Are Libertarians Racist? Salon thinks so.....

[steveh_131]

I haven't seen this scale of rationalizing since my x-wife......................Wait - Jenni?

Rationalizing implies that I am arguing that the south wasn't in the wrong.

In point of fact, I was arguing that they were both in the wrong and that the war was all about politics.

That is not rationalizing.

 

[steveh_131]

The only objective fact in all of this is that there were douche bags in the south and douche bags in the north. They couldn't get along, so they got other people to kill each other over it until one set of douche bags got the upper hand.

This sums it up quite perfectly.

 

[jamil]

Rationalizing implies that I am arguing that the south wasn't in the wrong.

In point of fact, I was arguing that they were both in the wrong and that the war was all about politics.

That is not rationalizing.

Of course it was about politics. It was about the politics of Southern Aristocrats keeping their way of life.

 

[indiucky]

And what's even crazier, is that he has a black daughter that was kept secret until after his death. Not even joking.

Want to hear something really funny? I saw Tavis Smiley spend 15 minutes of an interview with the woman in question trying to get her to say something negative about Strom Thurmond and she wouldn't.....She said they (her parents) were in love and their love was a victim of the time and the place in which they lived....She also stated that though her mother's love for him was strong that she was the one who broke it off...She said she knew he was going places and due to the times he would not be able to succeed with her (and the kids...) in his life....

He maintained a relationship with the grandchildren.....I remember the grandson said the only thing he can remember Strom getting on him about was that he had let his afro grow out (it was the early 70's) and Strom told him that being bi-racial was going to be a tough enough hill to climb when trying to get a job without having long hair as well....The grandson chuckled at the memory as he said every time he saw his grandfather that Strom would just look at him and shake his head and say, "Son would you please get a hair cut?" ....If you get a chance try to find that interview...It was interesting and surprising (to me.)

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Hell,Billy Clinton has kids all over Littlerock, I have been waiting for years for that story to break.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Hell,Billy Clinton has kids all over Littlerock, I have been waiting for years for that story to break.

I am sorry. This does not apply,cause he is not a racist.

 

[steveh_131]

Of course it was about politics. It was about the politics of Southern Aristocrats keeping their way of life.

And the Northern politicians continuing to leech off of them.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Want to hear something really funny? I saw Tavis Smiley spend 15 minutes of an interview with the woman in question trying to get her to say something negative about Strom Thurmond and she wouldn't.....She said they (her parents) were in love and their love was a victim of the time and the place in which they lived....She also stated that though her mother's love for him was strong that she was the one who broke it off...She said she knew he was going places and due to the times he would not be able to succeed with her (and the kids...) in his life....

He maintained a relationship with the grandchildren.....I remember the grandson said the only thing he can remember Strom getting on him about was that he had let his afro grow out (it was the early 70's) and Strom told him that being bi-racial was going to be a tough enough hill to climb when trying to get a job without having long hair as well....The son chuckled at the memory as he said every time he saw his grandfather that Strom would just look at him and shake his head and say, "Son would you please get a hair cut?" ....If you get a chance try to find that interview...It was interesting and surprising (to me.)

O'rly? I haven't seen it.... but I did find the interview. So I'll watch it and tell you my thoughts later.

Video: Essie Mae Washington-Williams Tribute | Watch Tavis Smiley Online | PBS Video

 

[IndyDave1776]

The only objective fact in all of this is that there were douche bags in the south and douche bags in the north. They couldn't get along, so they got other people to kill each other over it until one set of douche bags got the upper hand.

That seems to sum it up. The lingering problem is that by virtue of being able to write the history and accidentally making one meritorious accomplishment, a war between two groups of douche bags dragging in all the people around them has turned into an epic tale of good versus evil in which good triumphed and awesomeness prevailed, which is about as legitimate as a whore's baby.

 

[jamil]

And the Northern politicians continuing to leech off of them.

That may be true, politics and human nature being what it is, but any discussion of "States' Rights" in those days implied a singular subject, the right to enslave "inferior" people. It is obvious from arguments made supporting various legislation over the 20 years prior, that Southern lawmakers only cared about "States' Rights" when it came to slavery.

 

[rhino]

That may be true, politics and human nature being what it is, but any discussion of "States' Rights" in those days implied a singular subject, the right to enslave "inferior" people. It is obvious from arguments made supporting various legislation over the 20 years prior, that Southern lawmakers only cared about "States' Rights" when it came to slavery.

Could that be because that was the only (perceived) right of states that was in contention at the time?

 

[indiucky]

That may be true, politics and human nature being what it is, but any discussion of "States' Rights" in those days implied a singular subject, the right to enslave "inferior" people.

"Inferior" when they were not selling...I have read transcripts of 18th and 19th century slave auctions and when selling there was nothing "inferior" about the slave...No sir...

You know New England almost seceded and the root cause was....Slavery!!!!! It was over the Mexican War and New England folk felt that the only reason the Southern Politicians were pushing for the war was to expand slavery into the new territories we anticipated receiving from a victory....

 

[indiucky]

O'rly? I haven't seen it.... but I did find the interview. So I'll watch it and tell you my thoughts later.

Video: Essie Mae Washington-Williams Tribute | Watch Tavis Smiley Online | PBS Video

I paraphrased from memory Kut so if I am a little off on my quotes it was a few years ago...The grandson interview may have been on another station. When the book came out various family members were making the rounds to news outlets to tell their story....The grandson cracked me up imitating Strom getting on him about his "Militant" afro.....

 

[HoughMade]

"Inferior" when they were not selling...I have read transcripts of 18th and 19th century slave auctions and when selling there was nothing "inferior" about the slave...No sir...

