Jesse Helms, John McCain and the Mark of the White Hands

Jesse Helms was a segregationist, and a nasty one at that.

Long after his contemporaries abandoned old "Jim Crow," Helms kept playing the race card when it served him politically. And when he was not picking on African-Americans, he picked on ethnic minorities, immigrants, trade unionists and gays and lesbians.

While Helms served thirty years in the Senate, his tenure on Capitol Hill was never so historically significant as his crude pursuit of power and the unsettling lengths to which he went to retain it. "He'll be remembered, in part, for the strong racist streak that articulated his politics and almost all of his political campaigns - "they were racialized in the most negative ways," recalled Kerry Haynie, a political science professor at Duke University.

Helms' death Friday, at age 86, brings America a small step closer to the end of the post-antebellum era in our politics that saw the men who had battled to deny the franchise to millions of Americans because of the color of their skin -- and who fought even more aggressively to deny adequate education, nutrition and health care to African-American children -- make the easy transition to leadership positions in the "modern" Republican Party.

Helms was not always a Republican. As a young man of the Old South, he had no interest in joining an organization that, well into the 20th century, proudly referred to itself as "the party of Lincoln."

Only when the Grand Old Party adopted a southern accent and replaced references to the Great Emancipator with grumping about "racial quotas" did Helms make the switch to the party of Ronald Reagan, George Bush and John McCain. He brought along the symbols and sounds of the "Jim Crow" Democrats, insisting that Republican events celebrate the memory of Robert E. Lee and encouraging the singing of "Dixie" at party rallies.

Helms was not just any Republican, however. He was an essential player in the remaking of the party. With his National Congressional Club, a money-raising machine that helped forge what came to be called "the New Right" within the GOP, Helms aide Carter Wrenn says the senator forced "the realignment of the Republican party."

"You can't really separate the growth of the Republican party from Jesse's career," explained Wrenn.

The wily Richard Nixon was one of the first Republicans to recognize Helms' utility.

The North Carolinian was welcomed into the GOP by then President Nixon and his southern strategists of the late 1960s and early 1970s because they understood that Helms was skilled at working the fault lines that could turn white fears into Republican votes.

The Republicans are still working those fault-lines. Indeed, some of the people who worked most closely with Helms as he transformed what began as an anti-slavery party into a comfortable retreat for white-backlash voters are now key players in the campaign of John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for president.

"Let us remember a life dedicated to serving this nation," McCain declared in a statement on the death of Helms, to whom he was compared favorably by former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole earlier this year. (Actually, Dole suggested that McCain was somewhat more conservative than Helms.)

Those who battled hardest against Helms and his racial politics are quite certain that the 2008 campaign of Republican McCain against Democrat Barack Obama, who in August will become the first African-American nominee of a major party for president, will take a Helmsian turn.

"There's no question appeals will be made by McCain's campaign on racial lines," says North Carolina Congressman Mel Watt, who felt the full brunt of that racial politics when he managed the campaign of Harvey Gantt, an African-American Democrat who challenged Helms in 1990 and 1996.

Jesse Alexander Helms Jr. got his start in national politics as a campaign strategist for Willis Smith, who mounted a race-baiting challenge to U.S. Senator Frank Porter Graham in the 1950 North Carolina Democratic primary.

Graham, a former president of the University of North Carolina, served in the Senate as a national Democrat, who supported President Harry Truman and accepted the party's emerging commitment to civil rights.

Smith, who was backed by the segregationist dead-enders that had supported the 1948 States' Rights Party ("Dixiecrat") campaign of segregationist Strom Thurmond, hired Helms to help him win by exploiting racist sentiment in the state.

One advertisement that Helms and his team created screamed: "White people, wake up before it is too late. Do you want Negroes working beside you, your wife and your daughters, in your mills and factories? Frank Graham favors mingling of the races."

Another advertisement allegedly worked up by Helms highlighted a doctored photograph that purported to illustrate the penchant of Graham's wife for dancing with African-American men.

The Smith campaign was called "the most overtly racist campaign since the turn of the century," according to the Raleigh News & Observer, a publication for which Helms once worked.

Unfortunately, it was also successful -- a lesson that was not lost on the 29-year-old Helms.

Smith beat Graham, won the general election, went to Washington and brought the campaign along as his administrative assistant.

But Helms was soon back in North Carolina, encouraging massive resistance to integration, as a Raleigh city councilman and a television commentator who referred to the University of North Carolina as the "University of Negroes and Communists" and suggested that walls be erected around the UNC campus to prevent enlightened thinking from "infecting" the rest of North Carolina.

Though he was genteel in person -- so much so that this reporter would sometimes describe him favorably when compared to less gracious members of the Senate -- Helms went wide-eyed and brutal when the cameras went on.

Helms warned that, "Crime rates and irresponsibility among Negroes are a fact of life which must be faced."

He suggested that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was a communist dupe and refused, even decades after King's death, to honor the Nobel Peace Prize winner.

He dismissed the civil rights movement as a cabal of communists and "moral degenerates."

As the movement gathered strength -- and as murderous violence against activists in particular and African-Americans in general increased -- Helms menacingly suggested to non-violent civil rights activists that, "The Negro cannot count forever on the kind of restraint that's thus far left him free to clog the streets, disrupt traffic, and interfere with other men's rights."

When his fellow Democrats began to reject his brand of race-baiting politics in a series of primaries that saw moderates such as former North Carolina Governor Terry Sanford beat segregationists, Helms followed Thurmond into the Republican Party.

In 1972, he determined to follow Thurmond into the Senate.

Helms got a couple of lucky political breaks. First, President Nixon was running his "southern strategy" reelection campaign to attract segregationist Democrats to the GOP. Second, the Democratic nominee for the Senate that year was North Carolina Congressman Nick Galifianakis.

Galifianakis was a Greek-American, which to Helms and his supporters meant the congressman was a bit too "ethnic" to represent North Carolina. The newly-minted Republican, who could always be counted on to exploit any difference that might benefit his candidacy, campaigned on the slogan: "Vote for Helms --- He's One of Us!"

That was mild compared with the 1990 and 1996 campaigns Helms ran against Gantt, the former Charlotte mayor who was the first African-American to compete seriously for a southern Senate seat in the modern era.

In 1990, after Helms fell behind in the race, his campaign began running television advertisements that showed a white man's hands crumpling up a rejection notice from a corporation that had refused to hire him because affirmative action policies had supposedly required that the job go to a "less qualified minority." After those words were uttered, an image of Gantt flashed on the screen.

Helms won a narrow victory that year, as he did in 1996.

Helms did not leave his sentiments on the campaign trail.

Unlike George Wallace and a number of other southern pols, who made racist noises at election time but then quietly funded roads, schools and other projects in African-American communities, the former North Carolina senator's hometown newspaper noted delicately in an obituary that, "Although Helms denied he was a racist, his work in the Senate seemed at odds with the interests of blacks."

In addition to waging a filibuster in an attempt to block the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday, Helms opposed extension of the Voting Rights Act and championed the apartheid regime in South Africa.

Even as he rose in stature in the Senate, where he eventually served as chair of the powerful Foreign Relations Committee, Helms remained the son of the south that he had always been.

When Carol Moseley-Braun of Illinois became the first African-American woman to sit in the Senate, Helms followed Moseley-Braun into an elevator, announcing to Utah Senator Orrin Hatch: "Watch me make her cry. I'm going to make her cry. I'm going to sing 'Dixie' until she cries."

Then, emphasizing the lines about how "good" things were before the Civil War ended slavery, Helms sang "Dixie."

In one way or another, that's all he ever did. As the Rev. Jesse Jackson recalled, "At the height of his power, he fought for the values of the old confederacy. He resisted the new South. He resisted the opportunity to fight for a more perfect union."

Despite the best efforts of the senator and his spin doctors to rehabilitate the old man by hiring a few conservative staffers who happened to be people of color or by posing him for pictures with U2's Bono, Helms finished his career without the apologies that came from George Wallace, Orval Faubus and his fellow segregationists.

Even Strom Thurmond admitted his defenses of segregation were wrong, but not Helms. Nor did the North Carolinian ever make serious efforts to appeal to African-American voters -- as Wallace, Thurmond and "Jim Crow" politicians began to do late in their careers.

"He was sort of unrepentant until the end," said Duke's Kerry Haynie.

A biographer of Helms, Ernest Furgurson, put it more bluntly when he wrote: "All his public life, (Helms) has done and said things offensive to blacks, and to anyone sensitive to racial nuance."

Jesse Helms may have started as a Democrat and finished as a Republican. But he always sang "Dixie."

And those who sang it with him are now working for John McCain. Alex Castellanos, the veteran Republican media consultant who produced the so-called "White Hands" commercial that Helms used against Gantt, has according to the Washington Post been advising McCain's campaign on media strategy.

Castellanos bluntly refers to his work with Helms as "The Cause." And That cause has attracted other key players from the late senator's campaigns.

Republican strategist Charlie Black, perhaps the most prominent member of McCain's political inner circle (especially since he suggested that a terrorist attack on the U.S. would benefit the Republican's prospects this fall), advised Helms throughout much of the senator's career and played a particularly central role in the 1990 campaign, according to contemporary media accounts.

When the "White Hands" ad stirred a national controversy, Black appeared on the PBS's Newshour to defend it. Democratic National Committee chairman Ron Brown, who was also on the show, said to Black: "You are a principal adviser of Jesse Helms. Would you advise him to run that kind of ad, Charlie? Do you approve of that ad, Charlie?"

