I meant to include a cite the Washington Times article.
Hell, given his present. The man’s anti-homosexual streak is a mile wide, and it’s what wins him high praise from Republicans (who, I notice, aren’t being criticized by right wing bloggers for lauding Byrd).
“‘I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia that he would have been a great senator at any moment,’ Mr. Dodd, Connecticut Democrat, said while praising Mr. Byrd last week on the occasion of the eight-term Democrat’s 17,000th Senate vote…”
I think it’s a hell of an exaggeration, given that Byrd is the all-time poster child for irresponsible pork spending. We’ve had other leaders who at one time stupidly flirted with racist groups (a Supreme Court justice and ex-Klansman named Hugo Black, for one), but it’s doubtful that anyone wastefully lavished more funds on his home state.
Which is also an exagerration, mostly because there are many many Senators and House members that do just as well for themselves.
Including, for example, Strom Thurmond.
I do quite agree that Sen. Byrd should be an embarassment to the Dems. But not so much that he is a doddering and senile reformed racist who can’t walk past an appropriation bill without getting a taste.
Its because this utterly corrupt pol had the balls to speak truth to power when the rest of the Democrats were being stampeded and steamrollered into handing our nation over to a bunch of arrogant dipsticks.
I think it’s a hell of an exaggeration, given that Byrd is the all-time poster child for irresponsible pork spending. We’ve had other leaders who at one time stupidly flirted with racist groups (a Supreme Court justice and ex-Klansman named Hugo Black, for one), but it’s doubtful that anyone wastefully lavished more funds on his home state.
I’m not a raging Byrd fan, and I agree that he is all about the pork.
He is the only elected representative looking out for WV, though (Rockefeller is useless). This state is an absolute shithole, and Uncle Sam turns a blind eye. I’m not against the war in Iraq, but it chaps my ass that we are spending tens of billions on Iraqis, yet what is being done for my state? Not a damn thing. We’re the 2nd worst state to live in overall and we rank #47-50 on just about anything else that judges the 50 states on positive criteria (jobs, health, education, etc.). College graduates head to North Carolina the second they get out of school which is why we have a generally uneducated population. You would think we’d get more attention since we’re so close to DC. If this state ever got its shit together, it would be a PARADISE. There are parts of this state that are so beautiful you’d cry, and the people here are the nation’s best kept secret.
I’ve often wondered if maybe those in charge in DC don’t want WV to progress. This is where they come to play (fishing, rafting, etc.), and maybe they prefer their playground to remain rural and backwards.
The very little WV does have is because of Byrd. If he weren’t in office I’m convinced half of our roads would still be made of either dirt or gravel (and our paved roads are terrible, anyway). I hope he lives to be 100 because nobody else is going to go out of their way to help this state. At least he’s trying, even though sometimes he procures money for stupid projects.
I don’t care much for either one, Byrd or Thurmond.
In the praise for Byrd the guy didn’t say anything particularly offensive or stupid. Lott did say some very, very stupid things.
I’m sure that most Democrats are not overjoyed about Byrd’s past, but there is nothing new here to get upset about.
I’m with you except for this:
1.) It’s not primarily the Fed’s responsibility to clean up WV and bring it into the 20th (let alone 21st) century, that needs to start at the local level. Yet the stagnation on the state level has gone on for decades, with no apparent end in sight. Why isn’t it chapping your ass that your city councils, mayors, county commissioners, state legislators and hapless governors haven’t done much of anything, either? They can’t possibly be doing more than Rockefeller, if only by virtue of the fact that Rockefeller isn’t doing anything to stop the flow of pork into the state.
2.) Byrd’s pork has put his name on lots of roadways, buildings and other publicly funded projects, but have those projects panned out to mean long-term jobs or educational improvements for West Virginians? That stretch of I-79 with Byrd’s name on it is nice and all, but is that the kind of infrastructure improvement that can really help WV fiscally? Are the dirt poor folks in central and southern WV being helped at all by all of the federal quasiagencies and programs Byrd used his muscle to divert into the far eastern panhandle of the state, (over in and around Martinsburg where one ten mile stretch of I-81 has been lavished with federal pork “rehabilitation” money and has been worked on endlessly for the last four summers) where the employees can drive in to work but then slip back over to the “civilization” of Virginia to live?
Stop and think – if Byrd had used his considerable clout to divert 1/10 of the money that’s been wasted on stupid projects to, say, WV schools, how much better off would the state be? Those stupid projects hurt West Virginia and they hurt the rest of us. It’s hard to stomach a man being lauded for wasting the nation’s money, especially when his home state, which continually re-elected him as though he were some kind of infallible saint, is in such a shambles.
And for that alone, Chris Dodd should be smacked in his mouth (metaphorically speaking, at least) for praising Byrd.
More than 20 at last count. My favorite is the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope.
