.

While I live in Virginia now, I don’t know much about the Governor, but I haven’t heard him being racist before now. Do his actions over the last 35 years, provided they were progressive and honest, trump the photo?

In short, are we all certain that we haven’t done anything over the last 35 years that would be judged differently today? What are we doing now that our grandchildren will look askance at us for in 40 years? Because you can be certain that some things that we condone now will look like hell in 40 years.

[SlackerInc]

@RTFirefly

You are repeating what one might call the organized, deliberate hysterics of the pro-lifers.

No. This is about suburban moderates who aren’t thrilled about first trimester abortion but don’t believe it should be outlawed. I am not a suburban moderate per se, but I share their deep skepticism about second and third trimester abortion, and I believe you should only be able to get one if you get past a serious medical ethics panel, as is the case in my grandmother’s homeland of Ireland.

[Thudlow_Boink]

@asahi

My point is that Northam apparently felt comfortable posing either as, or with, someone dressed up in Klan garb, and at minimum, consenting to said photo being used in a medical school yearbook.

Or not. What he’s now saying is that he’s not in that photo and hadn’t seen it before Friday.

[Fenris]

@asahi

A bigger nightmare would be if, in the face of a growing Democratic chorus to have him resign, he decides to switch parties and become a Republican. It’s not like the Republicans wouldn’t at least partially support him.

That is a remarkably stupid argument. You’re attacking the Republicans for something they haven’t done yet? What if Democrats murdered all the babies and fed them to their Lizardmen masters? That would be what’s worse than the Republicans accepting a racist. So Democrats are worse Nyah-nyah.

Protip: posts work better if they’re based in reality.

[Riemann]

I’m just left totally mystified by all this.

Let alone the original events, do we any even have any kind of remotely plausible or coherent account of Northam’s actions over the past 48 hours? How on earth is it possible that he initially conceded that it’s him in the photo if it’s not?

[Fretful_Porpentine]

@Riemann

I’m just left totally mystified by all this.

Let alone the original events, do we any even have any kind of remotely plausible or coherent account of Northam’s actions over the past 48 hours? How on earth is it possible that he initially conceded that it’s him in the photo if it’s not?

This is what I keep trying to wrap my head around, and coming to the conclusion that the only really plausible explanation is pretty damning for Northam: the photo is of him and he knew it, he initially calculated that he could weather this particular political storm by acknowledging it and apologizing, discovered from the reactions to his statement on Friday that people still overwhelmingly wanted him to resign, and hastily backtracked with a now-very-unbelievable denial.

I can imagine a less damning version of events (Northam hears on Friday that someone has dug up a photo of him in blackface, remembers dressing up as Michael Jackson and leaps to the conclusion that this is the photo in question, issues his statement without actually seeing the photo, and is then subsequently horrified to discover that it’s a different, far more offensive, picture of which he has no memory) – but it makes no sense that Northam would not directly SAY that this is what happened, or, indeed, that he would make any sort of statement without knowing exactly what the photo showed, since images of the yearbook page had already hit the Internet at that point.

[RTFirefly]

@SlackerInc

No. This is about suburban moderates who aren’t thrilled about first trimester abortion but don’t believe it should be outlawed. I am not a suburban moderate per se, but I share their deep skepticism about second and third trimester abortion, and I believe you should only be able to get one if you get past a serious medical ethics panel, as is the case in my grandmother’s homeland of Ireland.

That’s a fair argument to make.

But that’s not where they’re going. They’re trying to make people think the Dems are trying to change the law to allow ‘abortions’ AFTER the baby is born.

They are NOT arguing over the change from 3 doctors to 1 doctor.

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@Fretful_Porpentine

This is what I keep trying to wrap my head around, and coming to the conclusion that the only really plausible explanation is pretty damning for Northam: the photo is of him and he knew it, he initially calculated that he could weather this particular political storm by acknowledging it and apologizing, discovered from the reactions to his statement on Friday that people still overwhelmingly wanted him to resign, and hastily backtracked with a now-very-unbelievable denial.