Black replied, "I advised Jesse Helms to do what he's always done."

The question now is whether Black will advise McCain, another Republican who is trailing an attractive African-American Democrat, to do what Helms always did?

The answer is: Not exactly.

McCain's presidential campaign will not be a precise homage to Helms.

Black and his fellow strategists will undoubtedly be a bit subtler.

But Mel Watt suggested in a recent interview that we might still hear the faint strains of "Dixie."

"Clearly, times have changed, and people aren't going to be able to get away with those kind of direct racial appeals," said Watt recalling the 1990 anti-Gantt campaigning by Helms and his associates. "But they will make them more subtle, and call them something else. They'll call them economic appeals, like they did with the 'White Hands' ad."

Comments (92)

1. Uh, it's Mel Watt.

   Posted by woodyee at 07/04/2008 @ 11:41pm

2. I'm amazed Charlie Black still has a job with Grandpa. One would think that albatross would be well crushed under the wheels of the Straight Talk Express (that name gets more and more ironic). But I guess he's running out of hiring options now huh?

   Posted by yutsano at 07/05/2008 @ 12:42am

3. Well, I mean, we all know that whoever doesn't vote for Obama is racist. That's very clear.

   Posted by hepstein at 07/05/2008 @ 02:07am

4. Wow,37 years in office and the guy achieved nothing in the minds of guys like JOHN NICHOLS except a reputation for predjudice.

   Sounds like JOHN has a few predjudices to work out himself.

   Posted by william.harry13 at 07/05/2008 @ 07:51am

5. Didn't Saruman use the sign of the White Hand in Lord of the Rings?

   I think that the Uruk Hai had it painted on their foreheads.

   Posted by skeletonman at 07/05/2008 @ 08:57am

6. [" And when he was not picking on African-Americans, he picked on ethnic minorities, immigrants, trade unionists and gays and lesbians."]

   this description sounds a lot like some around here, and an awful lot like communism as it was practiced in the Soviet, Nazi Germany and China, and what is practiced by the so-called Islamo-fascists today.

   Isn't the irony of this just too rich for words?

   --Posted by william.harry13 at 07/05/2008 @ 07:51am

   Could you list some of his accomplishments that would overshadow his stance on segregation, opposition to the Civil Rights Act, support of dictators like Pinochet and his record of violating election laws?

   Posted by crabwalk at 07/05/2008 @ 09:06am

7. Well, I mean, we all know that whoever doesn't vote for Obama is racist. That's very clear.

   Posted by hepstein at 07/05/2008 @ 02:07am

   Of course not, and this was never said here.

   Are you, however, willing to say that portions of the republican machine will not use Obamas skin color against him in campaign ads, 527 ads, mailers and those ever so popular anonymous pieces of literature and email that are already floating around?

   Ask LIBSUX, it will tell you in no uncertain terms that Obama is a Muslim and he will turn 1600 Pennsylvania Ave into the Black/White house!

   And lookie what that nice man David Duke has to say about an Obama Black/White house:

   ""Obama will be a signal, a clear signal for millions of our people, Obama is like that new big dark spot on your arm that finally sends you to the doctor for some real medicine. Obama is the pain that let's [sic] your body know that something is dreadfully wrong. Obama will let the American people know that there is a real cancer eating away at the heart of our country and Republican aspirin will not only not cure it, but only masks the pain and makes you think you don't need radical surgery. … My bet is that whether Obama wins or loses in November, millions of European Americans will inevitably react with new awareness of their heritage and the need for them to defend and advance it."-"A Black Flag for White America" by David Duke, former republican candidate for congress and Helms fan.

   This is not just a southern disease, here in my home state of MI we have a fine collection of KKK and white supremacist groups peddling their fear in public.

   I just can't wait for their Clayton Bigsby to be unmasked.

   Posted by crabwalk at 07/05/2008 @ 09:55am

8. In an era where a great number of young men collectively, openly and very clearly-- acknowledge that "we've been caught with our pants down", will the Eddie Haskell party still pull the hsuB wool over on the Cleavers' eyes?

   Stay tuned.

   Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 09:55am

9. ... would be well crushed under the wheels of the Straight Talk Express ...

   Posted by yutsano at 07/05/2008 @ 12:42am

   Have you seen the wheels on that thing lately? They have like one hell of a wide stance and the wheels are all pointing in different directions! Some are even in reverse while others are trying to move forward simultaneously.

   Get crushed? Why one would have to make one great effort to get to that point where the Straight Talk Express is just there just 'spinning' around; it's really not going anywhere. Well, maybe down.

   Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 10:13am

10. Indeed, the mainstream media rarely put Helms's career in context the way they did, for example, with Sam Ervin, a Democrat who served with Helms in the Senate from North Carolina before retiring in 1975. Ervin was the leading legal strategist against Civil Rights legislation, and he largely crafted the Southern Manifesto against Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court case that ruled school segregation unconstitutional. But Ervin was the man who chaired the Watergate hearings that helped bring down Richard Nixon, and his views on civil rights were almost never mentioned. Both Helms and Ervin were courtly, principled conservatives. Only one became a cartoon media villain.

    Some of us think the libs are racist. I see it everywhere. Your hero slick willie- yuck - plays the racist card hard. didn't work for for them this time. The white hands ad was copied from a democrat I believe. something ti be verified but it would make sense- democrats are racists! right?

    Posted by rjpayne at 07/05/2008 @ 11:18am

11. libzr-liberals have no history of being racist nor were you able to show that such a history exists.You,simply,showed your ignorance by trying to claim that those southern democrats were liberals.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2008 @ 12:00pm

12. libzr-Don't forget that those racist southern democrats that you referred to are now republicans.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2008 @ 12:03pm

13. Civilized society ends when the reptiles skin all the mink.

    But then again, everyone, even the most dense, must recognize that there is after all-- global warming...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 12:19pm

14. The "White Hands" ad was one of the best campaign ads ever written. It was not a racist ad, it was an issues ad. That is, after all, exactly what does happen when quotas of any kind are put in place: a potentially more qualified candidate is turned away so that a quota can be filled. It is wrong, Wrong, WRONG! How any person who professes to have any sense of fairness can support such policies is beyond me.

    The ad could have been(and versions of it were)used against any candidate, black or white, supporting racial quotas.

    It was only considered racist because white (accused racist) Republican Jesse Helms ran it against black Democrat Harvey Gantt in southern state North Carolina.

    If Mitt Romney had run the same ad against Ted Kennedy in a Massachusetts senate race no one would have considered Romney a racist.

    Posted by joeydavis at 07/05/2008 @ 12:35pm

15. Posted by libzRfreaks at 07/05/2008 @ 11:38am

    this is how people like Helms, Olllie North, G. gordon Liddy and Scooter become heroes, and how a man like George W. Bush can be elected twice as president.

    Pure unabashed ignorance.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/05/2008 @ 12:43pm

16. How sad---to turn the death of a distinguished Senator into an opportunity to slander a candidate for president that you oppose. Jesse Helms always stood on principal during his career as a US Senator---and never more boldly than when he cast the only vote against confirming Henry Kissinger as Secretary of State. Kissinger's willingness to sacrifice US interests at almost every diplomatic turn proved Helms instincts to be dead on! Liberals like Mr. Nichols are of course to be congratulated on their compassion in wishing to take money and jobs from those who have earned them and transfer them to those who have not earned them. The white hands commercial was divisive only in the sense that it's difficult to expect those who would be given a good paying job through an affirmative program the assigns a racial preference to stand up and oppose such a preference on principal. If you liberals want to make a difference in equality and the differential crime rate in the black community, then you need to abandon your union allies in the NEA and support the funding of vouchers for disadvantaged kids rather than increasing the appropriations to the overpaid administrators who run the public school system for their own benefit.

    Posted by oolagah_otto at 07/05/2008 @ 12:52pm

17. Er, pay the poor to take the children to underpaid teachers-- now that makes a lot of sense... to the rich.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 1:04pm

18. One must never forget-- when raising very young children, please do not emphasize what is it that you 'do not' want them to do, but rather-- 'do' tell them what it is you would prefer that they do. Very young children tend to fixate on the concept of action and 'not' on the concept of choice.

    Benjamin Franklin 1706-90. 'Tax is a subscription to a civilised society.'

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 1:11pm

19. This article hits the nail on the head regarding Helms' legacy. A myriad of his own quotations show what a racist he was. Unlike other politicians who were racist in the 50s and 60s and later apologized, he never renounced his racist opinions. Media (including many in the so-called liberal media) and conservative bloggers) who want to memorialize and lionize Helms as if someone like Bob Dole had died are being too kind. It is fine to oppose abortion and support tax cuts or the war in Iraq. However, when unabashed racism is added to that record, a politician should lose his or her right to cannonization. The conservative straw person that Obama supporters call every critic of Obama a racist should also be called out and denounced. Most progressives would agree that there are conservatives who oppose Obama for the same reasons they would have opposed Clinton or Edwards or Biden. However, when conservatives go beyond a principled critique of Obama's position on Iran or abstinence-based sex education and use racist language like "Obama boy" then it is fair to wonder how they can see out of their white sheet in order to write their invectives. The conservative movement is home to people who think like George Will and those who think like George Wallace (circa 1959).

