58 Comments

1. byrd:

You’re assuming he regrets it.

Mar 2, 2006 - 9:03 am 2. Rick Ballard:

Or that his regrets on the filibuster aren’t on the order of “if I just coulda hung on for a bit longer…”

Mar 2, 2006 - 9:46 am 3. Robert Crawford:

Why would the longest-serving Democrat in the Senate regret having served in his party’s enforcement arm?

Mar 2, 2006 - 9:50 am 4. gc:

ello Mr. Simon, enjoy your site. One correction,
he didn’t join the Klan, he founded, organized and led his own Klan group, AT THE AGE OF 29!!!
Not 17, young and naive, 29, a fully formed adult. That speaks volumes as to his character, that was no youthful indiscretion.

Mar 2, 2006 - 9:59 am 5. Roger:

Sorry, Robert. That’s off the charts. There were racist on both sides of the aisle in those days.

Mar 2, 2006 - 9:59 am 6. mrbones:

Christ, Simon. Do a little research before you shoot your mouth off, will you?

Byrd was talking about regrets in his Senate career, yes?

Yes.

He enter the Senate in 1959, sixteen years after he left the Klan.

USA Today’s a shit paper, but apparently it’s still more reliable that you and the “was their a missile aimed at an airplane?” crowd.

Mar 2, 2006 - 10:07 am 7. Insufficiently Sensitive:

If the good Senator wasn’t ashamed of his founding and leadership of a local KKK franchise, why’d he ever quit?

Mar 2, 2006 - 10:59 am 8. Former CNN Watcher:

The Washington Post & MSNBC had a long article last year about Sen Byrd’s (extensive) Klan past, but the URL no longer works. Here is an excerpt:

A senator’s shame: Byrd, in his new book, again confronts early ties to KKK
By Eric Pianin, Washington Post
June 19, 2005

In the early 1940s, a politically ambitious butcher from West Virginia named Bob Byrd recruited 150 of his friends and associates to form a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan. After Byrd had collected the $10 joining fee and $3 charge for a robe and hood from every applicant, the “Grand Dragon” for the mid-Atlantic states came down to tiny Crab Orchard, W.Va., to officially organize the chapter.

As Byrd recalls now, the Klan official, Joel L. Baskin of Arlington, Va., was so impressed with the young Byrd’s organizational skills that he urged him to go into politics. “The country needs young men like you in the leadership of the nation,” Baskin said…

Despite his many achievements, however, the venerated Byrd has never been able to fully erase the stain of his association with one of the most reviled hate groups in the nation’s history.

“It has emerged throughout my life to haunt and embarrass me and has taught me in a very graphic way what one major mistake can do to one’s life, career, and reputation,” Byrd wrote in a new memoir — “Robert C. Byrd: Child of the Appalachian Coalfields” — that will be published tomorrow by West Virginia University Press.

Latest account
The 770-page book is the latest in a long series of attempts by the 87-year-old Democratic patriarch to try to explain an event early in his life that threatens to define him nearly as much as his achievements in the Senate. In it, Byrd says he viewed the Klan as a useful platform from which to launch his political career. He described it essentially as a fraternal group of elites — doctors, lawyers, clergy, judges and other “upstanding people” who at no time engaged in or preached violence against blacks, Jews or Catholics, who historically were targets of the Klan.

His latest account is consistent with others he has offered over the years that tend to minimize his direct involvement with the Klan and explain it as a youthful indiscretion. “My only explanation for the entire episode is that I was sorely afflicted with tunnel vision — a jejune and immature outlook — seeing only what I wanted to see because I thought the Klan could provide an outlet for my talents and ambitions,” Byrd wrote.

While Byrd provides the most detailed description of his early involvement with the Klan, conceding that he reflected “the fears and prejudices I had heard throughout my boyhood,” the account is not complete. He does not acknowledge the full length of time he spent as a Klan organizer and advocate. Nor does he make any mention of a particularly incendiary letter he wrote in 1945 complaining about efforts to integrate the military…

By the time Byrd began organizing for the Klan during World War II, the organization had largely morphed into a money-making fraternal organization that was virulently anti-black, anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic…

Byrd’s book offers a truncated description of his days with the Klan that does not completely square with contemporaneous newspaper accounts and letters that show he was involved with the Klan throughout much of the 1940s, and not merely for two or three years.