Sorry, in this respect, Byrd isn’t even close. Ted Stevens of Alaska, ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, leads the nation in per capita spending for his state:
West Virginia is fifth on the list, with only $165 per capita spent in the state, a total of $298 million. Byrd doesn’t even qualify to hold the hem of Ted Stevens’ cloak in the running for pork barrel poster boy.
By citing 2003 figures, you’re refuting an argument I didn’t make.
What I said was “Byrd is the all-time poster child for irresponsible pork spending.” (bolding added to assist reading comprehension). What I did not say was “Byrd is currently responsible for more wasteful pork spending than anyone else in Congress”.
Holding up Stevens over Byrd is like comparing Albert Pujols to Ted Williams. 
Sure. The “white nigger” Senator Byrd of today would have been in the right of the Civil War and I’m the partisan.
What are the laws of physics like in your universe?
If Lott’s comment had been isolated, and out of character, it wouldn’t have received any attention. It barely did at first, even at that. But he did and does have a background (summary), one he never discussed or recanted publicly, that allowed the suspicion to exist that finally took hold. Does the name “Council of Conservative Citizens” jog anyone’s memory? It’s certainly true that it would never have been possible for the Republicans to portray themselves as color-blind uniters as long as they kept electing people like Lott and Thurmond and Helms as their *leaders * after it became impossible to politely overlook.
In Byrd’s case, as the ivylasses and manhattans of the world strenuously insist on overlooking in their desperately amoral attempts to find facts to support their core knowledge that “the other guys” are just as bad as their own, he had faced up to and recanted the beliefs of his earlier days. He did use a term common in his developing years but no longer, as old men sometimes will, but it was already known he couldn’t have meant by it what the GOP partisans wanted him to have meant. Still do, obviously. (Done it already, too, guys - here among other places; also search Lott).
Perhaps Frist did more lobbying for the job than was apparent, but he’s been such a loyal servant of the Bush Administration (most recently including taking his own turn at trying to smear Clarke), that the primary lobbyist for Frist seems to me more likely to have been Rove - who selected Frist *because * of his pliability.
They don’t involve mangling English in a desperation to make someone say something they plainly did not. And why aren’t you criticizing the Republicans who have praised Byrd, manhattan?
I take it by your non-response to any of the substantive problems pointed out about your reading that you are conceeding the basic points, albiet in bitterness?
Well, my impression is that the laws of physics are pretty much the same although the laws of reading comprehension appear to be quite different. I repeat the rest of what I stated previously in that parargraph for your benefit:
Just to elaborate, I don’t even know how one would go about determining the truth value of Dodd’s conjecture about which side of the Civil War Byrd would have been on. I mean, which Byrd are we talking about…the one now or the one of 50 years ago? It is sort of like speculating on whether, if the moon was made of green cheese, the Philadelphia Cream Cheese Company would be up there mining it and making a killing. An interesting question but not one I really know how to go about answering nor one that I find very worthwhile to answer.
Dodd’s a Democrat, Lott’s a Republican.
Simple as that!
(Just like Packwood was driven from office for relatively minor offenses against women, while Clinton was given a free pass for behavior that would land most men in jail, not to mention thoroughly trashing the reputation of the few women brave enough to come forward.) Can anyone say: “Double-standard?”
On race matters Byrd is a fully-reformed, openly-apologetic sinner who is now regarded as a hero by liberals for heroically speaking out on the side of reason in our mad, hysterical rush to a war — which, in case you don’t know, is horrendously backfiring and has justified almost every single one of his fears. Thurmond was a opportunistic hack whom, despite his earlier condemnation of race mixing, begat an unacknowledged illegitimate daughter by a maid who has a really, really healthy tan, if you know what I mean (I guess that was just his way of standing up for traditional southern Christian family values). The reason Trent Lott got in trouble because he, by overwhelming implication, thoughtlessly endorsed the 1948 segregationist platform of the Dixiecrats and the reason we know this is true is because segregation was the entire raison d’etre for its existence. Finally, it’s abundantly clear that Dodd was referring to the Byrd he knows now, not the one that was.
Congrats to all you wing nuts for, once again, doing your level best to confuse the issue in order to create yet another phony controversy. Eventually it’s going to dawn on most of America what you’ve been up to and, when that happens, you’ll be out on your asses for a very, very long time. You think liberal’s a dirty word now? Wait until you see what happens to Republican.
Starving Artist ;
I can.
Double standard, double standard, double-yellow-dog Democrat standard.
Thank you.
I can, and it’s right there in your own words. Do you recall the specifics of what Packwood is known to have done, or are you just parroting the party line? Lots of cites, just a quick Google away, like this one:
Is that “relatively minor”? It’s called assault, sometimes sexual battery. Do you know the meaning of the word “consent”? What did Clinton do that compares? People have gone to jail for what Packwood is known to have done, but not for anything Clinton is known to have done. I repeat, “consent”. Look it up.
I don’t know what’s more pitiful, the spreading of total bullshit by those determined to make Clinton out to be the Antichrist, or the sheer numbers of those of you who swallow it whole.
“Relatively minor”, you say. Tell us more about your version of morality, kid.