    Posted by Kodi at 07/05/2008 @ 1:16pm

20. If you are for equality it matters little if you are black or white-- to a racist.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 1:38pm

21. This column warns that "the 2008 campaign of Republican McCain...will take a Helmsian turn."

    There's no sign of this. Conversely, McCain has acted quickly to step on Bob Cunningham and the Tennessee GOP this season, in a clear attempt to keep the dialogue elevated (as promised).

    Unfortunately, Obama himself opened the door to racially divisive punditry in this campaign with his, "Did I mention he's black?" gag. This remark raised the false spectre of a racist John McCain. It created tacit permission for polemicists like Nichols to use the occaision of Helms' passing to fluff up the strawman, decorating with some choice name drops (Thurmond, Wallace, Duke) for added scare effect.

    This is quite a shame, and the "we're slinging, so McCain surely will" argument is not going to fly. Image untarnished, he'll stay on the high road.

    I long for the issues-based campaign to begin, with both candidates standing to tell us what they'll do for us and how.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/05/2008 @ 1:56pm

22. Posted by man00ver at 07/05/2008 @ 1:56pm

    You have such a PRE-9/11-type attitude.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 2:17pm

23. Faux Woos doesn't:

    http://tinyurl.com/54wjfn

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 3:19pm

24. hsuBfools - I find your responses a little cryptic.

    Are you saying it's OK to imply McCain is a racist because of 9/11?

    And what's with the link to the coverage of Obama's clandestine filming session? The relevance escapes me, please help.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/05/2008 @ 3:36pm

25. manoover - McCain may keep himself pure, but if he wants to keep his whole campaign pure as well, why does he gather these guys around him who are known for playing dirty?

    Posted by ramara at 07/05/2008 @ 3:43pm

26. <i>Posted by Kodi at 07/05/2008 @ 1:16pm </i>

    I think you have a valid point here, but at the same time I think there is an implicit danger. I completely agree with you that there are a number of issues about which people can have principled disagreements with one another, and racism isn't one of them.

    I'm not sure, though, if we want to carry it as far as some other posters are suggesting. While I think it is absolutely valid and indeed necessary to critique the racism of an individual, it's also important to remember that that racism is not ALL that composes an individual. The man has just died, and when remembering him I think it's worthwhile to remember the WHOLE person, not simply the aspect of him that was racist. Remember that he also had a family, people who cared about him, saw a loving side of him and no doubt mourn him. Remember that he was a human being.

    I can predict pretty easily what the response to this will be. Someone will say "really, should we then 'pay respects', as it where to Hitler? Or Stalin? Or perhaps Che? Saddam?" Casting aside momentarily the multiple faults in that analogy, and realizing how difficult what I'm defending actually is, I'd have to say...yes. No matter how much someone has done, no matter how far they have fallen, they still deserve to be remembered as human beings, who despite whatever they've done to degrade the dignity of others, still possess a kind of "divine spark." There was, in them, some good even if it lay concealed beneath the many hateful things perpetrated by even these the world's worst dictators. This isn't easy to do, I'm sure; I still have a great deal of trouble with it. But, at the end of the day, how else is "love your enemies" to be understood?

    Posted by Thrawn at 07/05/2008 @ 4:02pm

27. What's the difference between a black man feeling 'bad' that there are racists in the world and a racist that feels good that there are other racists around same as him?

    Wow now that is really a hard one...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 4:10pm

28. hsuBfools - I find your responses a little cryptic.

    Are you saying it's OK to imply McCain is a racist because of 9/11?

    And what's with the link to the coverage of Obama's clandestine filming session? The relevance escapes me, please help.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/05/2008 @ 3:36pm

    I was being ironic, i.e. you stating there's no evidence proving McCave will use the nuclear political weaponry that he is clearly purchasing... Wasn't that the very reasoning that the petty hsuB/cHeney dic'tator admin used to lie us into Iraq? Only difference is there's no lie about McCave's purchases.

    And as far as Faux Woos reporting-- it is their overt implication that something nefarious is happening as the one filming is associated with Al Gore; clearly an automatic hot button missile launch for those on the new con supporting dic'tatorship philosophy side.

    Sorry if you do not see the obvious metaphors. I'm just bad that way.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 4:26pm

29. FrGr,

    Why were you blaming a few poor black women for your state of affairs and not the many many more rich white folk that just happen to be born wealthy per black people being used as their fathers and grandfathers free utility?

    I know I know, it's much easier to attack the weakened than it is to see the truth.

    Been there, done that.

    No more.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 4:39pm

30. FrGr,

    But why can't you put blame where it honestly is-- it was the much larger populated rich whites that took advantage of black slaves and then racist attitudes that drove wages down which then created, by necessity-- the welfare state? Or are you saying that blacks created their own slavery and welfare state? Or are you simply blaming Obama for a few blacks that took advantage of a horrible situation?

    Uhmmm, destroying a whole crop per a few apples surviving in the box they were stolen in... And it must of cost the system a few million dollars over a few decades...

    Wish you were as adamant about your petty dic'tator extra-rendition/pilfering no bid billions and disappearing them from our coffers for MIC GOP BBB (big business buds). But no that's business; ok for big corporations to steal, or...

    ..is it because you'd like to believe that they're white, maybe?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 5:13pm

31. Anyone else want to buy Frank a white sheet? Why don't you bother to figure out why the mothers have no choice but to be on welfare and then produce a lot of children just to somehow make a decent life? It is honestly despicable that you think someone chooses to stay on welfare out of the blanket tar of laziness. Getting out of the system is much much much harder. If you don't think it is, you try it. And equating that to skin color is blatant racism period. Your true colors have finally shown.

    Posted by yutsano at 07/05/2008 @ 5:45pm

32. ah liberal racism is alive and well on the Nation website. The worst part is that they always deny it while proudly proclaiming the success of their racist programs (ie welfare state), all intended to keep African Americans in poverty and beholden to their liberal slave masters who hold the purse strings in exchange for their vote.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 07/05/2008 @ 6:07pm

33. frankie, as i pointed out even before your more overtly racist tirades, you are a racist swine, and i will rejoice when the last of your kind departs the corporeal realm. Your disgusting, noxious denigration of african americans has absolutely no place in a civilized, modern world. You are a despicable person. I can only hope that your "son" has different values than you- if not, he is probably a despicable war criminal who expressed his racism by murdering and raping iraqis. Choke on your own bile and croak you pile.

    Posted by entropy at 07/05/2008 @ 6:32pm

34. I apologize to all except frank for the coarseness of my response, but I figured perhaps this was the only way to trigger some semblance of cognition in a man who routinely refers to his interlocutors as "motherfuckers" and just as routinely ignores all rational discourse which invalidates his facile "points." Anyone who talks about a race of people in the way he just did is beyond pathetic, and should receive no quater from the most brutal verbal barrages we can muster. so this ones for you frankie- Choke on a pretzel you hillbilly fuck.

    Posted by entropy at 07/05/2008 @ 6:39pm

35. btw, good riddance to helms- everyone should take a little time off work, travel to his resting place, and piss on his grave.

    Posted by entropy at 07/05/2008 @ 6:40pm

36. lvliberty-If you do some fact gathering you'll discover that most people who are on welfare are white and affirmative action is not just for blacks.I know that these facts will mean nothing to you and that you will just repeat your nonsense,but I thought I would mention them,anyway.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2008 @ 6:42pm

37. The facts bear that truth out.

    Posted by frankgrits at 07/05/2008 @ 5:58pm

    What facts? That one or two of your black 'buds' got a gullible sourpuss to believe their uncollaborated stories? Do you also believe that the earth is 5K years old because some anti-science idiot new con puts a horse saddle on dinosaur bones?

    Don't you see that you're basing it all on the color of their skin and not on any facts: you've pre-judged a whole race based on a couple of black guys that were attracted to you-- I can kinda see why they told you those stories... It's actually pretty funny that you fell for it.

    But lets for a second follow your faulty logic to see if it indeed isn't racist. With that logic why then don't you also feel victimized by the paraplegic stuck on a wheel chair for using the ramps 'we all' had to paid for? Better yet-- do you feel even more victimized if the paraplegic is black or hispanic?

    Sorry FrGr your whole argument teeters on the premise that it's 'the' blacks that manipulate the system therefore it's not as bad that the hsuB petty dic'tatorship let 'them' waste away in New Orleans. Just like you blame blacks for Obama beating Billary like the old rug full of swept under dirt.

    No FrGr, it's not 'those' ungrateful blacks' fault that Obama is winning-- it's all those ungrateful multitudes that want a drastic change from our current disastrous petty dictatorship and 'we the people' saw that change more in Obama than in Billary. It's really that simple.

    You need to take off your green tinted glasses. (lime green being the opposite of the color rose and also symbolically represents envy)

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 6:43pm

38. lvliberty-Many of those whites on welfare are in red states and vote GOP.Guess liberals aren't holding any purse strings in exchange for votes,.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2008 @ 6:44pm

39. frankgrits-reading someones self promoting book would teach us nothing about the person.never read any of their books and don't need to.those are for the gullible.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2008 @ 6:46pm

40. Frankgrits used to say that some of us on here were secret republican operatives,except for Mask who was a secret Nation employee,but none of our views have changed to GOP views.Only FrankGrits,now,spews non stop GOP talking points. Only FrankGrits views have changed.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/05/2008 @ 6:52pm

41. FrGr reminds me of the movie- Invasion of the Body Snatchers... for some strange reason.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 6:57pm

42. *The first thing blacks always say when you nail them for their ways is to accuse the messenger of being a racist.*

    The fact that you can't see that calling all African-Americans "lazy" is stereotyping of the worst order just shows that you are seeing the issue as an us vs them. You are taking on the worst arguments that white racists have used since the end of slavery that make equality for all American citizens that much more of a struggle. You know what? Vote for Grandpa, I think he really is closer to your true personal philosophy. It also explains your romance with the old Goldwater Girl.