You know New England almost seceded and the root cause was....Slavery!!!!! It was over the Mexican War and New England folk felt that the only reason the Southern Politicians were pushing for the war was to expand slavery into the new territories we anticipated receiving from a victory....

Haven't you heard, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were accidents.

Frankly, moving off "The Union as tyrannical overlord and the south as innocent victim" to "both sides were douchebags" is an improvement.

 

[jamil]

Haven't you heard, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were accidents.

Frankly, moving off "The Union as tyrannical overlord and the south as innocent victim" to "both sides were douchebags" is an improvement.

I think "both sides were douchebags" is probably most accurate, though I think the bigger douchebags at that time were the Southern Aristocrats who conned poor whites into dying to perpetuate their own prosperity because "States Rights".

 

[jamil]

Could that be because that was the only (perceived) right of states that was in contention at the time?

No, I think human nature prevailed. When the perceived right of states that was in contention favored the North, Southern lawmakers had no qualms about ignoring states' rights. It's no different on INGO. Humans tend to act like hypocrites, but really we're just spin doctors. We find righteous ways to justify what we want to do, even when what we want to do has no righteousness to it.

 

[indiucky]

Frankly, moving off "The Union as tyrannical overlord and the south as innocent victim" to "both sides were douchebags" is an improvement.

I live on the river....There are "douchebags" North and South of the Ohio River.....

What's funny is that the coolest thing you can find around here about an ancestor is that they "worked on the Underground Railroad"......The thing is that for every Hoosier working on the Underground Railroad there were about a hundred making a living capturing runaway slaves and taking them back across the river....No one will admit to having one of those in the family tree...I have done some research on the subject...Our state, especially down here on the river was closer in attitude on race relations to the South than they were the North....There is a great Documentary that was on KET3 (our local PBS Station) called "African Americans in New Albany" and it might as well have been called "African Americans in Vicksburg".....

One of my customers is from Alabama and I was teasing him one day about being "rednecky" and he looked up at me and said in that wonderful drawl, "Hey Rick, You do realize that Indiana IS the Mississippi of the North right?"

The sad thing is I knew what he meant...The most famous lynching photo (that is often used to make a point about the South was "gulp" taken in Indiana...And not "southern" Indiana either....)

Here is the article...The pic is just too disturbing...The look on the faces in the crowd is just plain creepy...Plus it was 1930 and one guy looks like Hitler...A lot like Hitler....

 

[AmmoManAaron]

How many names do you want to change your opinion?

We'll start with Trent Lott, William Colmer, Clarke Reed, Ronald Reagan, Strom Thurmond, Charles Pickering, Fob James, Murphy J. Foster, Albert Watson, David Beasley, Nathan Deal, Henry Grover, Sonny Purdue.... and for good measure, let's throw in David Duke.
I really don't expect you to understand Southern politic, but meh. I'll try to get ya straight.

So Trent Lott, Ronald Reagan, and some of the others would have been Democrats, but they had to be Republicans instead because they were racist? I'm not buying that load of manure. Anyone can point to a few cases like Strom, but you're really stretching things. And Strom, like his racist supporters in the south, died out long ago. The south is probably MORE integrated and less racist today than the north is (note that racism can come from any race and that in my experience here in Indy the biggest bunch of racists are the poor black folks).

 

[Kutnupe14]

So Trent Lott, Ronald Reagan, and some of the others would have been Democrats, but they had to be Republicans instead because they were racist? I'm not buying that load of manure. Anyone can point to a few cases like Strom, but you're really stretching things. And Strom, like his racist supporters in the south, died out long ago. The south is probably MORE integrated and less racist today than the north is (note that racism can come from any race and that in my experience here in Indy the biggest bunch of racists are the poor black folks).

I would address this, but it's obvious you either don't understand, or have a lot of catching up to do. So until then, ill just consider this you wanting to get involved somehow.

 

[jamil]

How many names do you want to change your opinion?

We'll start with Trent Lott, William Colmer, Clarke Reed, Ronald Reagan, Strom Thurmond, Charles Pickering, Fob James, Murphy J. Foster, Albert Watson, David Beasley, Nathan Deal, Henry Grover, Sonny Purdue.... and for good measure, let's throw in David Duke.
I really don't expect you to understand Southern politic, but meh. I'll try to get ya straight.

So Trent Lott, Ronald Reagan, and some of the others would have been Democrats, but they had to be Republicans instead because they were racist? I'm not buying that load of manure. Anyone can point to a few cases like Strom, but you're really stretching things. And Strom, like his racist supporters in the south, died out long ago. The south is probably MORE integrated and less racist today than the north is (note that racism can come from any race and that in my experience here in Indy the biggest bunch of racists are the poor black folks).

Kuts list was supposed to be former democrat-racists-turned-Republican.

Trent Lott: Check
There seems to be some evidence that Trent Lott was a racist. He entered congress as a Republican but he was formerly a Democrat. So, yep. He switched parties, not because his ideology changed, but because Democrats were supporting civil rights.

William Colmer: No.
It seems he was probably a racist. He entered his political career as a New Deal Democrat, supported FDR. His ideology changed and he became more conservative. But he stayed in the Democratic Party throughout his time in office, even though he often supported Southern Republican candidates.

Ronald Reagan: No.
Reagan was originally a New Deal Democrat, but turned more conservative and switched parties for ideological reasons. His ideology changed while employed by GE. No reason for me to believe that he switched because he was racist.

Strom Thurmond: Check.
Do I even need to explain?



I'm not going to go through each one on the list. Some clearly are examples, some just aren't.

However, to look at what actually happened and still deny that Southern Democrats switched parties because they did not support the CRA is intellectually dishonest. You can honestly believe the history and not buy into the myth that the Republican Party is racist.