Where's the outrage over Dodd's comments about Robert Byrd?

[braintree]

It’s useless arguing with these people, Elvis. The thing about Republicans is that they’ve become more than a political party. It’s like dealing with a cult. They keep repeating the same arguments no matter how many times they’ve been discredited and absolutely refuse to acknowledge any fact that goes against them. The idea that Clinton was guilty of sexual assault has never been substantiated (and why would he? by all accounts he’s one hell of a seductive bastard). Even the sexual adventuring has been exaggerated. Geinnifer Flowers (who once faked her own kidnapping) claimed that she and Bubba launched their supposed 7-year affair in a Little Rock hotel two years before it actually opened. And don’t get me started on Paula Jones. As long as it confirms to their political prejudices, a wingnut will believe anything you tell them. They’re so absurdly gullible. What a pity they’re running the country.

Bonus political jibe:
Shorter Condi Rice: Because no one specifically told me what to do, I could not exercise leadership.

[Milum]

[Hammertime]

Hammer: Easy, he’s a democrat. A few other other small differences.

One was said** at a birthday party**,
and one was said on the senate floor.

One could be misunderstood to support segregation
and one could be misunderstood to support slavery.

It would have been polite if one of you apologists for Byrd had addressed Mister Hammer’s distinction.

Now wouldn’t it now?

[jshore]

Milum: We did address the distinction. We explained that there was no reasonable way in which Dodd’s comments could be interpretted to support slavery. And, noone has even tried to seriously make a case that they could.

[emarkp]

Dodd’s comments about Lott:

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Connecticut, came close Sunday on “Late Edition.”

“If Tom Daschle or another Democratic leader were to have made similar statements, the reaction would have been very swift,” Dodd said. “I don’t think several hours would have gone by without there being an almost unanimous call for the leader to step aside.”

Dodd said the problem lies with the Republican Party.

“Mainstream Republican thinking over the last 40 years has been opposed to an awful lot of the civil rights legislation,” he said. “So this isn’t just about Trent Lott, it’s about a party that needs to come to terms with this view here – that you go to the South, you say one thing to one group of people and another thing nationally.”

Now, what has Byrd done about civil rights legislation? His own personal record for longest speech was a 14-hour filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (40 years ago). It’s a distinction he shares with Strom Thurmond, who filibustered civil rights legislation in 1957 for 24 hours.

Yeah, no parallel there. What was the timeline Dodd gave for the problems Republicans have with civil rights? Oh yeah. Also 40 years.

[Apos]

Now, what has Byrd done about civil rights legislation? His own personal record for longest speech was a 14-hour filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (40 years ago). It’s a distinction he shares with Strom Thurmond, who filibustered civil rights legislation in 1957 for 24 hours.

Yes, and both repudiated their actions, and both continued to serve without any particular scandal.

Lott’s comments were obejcted to (first and primarily by right wingers, RIGHT WINGERS) not because they praised Thurmond, but because they expressed the wish that his segregationist campaign had succeeded. Dodd’s comments merely praised Byrd as a good man for any age: the Senator Byrd of today.

Must we repeat that some more, or are we going to have to repeat it again and again before someone actually acknowledges the basic facts?

[ElvisL1ves]

Thurmond is generally given credit for recanting, but it’s doubtful that he did. It seems more likely that he simply changed his public stances and rhetoric to match political reality.

Byrd did, though.

See, for example, this exchange with CNN’s Bernard Shaw in Dec. 1993:
“Well, it’s easy to state what has been my biggest mistake. The greatest mistake I ever made was joining the Ku Klux Klan. And I’ve said that many times. But one cannot erase what he has done. He can only change his ways and his thoughts. That was an albatross around my neck that I will always wear. You will read it in my obituary that I was a member of the Ku Klux Klan.”

Contrast that with an interview Thurmond gave Joseph Stroud of the Charlotte Observer in July 1998 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of his presidential bid on the segregationist Dixiecrat ticket. Asked if he wanted to apologize, Thurmond said, “I don’t have anything to apologize for,” and “I don’t have any regrets.” Asked if he thought the Dixiecrats were right, Thurmond said, “Yes, I do.” Thurmond said this four years ago! (in 1998)

[Apos]

Is Ivylass ever coming back to her thread?