    Posted by yutsano at 07/05/2008 @ 7:01pm

43. With a little luck, Helms is in HELL with Strom...

    Rot in Hell Uncle Jesse !!!

    And i believe some kind of tour stop at Jesse's grave for urination might be a real money maker..??

    Posted by Vvf1969 at 07/05/2008 @ 9:02pm

44. Sorry if you do not see the obvious metaphors. I'm just bad that way.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 4:26pm

    Thanks for explaining. I think I get you now. You think it's OK to splash a little racism on McCain because Fox News splashed a little Global Warming on Obama.

    I'm not persuaded of the proportionality of this, however. Voters will hardly be scandalized by Obama's association with Gore or their mutual supportiveness. And, unless I'm mistaken, global warming activism is a liberal plank Obama publically embraces (so far). No real shock value there. My guess about the hush-hush: Obama's Convention Documentary will be submitted for an Oscar.

    If you agree McCain can be expected to run a racist campaign because Black and Castellanos once worked for Helms, as Nichols clearly implies, I think you're both being a little free-wheeling with a more serious implication. McCain's now in charge of the party and its message (strangely enough), and you should allow that means for some changes. I'll join you in holding him responsible for the message, throughout the campaign (and possibly beyond), but I predict that he'll continue to clobber anyone that even glances at the low road.

    I wonder if Obama will respond to voices like Nichols? Will he proclaim this line of attack "inartful?" Fierce indeed.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/05/2008 @ 10:56pm

45. Pore Jesse's daid, Pore old Jesse Helms is daid, All gather 'round his coffin now and cry And cry!

    He had a heart of brass And a G-O-P pol's ass And that's why such a feller had to die.

    Pore Jesse's daid Pore old Jesse Helms is daid, He's lookin' oh so peaceful and serene And serene!

    He's all laid out to rest With his hands acrost his chest His fingernails have never been so clean!

    Pore Jesse's daid Pore old Jesse Helms is daid His racist friends'll weep for miles around Miles around!

    The daisies in the dell Will give out a different smell Cause Jesse Helms is underneath the ground.

    Pore Jesse's daid A candle lights his haid He's layin' in a coffin made of wood Made of wood!

    And some folks are feelin' glad Cause he used to treat 'em bad But now they know old Jesse's gone for good For good!

    Pore Jesse's daid A candle lights his haid! He's lookin' oh so purty and so nice

    He looks like he's asleep, And we're glad that he won't keep Cause it's summer and we're running out of ice.

    With apologies to Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein

    Posted by jwburgess6440 at 07/05/2008 @ 11:16pm

46. Blaming a whole race for the faults of some seems like stereotyping (at best) or racism to me. I would love to have an intelligent discussion, especially without the flinging of insults.

    You can quote all the literature, but in the end, you sound like an angry person with an agenda.

    By the way, thanks for posting Dr Caputo's paper. It is an interesting read. I do feel sad that one can use Dr Caputo's work to put blame on one race. I'm sorry, but you can blame all the individuals who perpetrated the "fraud", but you just can't keep going on and on about "blacks" as a whole. Until you can make the distinction between the perpetrators and the faultless, I'm sure many here won't want to bother discussing this issue.

    Posted by fufuplatter at 07/05/2008 @ 11:25pm

47. Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 6:43pm

    Do your homework. Find out the percentage of single black women had three kids or more with different partners just to fleece the system.

    Call me anything you like but do your homework first.

    Posted by frankgrits at 07/05/2008 @ 10:33pm

    Er, no, FrGr-- Where's your homework? Show me specifically where you sited above where it states in a scientific research study what racist BS you've been spewing here.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/05/2008 @ 11:45pm

48. Did I miss something Frank..?? I didnt See any references to Skin color in that report.. Just welfare stats...

    Question... U.S. Population ?? Afro-American percentage..?? Number of black people on welfare...?? number of whites on welfare..?? Vast Majority.??? no.

    And please stop beating the Rev. Wright bs... You and I both know its a political smokescreen... (abortion/gay rights ya know, the 'real issues')

    I dont think you are a racist,and I agree, race talk always gets people fired up... HOWEVER, do you believe 4 more years of failed policies will help..??

    I'm just tired of the talking heads and bullshit spinsters driving the general discussion... enough of the smokescreens ... I dont need (and in my humble opinion) America dosent need the usual sleight o' hand this election cycle.... gays/abortion/and yes SCARE TACTICS...

    so when everyone here starts hearing the national security drum beating and the 'terrorists/nine-eleven' trupet blaring on fox and the terror alert color codes goin up, think...

    p.s. Helms, ROT IN HELL

    Posted by Vvf1969 at 07/05/2008 @ 11:55pm

49. Thanks for explaining. I think I get you now. You think it's OK to splash a little racism on McCain because Fox News splashed a little Global Warming on Obama.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/05/2008 @ 10:56pm

    Er, Do you add up a saddle on dinosaur bones to equal humanity is only 5K years old too?

    I swear having a conversation with repub new con dic'tator philosophy supporters reminds me of my work in a state mental hospital. One just never can tell what world the patients were living in from one moment to the next, but it surely wasn't this one.

    What I said was:

    "I was being ironic, i.e. you stating there's no evidence proving McCave will use the nuclear political weaponry that he is clearly purchasing... Wasn't that the very reasoning that the petty hsuB/cHeney dic'tator admin used to lie us into Iraq? Only difference is there's no lie about McCave's purchases."

    And manoverboard got:

    "Thanks for explaining. I think I get you now. You think it's OK to splash a little racism on McCain because Fox News splashed a little Global Warming on Obama."

    But then again is 'overboard' as delusional as FrGr, uhmmm? Your guess.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/06/2008 @ 12:02am

50. You're lazy. I see you didn't bother to read ...

    Posted by frankgrits at 07/05/2008 @ 11:49pm

    No FrGr, I read it all. You are officially a big bag of racist lying scum.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/06/2008 @ 12:06am

51. Posted by frankgrits at 07/06/2008 @ 12:13am

    You just fucked yourself FrGr-- you racist prick.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/06/2008 @ 12:20am

52. few white cases sprinkled in..?? come on franco....

    No secret..?? lol... Again frank.. Open up another window and please get us a black/white/green ratio and real numbers on the welfare system....

    I have this friend we'll call 'Keith'(pronounced 'KEET' if you grew up in Mass) ... Grew up on Cape cod with him... His mom had 9 kids with 5 different fathers... White trash welfare... Tons more like his family sucking off the Govt. Teets.... Come on Frank... You race baitin' us..?? lol..

    Sprinkled in.... U sure your not a writer for Faux News..?? Stats man, Stats...

    So you bring up an Obama speech that you like.... hmm... Just askin, do you think Mccain is the man....?? I dont know your posit on that..?? Just want to know if I'm dealing with a sane person..??

    Posted by Vvf1969 at 07/06/2008 @ 12:30am

53. Despite prevailing stereotype, Whites, not Blacks, collect greatest share of public aid dollars

    SAY the word "welfare" and immediately the image of the lazy Black wellare queen who breeds for profit surfaces in the minds of those who have come to believe the hideous stereotype. It is a myth that persists despite government figures and authoritative studies showing that Whites overwhelmingly reap the lion's share of the dole.

    The image of the Black "welfare cheat," public aid advocates say, is based on misconceptions about poor minorities. The notion, they say, comes from society's resentment of seemingly ablebodied people getting paid for doing nothing.

    "For some people, there is a need to believe that there are professional welfare recipients who are deliberately trying to get not only what they need to survive, but more," says Anne D. Hill, director of programs for the National Urban League. "People say to themselves: 'I work. How come this person who appears to be healthy isn't working?' We tend to equate our condition with others without fully knowing their circumstances."

    Hill and other welfare supporters argue that numbers, and not erroneous stereotypes, tell the real story about public assistance clients: Some 61 percent of welfare recipients are White, while 33 percent are Black, according to 1990 Census Bureau statistics, the latest figures available.

    The federal government defines welfare as all entitlement programs funded through taxes. These programs, listed as "direct benefit payments for individuals" by the Office of Management and Budget, make up $730 billion or 43 percent of the $1.47 trillion the government will spend this fiscal year.

    Social Security is the nation's largest welfare program, although many Whites prefer to call it a retirement plan. The government writes retirement and disability benefit checks to 35.4 million recipients of whom 88.7 percent are White and 9.6 percent are Black. The reason behind this shocking disparity is perhaps the most lamentable of all: The life expectancy rate for Blacks is six years shorter than that of Whites, meaning Black workers spend years paying into a retirement system only to have White retirees reap the benefits for a longer time.

    Welfare critics rarely search the Social Security rolls for "welfare cheats," but train their sights on people getting Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), Medicaid and food stamps, the relief programs with the most Black clients. Yet government figures show that Whites not Blacks make up the bulk of clients on these public aid programs; a fact that dispels the notion that Blacks are scheming for a free lunch courtesy of the American taxpayer.

