🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:55:07 GMT, Mike Epperson <mikee4821@earthlink.net> wrote:

>In article <MPG.186198c76ef995dd9897bc@news.verizon.net>, Jeffrey E.
>Salzberg <jeff.salzberg@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Are you saying that it's a lie that Lott said at least twice that the 
>> country would have been better off if Thurmond, who ran on a "segregation 
>> forever" platform, had been elected?  
>
>So is Jesse Jackson an anti-Semite for for the taste-poor things he's
>said over the years?  The fire's hot!  Let's get EVERYONE up on the
>spit.
>
>If Lott had said, "God bless Strom!  We needed more racists like him!",
>that would be pretty bad.  Or even if he'd said "the country would have
>been better off if Thurmond had been eleced *because* he ran on a
>segregation forever platform."  But that's not the case.  Lott's just
>trying to make the old geezer feel good as he turns 100.  Saying nice
>things about him.  Whoop dee doo.  Lott is not a clever speaker.  He's
>a blunt axe.  He's always saying stoopid shit.  It doen't male him a
>racist.  Just a dumnass.
>
>Hell, Jesse's said TONS more inflammatory stuff than Lott.  And Jesse
>IS a word craftsman.  I'd be more inclined to hold Jackson to the
>literal disection of his statements than I would Lott.

J. Jackson, Lois Farrakhan, `Rev' Al Sharpton, Maxine Waters, Shelia Jackson
Lee, and the Congressional Black Caucus are all racist and most are antisemitic
as well. They exploit racism to get elected or use it to extort money. Strom
Thurmond was a candidate of the _States Rights_ Party known as the Dixiecrats.
Their main interest was in securing for the individual States their right to the
oil that was found beneath their tidelands. Segregation was just one issue. On
that point - has forced integration of our public schools and busing help our
public education? Have personal attitude really been changed that much? Why do
many black students resegregate themselves into cliques in desegregated schools?
Why do many neighborhoods retain a racial aspect? Have quotas worked?
Why were Senator Fullbright of Arkansas (Bill Clinton's mentor) and Governor
Orville Faubus (another of B. Clintons idols) such ardent segregationists that
President Eisenhower had to mobilize the National Guard to enforce the
desegregation ruling at Central High School in Little Rock Arkansas? Why did the
same Senator Fullbright along with Sen Albert Gore (Al Gore's father) oppose
Civil Rights Legislation in the US Senate? Why did it require Republican support
to pass that legislation over Southern Democrat opposition? Why is Senator
Robert Byrd a former member of the KKK who has stated that he knows both white
and black niggers been tolerated in the US Senate where he was the Democrat
Majority Leader for many years? If you want facts, let's get them all out on the
table. Finally Strom Thurmond opposed Harry Truman, Tom Dewey, and former VP
Henry Wallace (a communist candidate) in the Presidential election in question -
why did Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota lead a walkout at the Democratic National
Convention that nominated Truman and Senator Alban Barkley of Kentucky over the
issue of a Civil Rights Plank in the Party Platform? Let's chew on real
historical facts rather than personal ideal imagination. The easy way to bring
the left wing press down on one's head is to dare to discuss facts that disagree
with their imagined ideal. Do you still harbor all your prejudices that you held
in 1946, if you were even alive? I hope not. Do you ever look back at the past
with nostalgia? When you graduate from your childhood and adolesence, you
probably will. Why did Civil Rights have to wade through the courts all the way
to the Supreme Court to become enforced under  Eisenhower. Did FDR and Harry
Truman drop the ball on this issue? They were both Democrat Presidents. If you
want to make it a political issue, Civil Rights legislation - long after the
Courts and Eisenhower acted was forced down the throat of a Democrat Congress by
LBJ only with the help of the Republican minority. The Democrat Party has
historically been the party of the South and was during the Civil War. The
Republican Party was the northern Party that favored Emancipation. Lincoln in
his debates acknowledged that he had southern roots but had joined the Whigs and
later the Republican Party because of opposition to slavery. Few elections are
one issue elections. Party affiliations are very strong in the South. The
Dixicrats, regardless of what your opinion of that Party was, was closer to the
old southern Democrat Party than was the Party of FDR (a coalition of unions,
urban machines, populists, and southern Democrats held together by hard economic
times and put together by Big Jim Farley of NY (FDR's political geru). Frankly,
I agree with the Lott assessment to the extent it would have preserved States
Rights as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and given to the States the oil that
was located beneath their tidelands, that was what was at issue. Eisenhower, the
National Guard and the Courts had all ready decided the `Civil Rights' issue.
And I also wonder if enforced social change is a good way to proceed in such
matters where the Courts and the President have already acted. Sounds more like
exploitation for a political issue. But I'm sure the modern sound byte mentality
doesn't want to take the time to investigate the actual facts.