I can imagine a less damning version of events (Northam hears on Friday that someone has dug up a photo of him in blackface, remembers dressing up as Michael Jackson and leaps to the conclusion that this is the photo in question, issues his statement without actually seeing the photo, and is then subsequently horrified to discover that it’s a different, far more offensive, picture of which he has no memory) – but it makes no sense that Northam would not directly SAY that this is what happened, or, indeed, that he would make any sort of statement without knowing exactly what the photo showed, since images of the yearbook page had already hit the Internet at that point.

I want so much to see him say it’s like the MY COUSIN VINNY bit where the guy figures he’s been caught dead to rights for shoplifting and so is way too quick to confess just as soon as the cops start asking him anything, because clearly they mean this one thing and not — wait, I shot the clerk?

[Thudlow_Boink]

@Fretful_Porpentine

I can imagine a less damning version of events (Northam hears on Friday that someone has dug up a photo of him in blackface, remembers dressing up as Michael Jackson and leaps to the conclusion that this is the photo in question, issues his statement without actually seeing the photo, and is then subsequently horrified to discover that it’s a different, far more offensive, picture of which he has no memory) – but it makes no sense that Northam would not directly SAY that this is what happened, or, indeed, that he would make any sort of statement without knowing exactly what the photo showed, since images of the yearbook page had already hit the Internet at that point.

Yes. He said, “It has taken time for me to make sure that it’s not me, but I am convinced, I am convinced that I am not in that picture.” To me that implies either
(1) he did dress up like that sometimes, just not that particular time, or
(2) his memories of med school are fuzzy, but it wouldn’t have been out of character for him to dress up that way.

[Riemann]

Yup, there’s a vast difference between Michael Jackson fancy dress and coon stereotype + KKK. Any kind of blackface is deprecated today, but I don’t think the former is shocking or even surprising for a 1985 party. I wouldn’t take a white person dressing up as Michael Jackson or Diana Ross in 1985 as indicative of individual racism (whatever it might say about the level of racism in society as a whole at that time).

So if that’s all he actually did, how on earth can he look at a photo of coon + KKK and say “sure, that’s probably me”? It just makes no sense whatsoever unless he was in the habit of dressing up as coon man too - as his nickname in the earlier yearbook suggests - and perhaps some buddies were too, and this particular photo turns out not to be him.

ETA: ninjaed by Thudlow

[RTFirefly]

@asahi

My point is that Northam apparently felt comfortable posing either as, or with, someone dressed up in Klan garb, and at minimum, consenting to said photo being used in a medical school yearbook. Ignore Doug Wilder and Barack Obama for a moment, and consider what that means. Consider what it means that the editor of the yearbook apparently had no problem with publishing the photo, and as far as we know there was never any kind of sanction for it. That’s a society, however small it might be in this particular example, that is comfortable with racist memes and just being downright racist.

So because small societies such as this existed in 1984, there had been no significant change in whites’ attitudes towards blacks in Virginia since the days of Jim Crow?

Gotcha. :rolleyes:

[JRDelirious]

@Riemann

Let alone the original events, do we any even have any kind of remotely plausible or coherent account of Northam’s actions over the past 48 hours? How on earth is it possible that he initially conceded that it’s him in the photo if it’s not?

Right, this is one thing on which you should know exactly for what the hell you are going to be apologizing since getting it wrong means now you have to go, but for showing bad *current *judgment.

As others have said, his words indicate that he DID remember participating in *some *blackface shenanigans but he wasn’t clear about *for which specific incident *was he being called out now.

But that means now we can’t help but wonder what else may be out there that could blow up later on. ***That ***is what wounds him regarding being an effective governor from now on.

If he had proferred an unreserved apology at the start and then ***shut up ***and sat down with the people and groups he has upset, rather than do the, “oh, wait, THAT picture, THAT one’s not me”, I could be on the “oh, please, stupidity 30 years ago? there but for the grace of Og…” side. But not like this.

PS: Oh and yes, somewhere some opposition research team is looking like idiots

[k9bfriender]

@nearwildheaven

Agreed.

I do understand that people generally don’t look at their yearbooks much after they initially get them, BUT even if he didn’t have one, SOMEONE would have had to let their kids, for instance, look at it, and the kids would say something like, “Is that the same man who’s the governor?”

He has only been governor for a short time. These are yearbooks from 30 years ago.