    Among the poorest of the poor--single mothers, living below the poverty line with minor children to support 39.7 percent of AFDC clients are Black single mothers and 38.1 percent are White women with children. Food stamp recipients are 37.2 percent Black and 46.2 percent White. Medicaid benefits are paid to 27.5 percent Black recipients compared to 48.5 percent White clients.

    Although the numbers show that Whites get the biggest chunk of public aid dollars, welfare critics still charge that Blacks shouldn't collect 33 percent of welfare benefits when they only make up 12 percent of the general population. They say the imbalance proves their case that Blacks are too busy complaining and blaming racism for their plight to look for a job.

    But racism is at the heart of the standard-of-living gap between Blacks and Whites, welfare advocates argue. Unlawful race-based hiring practices, they contend, keep Blacks from getting jobs that pay enough to lift them out of poverty. Until more blue-collar jobs open up to Black workers, Blacks will continue to battle poverty and the freeloader misconception.

    "Public and congressional deliberations over... welfare reform in the last few years have been fueled by distortions and outright falsehoods about poverty," the National Urban League asserted in its 1988 report, Black Americans and Public Policy. "Welfare reform is not solely a Black issue, but one in need of immediate attention."

    Turning welfare reform into a "Black issue" makes racial scapegoating easy and allows stereotypes, like the Reaganera "welfare queen," to go unchallenged, public aid supporters say. Rightwing reformers cast Whites as "deserving" clients who are legitimately unable to pay their own way through no fault of their own. Blacks are labeled "undeserving" recipients who are looking for the feds to subsidize their slothfulness.

    just a lil sumtin sumtin...

    Posted by Vvf1969 at 07/06/2008 @ 12:59am

54. While I cannot whip out welfare stats on command, I am pretty sure frankgrits is reasonably close with his numbers.

    frank, while I applaud your efforts to back your arguments up with facts, your continuous indictment of the "black community" as a whole is rather sad. I am simply pointing out something that I have read over and over again in this thread.

    The discussion of blacks and welfare should probably warrant a whole new thread, so I'll leave it at that. There are way too many variables to just condemn the black community because of some numbers. Obama did the right thing, which is to call out the black fathers to task. That is being constructive.

    Posted by fufuplatter at 07/06/2008 @ 01:07am

55. hsuBfools - I'll try again to tease out your point, then.

    By "nuclear political weaponry," you mean "racially divisive messages," right? Aren't you contending, with Nichols, that McCain's staffing of Black and consulting with Castellanos amounts to "purchase" of the "weaponry?"

    Aren't you further saying that I have "such a PRE-911-type attitude," because, in a world where Bush is president and we're at war because (you say) Bush lied about Saddam's purchase of WMD, I shouldn't dispute that McCain will employ the "nuclear" racial tactics of Jesse Helms?

    I'm still finding my way on your Fox News reference, I guess. I was sure you were complaining about their associating of Obama with Gore, Inc. Wasn't that some kind of apologia for Nichols' insinuations? Or, maybe it's an off-topic comment that Fox News lies us into war with Obama, demonstrating their "POST-911-type" attitude. Pardon my obtuseness if I'm still reading this wrong.

    Anyway, I still have to challenge the aspersions cast in this article. Nichols' title, "Jesse Helms, John McCain and the Mark of the White Hands," is a plain smear (hell, he might as well be throwing a pointy sheet over McCain's head), and I don't see how it can be justified.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/06/2008 @ 01:12am

56. Posted by frankgrits at 07/06/2008 @ 12:23am

    Not really angry FrGr, just stating a fact.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/06/2008 @ 03:18am

57. hsuBfools - I'll try again to tease...

    Posted by man00ver at 07/06/2008 @ 01:12am

    That's about the only honest point to your posts.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/06/2008 @ 03:23am

58. With people like Frankie around, who needs Jesse?

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/06/2008 @ 08:58am

59. spread the fear!

    Posted by abell12ct at 07/06/2008 @ 09:30am

60. Little Johnny Another article that is a complete waste of cyber space. Trying to link John McCain to the racism of Jesse Helms should be a stretch for even Little Johnny ---but I should have known---nothing is beneath Little Johnny if it concerns his particular political agenda----his agenda always comes first---even at the expense of truth or the nations security.

    Posted by Len Mosse at 07/06/2008 @ 09:33am

61. Good grief, what's wrong with singing Dixie? This guy's really hung up on the song. I love the song, just like the Duke boys did. (Bo and Luke for you Northerners).

    I live in Raleigh, NC, and Jesse was my senator for a pretty long time. He really beat the hell out of Edwards. Having him as senator was an embarrassing period for NC. Compared to Jesse, Edwards was/is an empty suit with pretty hair. Jesse was rock-ribbed and solid, and you'd have to agree whether you liked him or not. The son of a bitch wouldn't budge an inch. He was tenacious and relentless in his pursuits. These days it's damn near impossible to find a politician like Jesse, who actually did what he said and said what he meant. He stared liberalism in the eye and laughed out loud. That's a quality that I sorely miss in today's crop of neutered conservatives.

    "O, I wish I was in the land of cotton Old times there are not forgotten Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.

    In Dixie Land where I was born in Early on one frosty mornin' Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.

    Chorus: O, I wish I was in Dixie! Hooray! Hooray! In Dixie Land I'll take my stand To live and die in Dixie Away, away, Away down south in Dixie!

    Old Missus marry Will, the weaver, William was a gay deceiver Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.

    But when he put his arm around her He smiled as fierce as a forty pounder Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.

    Chorus: O, I wish I was in Dixie! Hooray! Hooray! In Dixie Land I'll take my stand To live and die in Dixie Away, away, Away down south in Dixie!

    His face was sharp as a butcher's cleaver But that did not seem to grieve her Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land. Old Missus acted the foolish part And died for a man that broke her heart Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.

    Chorus: O, I wish I was in Dixie! Hooray! Hooray! In Dixie Land I'll take my stand To live and die in Dixie Away, away, Away down south in Dixie!"

    Posted by Person at 07/06/2008 @ 11:00am

62. shuBfools - You're avoiding my "honest point." You don't seem to want to pass judgment on whether it's right to spread unsubstantiated rumors about John McCain, as Nichols has done. Where a principled debater would address this point directly (as I'm sure you'd gladly do if the shoe were on the other foot), you've simply attempted to distract from it, first with your not-so-obvious metaphors of questionable relevance, later stooping to name-calling and quote-clipping as a smoke screen for your retreat.

    I'll let you get back to your beside-the-point cage match with frankgrits.

    To everyone else: I predict Obama will also ignore this shameless and unsupportable line of attack on McCain, thus demonstrating he's not really into running a clean campaign. This shouldn't be a surprise, since he's shown no fortitude on his past "liberal ideals" regarding the death penalty, gun control, the privacy of foreign communications, campaign finance reform, and rapid withrawal from Iraq.

    I just can't wait for the debates.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/06/2008 @ 12:07pm

63. person=singing the losers song is right up there with flying the losers flag.Just cut to the chase and sing-I'm a loser.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/06/2008 @ 12:14pm

64. Not a bad idea. I think I'll do just that:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvZJZkJi1g8

    Posted by Person at 07/06/2008 @ 1:51pm

65. Not to defend Jesse Helms, but it is interesting that Helms' critic Kerry Haynie, a Duke University political science professor, quoted in the third paragraph of John Nichols' post, was a member of the Duke faculty's infamous Group of 88 that without any evidence whatsoever, pronounced three members of the university's lacrosse team guilty of raping a woman hired to dance at one of the team parties.

    Posted by quartzkid at 07/06/2008 @ 5:35pm

66. she was dancing ..??

    lol...

    Posted by Vvf1969 at 07/06/2008 @ 6:09pm

67. "JoeyDavis" wrote:

    'The "White Hands" ad was one of the best campaign ads ever written. It was not a racist ad, it was an issues ad. That is, after all, exactly what does happen when quotas of any kind are put in place: a potentially more qualified candidate is turned away so that a quota can be filled. It is wrong, Wrong, WRONG! How any person who professes to have any sense of fairness can support such policies is beyond me.'

    There is clearly much that is beyond "JoeyDavis." For starters, there's the plain fact that whenever ANYBODY is hired to ANY position for ANY reason, it is ALWAYS possible that "a potentially more qualified candidate is turned away." This undoubtedly does happen occasionally - but not because of Affirmative Action.

    Here's how Affirmative Action works. If a candidate from a generally underrepresented group - one that demonstrably suffers diminished chances because of prejudice against it - is considered by an organization in which this group continues to be underrepresented, then this person's race or sex may be counted as a point in his or her favor, so that he or she may be chosen over an EQUALLY well qualified competitor. When the organization includes a number of members from this underrepresented group that is proportional to this group's number in the general population - this is what the "quota" means - then a new candidate's sex or race (whichever it may be) CEASES to be counted as a point in his or her favor or disfavor; instead, color-blindness and sex-blindness becomes the rule.

    Affirmative Action does not in any case favor less qualified candidates over better qualified ones. To suggest that it does is simply a lie.

    The "white hands" commercial is even worse than mendacious, because it insinuates that a white candidate who loses his job to a black candidate simply must have lost to a less qualified competitor - a racist insinuation indeed.