I just noticed that her expressed outrage seems to be just for Dodd praising Byrd, end stop. As I keep noting, if that were all there was to it, then plenty of Republicans have done exactly the same thing. Byrd has been good to them (why do you think he gets so much pork passed?).

And no one got on Lott’s case for simply praising Thurmond.

I wonder how many people have this sort of radically distorted view of the situation, and who gave it to them?

[jshore]

@Apos

And no one got on Lott’s case for simply praising Thurmond.

Indeed…It was a whole freakin’ party dedicated to Thurmond. I wish we had some sort of transcript from it so we could point out all the people … probably Republicans and Democrats … who praised Thurmond to high heaven and were not jumped upon, simply because they did not endorse the idea that the country would have been better off if he had won on his segregationist platform back in 1948.

[Voyager]

@jshore

I think this makes it clear that Apos’s interpretation is the one that makes sense and yours is simply partisan. One can argue about whether what Dodd said was true, given Byrd’s past, but I think there can be no logical way of interpretting it to mean that Dodd thought the “right” think in the conflict of Civil War was to be on the side of the south. Plus, there is absolutely nothing I know of in Dodd’s record which would show sympathy with the Southern cause during the Civil War.

Is everyone in this thread historically illiterate? What Dodd was obviously referring to was that West Virginia was on the Union side of the Civil War, and seceded from Virginia to do it. Cite

Good grief. We’re supposed to be fighting ignorance here, people.

[capacitor]

I believe Pat Buchanan was among the first to call for Lott’s head when Lott said what he said. Not that he held a grudge against Lott for all but assisting in driving Pat out of the Republican Party. I am sure he doesn’t.

[ElvisL1ves]

@Voyager

Is everyone in this thread historically illiterate? What Dodd was obviously referring to was that West Virginia was on the Union side of the Civil War, and seceded from Virginia to do it.

In all fairness to those looking to score points here, Byrd never made himself publicly known as either a secessionist or a unionist - few have since the Civil War, right? Even then, there were many anti-slavery, pro-union Southerners, and many Northerners who didn’t mind slavery or secession. Byrd was, though, once part of the organization most notorious for violently repressing blacks, and, had he lived at an earlier time, would then probably have supported slavery, regardless of the specific Virginia county of his residence.

It certainly seems that that’s the Byrd the OP and its supporters are trying to target - but unfortunately for that view, that isn’t today’s Byrd, the one who struggled with and overcame and renounced those beliefs. There’s a lot of things he deserves denunciation for, but not that.

[jshore]

[QUOTE=Voyager]
Is everyone in this thread historically illiterate? What Dodd was obviously referring to was that West Virginia was on the Union side of the Civil War, and seceded from Virginia to do it. Cite

Well, I suppose one could argue that as a loyal West Virginian, Byrd would have been likely to be on the Union side. However, it doesn’t seem clear to me whether Dodd was making this particular connection or not.

[Voyager]

@ElvisL1ves

In all fairness to those looking to score points here, Byrd never made himself publicly known as either a secessionist or a unionist - few have since the Civil War, right? Even then, there were many anti-slavery, pro-union Southerners, and many Northerners who didn’t mind slavery or secession. Byrd was, though, once part of the organization most notorious for violently repressing blacks, and, had he lived at an earlier time, would then probably have supported slavery, regardless of the specific Virginia county of his residence.

Dodd was also being targeted, for saying (joking?) that Byrd would even have been on the right side of the Civil War. I got the definite impression at least a few voters thought that Byrd’s state was in the Confederacy. So Dodd, at least, is innocent! As for Byrd, he grew up in a deeply racist society, which is not a justification. But, at least he is truly sorry for what he was then. Conservatives, on the other hand, seem never to apologize except under duress. Did Strom ever say he was wrong to have run in 1948?