@SlackerInc

No. This is about suburban moderates who aren’t thrilled about first trimester abortion but don’t believe it should be outlawed. I am not a suburban moderate per se, but I share their deep skepticism about second and third trimester abortion, and I believe you should only be able to get one if you get past a serious medical ethics panel, as is the case in my grandmother’s homeland of Ireland.

How long does it take to convene a serious ethics panel? Say it is 3:00 AM, and a car accident victim comes in. The victim is pregnant, and within a week of her due date. Due to her injuries and stress, she is going into labor, and also, due to her injuries, the fetus is non-viable, and attempting a live delivery would be a great risk to her life.

So, the ER doc does what needs to be done to save the woman’s life, should he go to jail? If doctors need to worry about non-medical professionals prosecuting them for making medical decisions, then that will cuase doctors to no longer perform what is in the best interest of the patient.

Should we convene a serious medical ethics panel to second guess all of a doctor’s decisions, or just the ones that non-medical professionals think should be second guessed? There already is a panel of medical professionals that will second guess a doctor’s decisions, and if it is found that they made poor decisions, they will be reprimanded and retrained to prevent a repeat of the error, if the decisions are made through fraud or negligence, they will be reprimanded much more severely, up to and including losing their license.

The claim that is being made, that this will allow late term abortions on demand, is hysteria that is created by liars, and is propagated by the ignorant.

[DigitalC]

If he resigns who gets to be governor?

[suranyi]

@puzzlegal

I’m in team “who the heck has a yearbook for graduate school? Why would anyone look for one? And who on earth LOOKS at old yearbooks?”

There were probably a couple hundred copies printed, most of which are sitting dusty on the bottom shelf of someone’s bookcase in the basement.

I guess what this incident tells us is that he was popular in medical school, because if he had enemies, one of them might have gone poking through the old yearbook to see if he could find any dirt on the governor.

As for what should happen now? At first, when it looked like he was going to apologize, I was thinking that might be enough. It was a long time ago. Virginia was pretty openly racist then. A good sincere apology along the lines of

“I was wrong to do that, I was wrong to put it in my yearbook, but I have since learned how harmful that sort of behavior is and I have put it behind me. Look at my record for the last 20 years and how progressive I’ve been on racial issues. That’s what I want to do going forward.”

And I would likely have been okay with him. But this mealy-mouthed “oops! that wasn’t me”? No dice. You chose to put it in your yearbook. You are responsible for it.

I keep wondering about this. You see, I also graduated from college in 1984, by coincidence, and I was friends was the college yearbook editors. And I know that in some cases the editors modified some students’ pages without their consent, if they didn’t like them. There was no oversight, and it was a cruel time.

[Riemann]

@DigitalC

If he resigns who gets to be governor?

Lt Gov Fairfax, also Dem.

Justin Fairfax would become Virginia’s 2nd black governor if Northam resigns

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

@DrDeth

How does that allow for the killing of said infant?

It leaves room for discussion of euthanasia after the birth of a profoundly unhealthy baby.

[Magiver]

@I_Love_Me_Vol.I

It leaves room for discussion of euthanasia after the birth of a profoundly unhealthy baby.

PBS did a show on late term abortion. In it they showed a woman who flat out didn’t want to have the baby and this was in the 3rd trimester. Nothing wrong with the baby. She was given the abortion. I don’t know what state it was in.

[Jonathan_Chance]

Does the abortion discussion have anything to do with Northam?

Take it to its own thread, guys.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Jonathan_Chance

Does the abortion discussion have anything to do with Northam?

Yes

Gov. Northam, a Democrat, was asked about the bill in a radio interview on Wednesday, and his response only added to the controversy. Appearing to discuss what would happen if a child was born after a failed attempt at abortion, he said, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
…
A spokesperson for Gov. Northam told Vox his comments were “absolutely not” a reference to infanticide, and that they “focused on the tragic and extremely rare case in which a woman with a nonviable pregnancy or severe fetal abnormalities went into labor.”

I hate hijacks, but in this case Northam’s had a horrible no good very bad week, and the (deliberate?) misinterpretation of his words about abortion, in which the context of a “nonviable pregnancy or severe fetal abnormalities” was removed, is part of that week.