    Posted by JakobFabian at 07/06/2008 @ 7:33pm

68. You don't seem to want to pass judgment on whether it's right to spread unsubstantiated rumors about John McCain, as Nichols has done.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/06/2008 @ 12:07pm

    1st of all you're asking a question utilizing a false statement. Thus your question is in itself disingenuous. Much like the rest of your posts.

    All John does is ask a question:

    "The question now is whether Black will advise McCain, another Republican who is trailing an attractive African-American Democrat, to do what Helms always did?"

    2nd, my explanation was clear enough for everyone else. That 'you' are unable to reason out metaphors isn't a fault of mine and unfortunately you can't post a legit letter from an authorized entity to request an accommodation for your mental disability.

    So here we are...

    But I can state clearly for even you, and as even the perhaps new and improved 'maskbeta' states above, repubs are being rather hypocritical with their wide stance on guilt by association. And that the hsuB dic'tatorship used that same reasoning to lie us into war w/Iraq is way too easy a metaphor. But then to deny that McCave's associations are actually proven, cannot be disputed, thus only a PRE-9/11 attitude would not hold McCave suspect and accountable for his political arsenal.

    So here we are again...

    I cannot tell if 'manoverboard' really needs a disability accommodation and thus some patience - or - he's just here jerking off for fun-- anybody have insight to this one?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/06/2008 @ 7:41pm

69. Posted by quartzkid at 07/06/2008 @ 5:35pm

    Posted by Vvf1969 at 07/06/2008 @ 6:09p

    Lap dancing/stripping... It is my understanding that she may have gotten groped and called racial epithets-- thus her retaliatory lie.

    I do still prefer that the police continue to take rape charges seriously and thoroughly investigate in an unbiased way rather than not.

    However, university deans/presidents/faculty are notorious for taking the most politically expedient stand for highly controversial public situations as their charge in those situations is educational equilibrium and not necessarily judicial equity. Majorly big dif between a court of law and a school.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/06/2008 @ 7:46pm

70. Friend:

    Don't trouble yourself with these particulars. The liberals in this group neither care nor have the capacity to understand the nature of the conflict.

    Posted by Person at 07/06/2008 @ 7:51pm

71. hsuBfools - I'm happy that Maskbeta made a reasonable argument, and I'm glad to respond to your embrace of it.

    *BTW, interesting that those who want "guilt by association" with Obama and Bill Ayers...

    claim it's unfair to use the same standard with Helms, McCain, and the aides and consultants both share.

    Posted by Maskbeta at 07/06/2008 @ 4:49pm *

    Wasn't it the Clinton campaign that jumped all over this Ayers thing? I don't think McCain's camp has said a word about Ayers since he sounded a little surprised after Hillary's debate performance.

    I'm not one who thinks Obama is hurt by the Ayers question, which he has already answered to my utter satisfaction. Ayers himself has come a long way from his bad old days.

    I may, however, now be seeing what you and Nichols are really worried about, and you can tell me if I've finally got a clue. Is it the Rev. Wright "nuke" we're really talking about here?

    Well, rest assured, McCain has already defused that one, telling Sean Hannity (no less) in March, "...I do know Sen. Obama. He does not share those views." In April, he strongly condemned a local campaign ad by the NC GOP containing an inflammatory clip of Wright, and fought to prevent it from airing. Said he, "There's no place for that kind of campaigning, the American people don't want it, period," and, "I understand that it moves numbers, negative ads do all that, but that doesn't mean it's right."

    Still think Nichols is being fair to McCain?

    hsuBfools, I think your article citation is, itself, off the mark. The question is not what Black will advise McCain to do. The legitimate question is what will McCain do? I think he's already answered that, and I'll even go out on a limb and predict he'll publicly shut down any further attempt to smear Obama by association with anyone or anything other than his own policies. He doesn't need to cheat in the contest of character.

    On the other hand, the citation *I* originally clipped from Nichols' article actually goes beyond "the question" and offers a pretty rude version of "the answer" about McCain (here offered in fuller context):

    *Those who battled hardest against Helms and his racial politics are quite certain that the 2008 campaign of Republican McCain against Democrat Barack Obama, who in August will become the first African-American nominee of a major party for president, will take a Helmsian turn.

    "There's no question appeals will be made by McCain's campaign on racial lines," says North Carolina Congressman Mel Watt....*

    This is pretty harsh, no? Dirty, I'd say. What say you all?

    Posted by man00ver at 07/06/2008 @ 10:11pm

72. I'm sure there are many whites out there who will vote for McCain because he is white... so it's nothing new that blacks out there would want to vote for Obama because he is, well, partly black.

    Just because Hannity (of all people) got a couple of young black folks to say they wanted to vote for Obama because he is black doesn't mean that every black is voting for him "for solidarity".

    Posted by fufuplatter at 07/07/2008 @ 01:15am

73. Wasn't it the Clinton campaign that jumped all over this Ayers thing? I don't think McCain's camp has said a word about Ayers since he sounded a little surprised after Hillary's debate performance.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/06/2008 @ 10:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    You're either mentally deficient or full of shit 'overboard', which is it:

    On "This Week," McCain Attacks Obama on Ayers Connection

    April 20, 2008 12:52 PM

    On "This Week with George George Stephanopoulos" this morning, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., unprompted, raised the issue of the connection between Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and William Ayers, a former member of the radical group the Weather Underground.

    On the subject of whether McCain would attempt to attack Obama on patriotism, the presumptive GOP nominee said, "I'm sure he's very patriotic. But his relationship with Mr. Ayers is open to question. ... if you're going to associate and have as a friend and serve on a board and have a guy kick off your campaign that says he's unrepentant, that he wished they had bombed more."

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/07/2008 @ 01:46am

74. "There's no question appeals will be made by McCain's campaign on racial lines," says North Carolina Congressman Mel Watt....*

    This is pretty harsh, no? Dirty, I'd say. What say you all?

    Posted by man00ver at 07/06/2008 @ 10:11pm

    You are an idiot. John quoting someone else saying what they think might happen-- compared to McCave's own words going after Barack-- you have no argument just more repub new con BS.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/07/2008 @ 01:51am

75. Oh sure, there's absolutely no evidence to suggest McCave's next petty dic'tator new con election machine won't use 'everything' they can to win:

    "McCain campaign baits Obama on Clinton slurs It's hard to believe the faux outrage at sexism after McCain chuckled at the B-word,..." Joan Walsh [2008-05-12]

    "Every word will be twisted to make it about race," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a McCain friend and adviser.

    "Shortly before North Carolina's May 6 primary, the state Republican Party aired a TV ad linking Democratic candidates to Obama, who was described as "too extreme" because of his ties to the retired Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.... The state party ignored McCain's repeated calls to kill the ad."

    "In South Dakota, a TV station briefly aired an ad that was edited to show Obama saying, "we are no longer a Christian nation, we are also a Muslim nation." It omitted his saying, in the same speech, that the United States is not solely a Christian nation. The ad, which included a photo of Obama wearing a turban as part of a traditional outfit given to him in Africa, concluded with a man saying: "It's time for people of faith to stand against Barack Hussein Obama." A group called the Coalition Against Anti-Christian Rhetoric paid for the ad, ..."

    "The Texas Republican Party recently cut ties with a vendor whose political buttons at a party convention included one saying: "If Obama is president ... will we still call it The White House?"

    "Racist Incidents Give Some Obama Campaigners Pause" By Kevin Merida, Washington Post Staff Writer, Tuesday, May 13, 2008; Page A01

    "On his campaign bus recently, Sen. John McCain told reporters, "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." Thursday, March 2, 2000, By KATIE HONG, SPECIAL TO THE POST-INTELLIGENCER

    MCCAIN: "Could I just make a comment? I'm not interested in trading with Al Qaida. All they want to trade is burkas." by E.A. Blayre III, (Libertarian), Friday, January 11, 2008

    "McCain, O'Reilly: The White, Christian, Male Power Structure": http://urbanuprising.wordpress.com/2008/04/08/mccain-oreilly-the-white-c hristian-male-power-structure/

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23957755#23952104

    Oh OK, I guess you get the pic.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/07/2008 @ 03:18am

76. Posted by 2HAPPY at 07/07/2008 @ 12:23am

    Yes, fortunately, there are NO folks voting for McCain because Obama is black, huh?

    Posted by Mask at 07/07/2008 @ 08:55am

77. Overboard is the typical new con-- they'll say it's "constructing reality", but it's always been what it's been and no way of saying it nicely will change what it is-- it's simply them pulling shit out of their ass. Even if one calls them on the new con repub lies, they'll just keep repeating it over and over again until their lemming Russsh Handjob O'Really! dic'tatorship followers lock step to pull our nation further over the cliff. They've already turned the GOP into a MIC shit-- everyone needs to hit these assholes over the head hard enough with the real reality to hear them pop. That pop is their heads being popped-out of their asses. And that means some majorly big whollupping. Get ready, get set-- go to it.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/07/2008 @ 09:28am

78. So, looks to me, blacks themselves, near unanimously for Obama have squarely legitimized "for solidarity" vote along racial lines.

    Posted by 2HAPPY

    uh,

    how many "whites" are voting for mccain because he's "white"?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 07/07/2008 @ 11:34am

79. Ahh race. What a precipitous discussion to have. It never turns out well. I see Frank like always is blaming everyone but the person to be blamed. Have you not figured out Frank that if it was ONLY blacks and youth voting for Obama he couldn't have won. Look at the numbers Frank. Your data is flawed. Why not try blaming the one person who is responsible? Or are you not for taking responsibility? Hillary thought it was inevtiable that she would win. When she actually had to put up a fight her true self was revealed and American voters didn't like it(Not just youths and blacks.)

    I like that you group all blacks into being so dumb that they can't make a decision for themselves and every black is racist enough to only vote along the lines of race. It's the same thing you were screaming about white people at the beginning. That they would never vote for a black man. Same thing most Hillary supporters were screaming. THAT is why she lost, because she race baited because she played dirty. She lost the black community because she treated them like you are treating them now, like a bunch of uneducated morons who can't make an intelligent decision without a white person to guide them. You're post reeks of disdain. The fact that you can boil down the voting of all blacks into just voting because he was black is ridiculous. Look at the beginning of the race and you would find out that your facts don't bear out. Blacks were unwilling to vote for him in the beginning. Do some research Frank. Look at when the tide changed. It was around when Hillary started doing things that were obviously meant to race bait. It was around Ferarro's comments that basically boiled down any major achievement by and African American into nothing more than a rise because of their race. How about Bill's comments. Your candidate lost and she lost the black vote especially because she ran a disdainful campaign.

    Yes some black people voted along the lines of race just like some white people vote along the lines of race but we aren't all so dumb as to not be able to make a decision for ourselves Frank. We don't need someone else to tell us how to think. YOU may think that the only way for blacks to make an intelligent decision is to listen to a white person but it's crazy how much blacks have done for themselves.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2008 @ 12:52pm

80. I still say this whole respect for the dead thing is hilarious. My motto is "Asshole in life, asshole in death." It's funny that LVL will come on here and defend Jesse Helms one of the most notoriously racist Senators to have ever disgraced America with his presence. Then he will bash George Carlin.

    No wonder the world thinks Americans are a bunch of raving idiots. We put people like Jesse Helms on the Senate Foreign Relations Commitee. Someone who praises apartheid supporting leaders.

    Good riddance to old garbage. America takes one more step away from the days of setting dogs on blacks who are trying to attain nothing more than their rights as Americans and one more step toward what this country should be. A place where you aren't judged on your skin color but on who you are.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2008 @ 12:59pm

81. Also Hap. Just because SOME black people are voting along race doesn't mean all or even most are. Correlation is not Causation. The reason most blacks didn't vote for Hillary is because her campaign tactics flat out insulted them.

    Did you enjoy when the Hillary supporters were screaming that Obama should not be elected because no white person would ever vote for a black man? Did it make you feel proud that all white people in America were basically being called a bunch of racists?

    When you insult a race as a whole, you can expect the race to not feel so inclined to vote for you. When a race is insulted by basically being told by Hillary supporters that she has done so much for you therefore you owe her a vote they tend to not flock toward that person.

    I talked to my grandmother about this. A woman who did vote for Hillary when the primaries came to California. She expressed the same sentiment that many people have. She said toward the end of the primaries that she regretted voting for Hillary. Why? Not because my grandmother is black and felt a need to express solidarity. No it's because she didn't like the way Hillary was running her campaign and the tactics she was using. She said she felt that when you have to truly put up a fight it shows your true self and she didn't like who Hillary had shown herself to be. She didn't like that she was being told who she was supposed to vote for because of some imaginary debt that Hillary is owed according to people like Frank.

    Frank black people turned on her because her surrogates insinuated that she was owed something. Which implies that she didn't help blacks out of trying to advance them as a people in this country but out of political gain so she could then call in their debt later.

    The fact that Hillary supporters say she is "owed" and that blacks "betrayed" shows a lot about the cult of personality that they are following. It goes back to her inevitability and her somehow being owed a Presidential seating. However no one in this country is owed that seat. They earn it. The way Hillary attempted to earn it played to the worse tactics and the basest wrongs of our culture. Instead of trying to go the higher road and play a campaign on the issues she attempted to go the low road and sling mud and appeal to certain peoples dark sides. She didn't earn it and the blame rests squarely on her and how she ran her campaign and the more you kick and scream and try to blame everyone else Frank the more you prove the point that you weren't voting for the sake of the nation you were voting for the sake of Hillary.

    If you would have never blamed Obama and the blacks for "stealing the election" and you had simply said Hillary was fairly beaten by a candidate I do not feel is qualified for the job so I am going to vote for McCain you would have been treated different. But your approach to the problem is what put you on the outside.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2008 @ 1:23pm

82. Also Hap. Just because SOME black people are voting along race doesn't mean all or even most are. Correlation is not Causation. The reason most blacks didn't vote for Hillary is because her campaign tactics flat out insulted them.

    Did you enjoy when the Hillary supporters were screaming that Obama should not be elected because no white person would ever vote for a black man? Did it make you feel proud that all white people in America were basically being called a bunch of racists?

    When you insult a race as a whole, you can expect the race to not feel so inclined to vote for you. When a race is insulted by basically being told by Hillary supporters that she has done so much for you therefore you owe her a vote they tend to not flock toward that person.

    I talked to my grandmother about this. A woman who did vote for Hillary when the primaries came to California. She expressed the same sentiment that many people have. She said toward the end of the primaries that she regretted voting for Hillary. Why? Not because my grandmother is black and felt a need to express solidarity. No it's because she didn't like the way Hillary was running her campaign and the tactics she was using. She said she felt that when you have to truly put up a fight it shows your true self and she didn't like who Hillary had shown herself to be. She didn't like that she was being told who she was supposed to vote for because of some imaginary debt that Hillary is owed according to people like Frank.

    Frank black people turned on her because her surrogates insinuated that she was owed something. Which implies that she didn't help blacks out of trying to advance them as a people in this country but out of political gain so she could then call in their debt later.

    The fact that Hillary supporters say she is "owed" and that blacks "betrayed" shows a lot about the cult of personality that they are following. It goes back to her inevitability and her somehow being owed a Presidential seating. However no one in this country is owed that seat. They earn it. The way Hillary attempted to earn it played to the worse tactics and the basest wrongs of our culture. Instead of trying to go the higher road and play a campaign on the issues she attempted to go the low road and sling mud and appeal to certain peoples dark sides. She didn't earn it and the blame rests squarely on her and how she ran her campaign and the more you kick and scream and try to blame everyone else Frank the more you prove the point that you weren't voting for the sake of the nation you were voting for the sake of Hillary.

    If you would have never blamed Obama and the blacks for "stealing the election" and you had simply said Hillary was fairly beaten by a candidate I do not feel is qualified for the job so I am going to vote for McCain you would have been treated different. But your approach to the problem is what put you on the outside.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2008 @ 1:23pm

83. Also Hap. Just because SOME black people are voting along race doesn't mean all or even most are. Correlation is not Causation. The reason most blacks didn't vote for Hillary is because her campaign tactics flat out insulted them.

    Did you enjoy when the Hillary supporters were screaming that Obama should not be elected because no white person would ever vote for a black man? Did it make you feel proud that all white people in America were basically being called a bunch of racists?

    When you insult a race as a whole, you can expect the race to not feel so inclined to vote for you. When a race is insulted by basically being told by Hillary supporters that she has done so much for you therefore you owe her a vote they tend to not flock toward that person.

    I talked to my grandmother about this. A woman who did vote for Hillary when the primaries came to California. She expressed the same sentiment that many people have. She said toward the end of the primaries that she regretted voting for Hillary. Why? Not because my grandmother is black and felt a need to express solidarity. No it's because she didn't like the way Hillary was running her campaign and the tactics she was using. She said she felt that when you have to truly put up a fight it shows your true self and she didn't like who Hillary had shown herself to be. She didn't like that she was being told who she was supposed to vote for because of some imaginary debt that Hillary is owed according to people like Frank.

    Frank black people turned on her because her surrogates insinuated that she was owed something. Which implies that she didn't help blacks out of trying to advance them as a people in this country but out of political gain so she could then call in their debt later.

    The fact that Hillary supporters say she is "owed" and that blacks "betrayed" shows a lot about the cult of personality that they are following. It goes back to her inevitability and her somehow being owed a Presidential seating. However no one in this country is owed that seat. They earn it. The way Hillary attempted to earn it played to the worse tactics and the basest wrongs of our culture. Instead of trying to go the higher road and play a campaign on the issues she attempted to go the low road and sling mud and appeal to certain peoples dark sides. She didn't earn it and the blame rests squarely on her and how she ran her campaign and the more you kick and scream and try to blame everyone else Frank the more you prove the point that you weren't voting for the sake of the nation you were voting for the sake of Hillary.

    If you would have never blamed Obama and the blacks for "stealing the election" and you had simply said Hillary was fairly beaten by a candidate I do not feel is qualified for the job so I am going to vote for McCain you would have been treated different. But your approach to the problem is what put you on the outside.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/07/2008 @ 1:24pm

84. This article is the biggest bunch of liberal-loser BS I've seen in a while. McCain and Helms cut from the same cloth? What a joke and what a "clever" way to link McCain to someone who you can tear down with tired old arguments. This country would be a lot better off if we had more people of integrity like Jesse Helms in our Congress instead of Harvey Milquetoasts like Obama (how many times did he vote "present" to avoid having to take a stand?)

    You liberals just plain suck. And you're stupid beyond belief. Did your mother drop you on your head or something?

    Posted by Leroy_Jenkins at 07/07/2008 @ 3:25pm

85. Maskbeta - Calling Hannity a "McCain surrogate" is not quite playing it straight. Like most ultra-conservative pundits, he's been very unkind to McCain, and he didn't go easy even during the interview I was quoting. Those types will likely hold their noses and vote Republican, but calling McCain "one of them" is disingenuous.

    hsuBfools - You're putting together quite an impassioned defense of political smear tactics.

    I'll concede that I was light on research for what McCain said about Obama's association with Ayers (which did follow the Clinton debate as I said, but which comment was not exactly "unprompted" either). While I understand that Ayers has qualified the inflammatory statements he made in 2001, and I also allow that his community work has had some positive value, McCain would obviously prefer a real apology. Unlike Obama, McCain was out of his short pants--and in uniform--while Ayers was planning to blow up soldiers at Ft. Dix. Still, he was making conciliatory noises at that same interview with the rabid Hannity in March (http://tinyurl.com/5ckehu):

    *Hannity brought up "one other emerging controversy we've dealt with a lot on Hannity & Colmes and my Sunday show," meaning of course Obama's "association" with William Ayers, a member of the Weather Underground 40 years ago and now an upstanding member of society..."Should that be an issue in the campaign?" Hannity asked hopefully.

    McCain was obviously not interested in going down that road. "My life has been one of reconciliation," he said. "If people want to put their past behind them, to apologize, to say look we've made mistakes in the past but we want to move forward, I respect that and embrace it. Because all of us have made serious mistakes in our lives and I certainly am one of them. But if this person is still proud of that kind of activity…" Hannity interrupted to say, "In 2001, (Ayers) said, ‘I regret not doing more.'" McCain said, "Then, obviously, a person like that has to be repudiated."*

    So, McCain would obviously also prefer for the Obama camp not to describe his relationship with Ayers as "friendly," and for Obama to refrain from comparing Ayers' politics to the anti-abortion rhetoric of Sen. Tom Coburn by way of defending his tolerance of all views in the Clinton debate. You can decide whether McCain's reaction was honest or not. Regardless, as I said, he hasn't mentioned Ayers again since then (that I could find).

    I can understand why you want to soft-pedal the Mel Watt remark Nichols quoted in his piece. Nichols didn't, instead lionizing Watt as one of "those who fought hardest against Helms and his racial politics," and even giving Watt the closing quote (to paraphrase: "Even if McCain doesn't say anything racist, all his criticisms of Obama will have to be viewed through that lens). Tell me again why this isn't a smear of McCain? For cryin' out loud, it's the whole point of the article!

    By the way, you don't win an argument by scattering litter all over the landscape. But you do get to read more of my responses.

    1. McCain baits Obama camp over surrogate's "Fatal Attraction" Clinton remarks. In what way is this racist? (It's not, but I'm sure we'll get to discuss whether or not an old lady was amusing when she referred to HRC as "the bitch," and how profoundly hypocritcal you think McCain was when he laughed.)

    2-3-4-5. You clipped Graham's quote out of context. Then you clipped another bit from the same article which is actually supportive of McCain (which I'm sure was not your intention). Then you clipped again to show me the aborted smear ad of a South Dakota Christian PAC. The whole piece (CNN 6/23) actually makes my point that of the two men, Obama has opened this racism gambit, and McCain's camp is committed to staying on the issues. You clearly missed the part that said, "Republicans know that McCain has no tolerance for such tactics."

    6. The Merida WaPo article says nothing about McCain. What's your point here? Racism is bad? Well, at least we agree on something.

    7. If anyone has the right to call NVA prison guards and torturers by derogatory names, it's McCain. There's very little question to whom he was referring, and it wasn't Obama (or even Katie Hong).

    8. Al-qaeda and burkas: McCain demeans a terrorist group by hanging a symbol of female repression on them. Maybe you have no sense of humor, but who are you standing up for here?

    9. O'Reilly and McCain - while O'Reilly wants to rail against the NYT, McCain sticks to issues, advancing his fairly progressive ideas on immigration and guest worker reform. Good clip. But aren't we talking about McCain and racism today?

    10. An MLK clip, including assassination footage. No mention of McCain. I guess it's supposed to just hang in the air like some kind of grim ward applied against any white politician.

    Got any more? And by that, I'm not asking for more ranting and raving, even though you're obviously overstocked. It doesn't really bother me, in case you haven't noticed yet.

    BTW, I don't harbor any illusions that I'll win this argument with you. You and Nichols are audaciously hopeless. But if I can reach just one center-left child....

    McCain deserves a fair assessment, not the politics of slander. Many liberals regard him as a hero, and there are plenty of good reasons for that.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/07/2008 @ 3:47pm

86. Posted by man00ver at 07/07/2008 @ 3:47pm

    Once again the machinations of a new con repub with blinders and rose colored glasses on for the little that visible so to ignore evidence and hold lemming-like to herr McCave's sainthood, thusly to follow in the hsuB dic'tator example of how to prepare for war-- con and con again and again if the first con doesn't work...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/07/2008 @ 5:55pm

87. Frank, you amaze me.

    Even your attempts to defend yourself, come off as racist.

    You really thing a significant number of black women, actually shared their bodies with strange men, in an attempt to be used as willing brood mares, to create minority voters?

    And more bizarre still; You really think that voicing this bullshit as fact, (with no statistics to back it up, just the mildly racist rantings of others who were published), not only doesn't make you look bad, but isn't a de facto definition of racism?

    Good luck with that.

    Eric

    Posted by Malcontent at 07/07/2008 @ 8:32pm

88. Thrawn,

    Although I often dis-agree with you, I usually appreciate your rational points of comment.

    But I feel compelled to point out, that while jesse was indeed a human, with those who loved him, he still doesn't automatically get respect for it. His humanity was a genetic coincidence and seldom was outwardly seen by anyone.

    My maternal grandfather was a racist. And although I didn't respect him I appreciated the things he added to the world around him. His bizarre points of view did not directly effect anybody, nor did his continued employment do anything but feed his family.

    The same cannot be said for somebody who made it his career to destroy other human beings.

    I appreciate your sentiment, but I would wait in line to piss on his grave.

    Eric

    Posted by Malcontent at 07/07/2008 @ 8:41pm

89. Here's a better link to #10: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/04/mccain-mlk-heckle/

    Still if this only went to judgement one could easily see McCave's tendency to do the wrong thing 'first' and then being dragged kicking screaming to the correct. Just like McCave apologizing for his racially insensitive jokes, his major flaw is, as with most new con repubs, a lost humanity, a missing empathy that signals one 'can' be late to the suffering in New Orleans, one can manufacture evidence to lead people to death and maiming, one can disregard our constitution, one can corrupt our DoJ. Yes, McCave can.

    And he can because he lives in a 'different' world than you and I. As 'overboard' states, he doesn't get mad, why not? He simply and calmly ignores. Well adjust people could not. For those that don't, it's because there is a disconnect from our reality, theirs is manufactured to fulfill their ideology and thus to ignore it's very inhumanity. Otherwise -- how could one feel it's weight on others if one felt anything.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 07/08/2008 @ 10:10am

90. Common courtesy, just like common sense, should be reserved for common situations. If a garden variety conservative dies, it would be cruel to celebrate. Heck, if I know the person or his or her family, I offer my sympathy and honest condolences. If someone who has passed is a bigot in some way, one balances that against the rest of their life, and you may still mourn for the person even as you acknowledge, if only to yourself, their failings.

    Jesse Helms, while not at the level of a Joseph Stalin or an Adolf Hitler, was not a common person. He was an evil man, an unrepentant racist, a hater of gay people, an imperialist enabler of murderers and a foe, in general, of the exploited and the oppressed. Although I don't believe in an afterlife, I like to imagine him roasting in Hell a ring or two above Hitler and Stalin with Strom Thurmond, Jerry Falwell and Ronald Reagan, and that Maggie Thatcher will be joining them real soon.

    Burn, Baby, Burn!

    Posted by cka2nd at 07/08/2008 @ 5:59pm

91. hsuBfools, your new link makes more sense to your argument. McCain makes his own defense within his video, offering his unqualified apology for his past positions on the MLK holiday. It's a take it or leave it thing, and it's entirely one's own choice. I for one remember he also called for AZ Gov. Evan Meacham's resignation in 1990 (I carried a Recall Meacham petition and got over 500 sigs back then). This was after a nasty MLK Day argument, when McCain lobbied hard and got Reagan to personally support the (ultimately unsuccessful) referendum for state recognition. When he did this, almost none of the state's GOP leadership (and less than half the state's voters) agreed with him. To me, that says he's not just making it up for the benefit of today's campaign. He really did change his mind, and once he did, he went all the way.

    I'm beginning to understand that your opposition to McCain is probably largely rooted in your feelings about the war (well-fertilized by your feelings about hsuB). By ignoring your invective, I can see a principled position within which I respect, even if I reason it out for myself and differ in conclusion. If I let you drive me away, I don't really get to hear your ideas. That could be my loss.

    I have an idea to offer you: please read (or re-skim, if you've already done) McCain's Wikipedia entry. It's a pretty objective cliffnotes, and contains many balanced referenced to check out. You may not vote for him, but it won't hurt your opposition research to brush up on his history. Legitimate attacks carry more freight than the sleazy type we've been commenting on here.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/08/2008 @ 9:42pm

92. That's former AZ Gov. Evan Mecham, BTW. Can't believe I misspelled it. It's been a long time, after all.

    Posted by man00ver at 07/08/2008 @ 9:58pm