According to his book, Byrd wrote to Samuel Green, an Atlanta doctor and “Imperial Wizard” of the Ku Klux Klan, in late 1941 or early 1942, expressing interest in joining. Some time later, he received the letter from Baskin, the “Grand Dragon” of mid-Atlantic states, saying he would come to Byrd’s home in Crab Orchard whenever Byrd had rounded up 150 recruits for the Klan.

‘Exalted Cyclops’
When Baskin finally arrived, the group gathered at the home of C.M. “Clyde” Goodwin, a former local law enforcement official. When it came time to choose the “Exalted Cyclops,” the top officer in the local Klan unit, Byrd won unanimously.

Byrd asserts that his Klan chapter never engaged in or preached violence, “nor did we conduct any parades or marches or other public demonstrations” — other than one time delivering a wreath of flowers in the shape of a cross to the home of a member who had been killed in a pistol duel.

Byrd wrote that he continued as a “Kleagle” recruiting for the Klan until early 1943, when he and his family left Crab Orchard for a welding job in a Baltimore shipyard. Returning to West Virginia after World War II ended in 1945, he launched his political career, but not before writing another letter, to one of the Senate’s most notorious segregationists, Theodore Bilbo (D-Miss.), complaining about the Truman administration’s efforts to integrate the military.

Byrd said in the Dec. 11, 1945, letter — which would not become public for 42 more years with the publication of a book on blacks in the military during World War II by author Graham Smith — that he would never fight in the armed forces “with a Negro by my side.” Byrd added that, “Rather I should die a thousand times, and see old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels.”…

Confronting the issue, Byrd went on the radio to acknowledge that he belonged to the Klan from “mid-1942 to early 1943,” according to newspaper accounts. He explained that he had joined “because it offered excitement and because it was strongly opposed to communism.” He said that after about a year, he quit and dropped his membership, and never was interested in the Klan again.

Byrd won the primary, but during the general election campaign, Byrd’s GOP opponent uncovered a letter Byrd had handwritten to Green, the KKK Imperial Wizard, recommending a friend as a Kleagle and urging promotion of the Klan throughout the country. The letter was dated 1946 — long after the time Byrd claimed he had lost interest in the Klan. “The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia,” Byrd wrote, according to newspaper accounts of that period. Byrd makes no mention of the letter in his new book…

During his 1958 Senate campaign, he told a newspaper reporter that he personally felt the Klan had been incorrectly blamed for many acts committed by others…

Byrd’s Klan past became an issue again when he joined with other southern Democrats to oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Byrd filibustered the bill for more than 14 hours as he argued that it abrogated principles of federalism. He criticized most anti-poverty programs except for food stamps. And in 1967, he voted against the nomination of Thurgood Marshall, the first black appointed to the Supreme Court…

Mar 2, 2006 - 11:02 am 9. Former CNN Watcher:

Here is an up-to-date link for that article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/18/AR2005061801105_pf.html

Mar 2, 2006 - 11:10 am 10. Fausta:

The same WaPo article refers to Byrd as a “pillar of the Senate” and “one of the most powerful and enduring figures in modern Senate history.”

Regrets? I don’t think so.

How do we take these people seriously?
I don’t think so, either.

Mar 2, 2006 - 11:15 am 11. markus:

Lot of southern Democratic elected officials were racists back then. The views of the people that voted them into office were being well-represented. Byrd was not unique.

The thing is, the party underwent a huge battle from 1948 to 1964 over this issue, until the pro-civil rights side won, and almost all of its elected officials, including its President, made the decision to KNOWINGLY ALIENATE their white Southern base, not for political expediency, but because it was the right thing to do.

The Republicans meanwhile, nominated for PRESIDENT in 1964 an opponent of the 1964 Civil Rights bill.

Which is the main reason Goldwater got 87% of the vote in Missippis that year, in contrast to the 24% that Nixon had gotten four years earlier.

Mar 2, 2006 - 12:35 pm 12. vegetius:

Markus, look at the actual votes for the ‘64 Act
and tell me which party was more obstructionist.

1964 Civil Rights Act
The Senate Version:

Democratic Party: 46-22
Republican Party: 27-6
The Senate Version, voted on by the House:

Democratic Party: 153-91
Republican Party: 136-35

Mar 2, 2006 - 12:47 pm 13. Former CNN Watcher:

Four years later, Byrd’s Klan past became an issue again when he joined with other southern Democrats to oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Byrd filibustered the bill for more than 14 hours as he argued that it abrogated principles of federalism.

Mar 2, 2006 - 12:49 pm 14. PaulfromMpls:

All very shameful, but as someone else said, I think he’s talking about his Senate career. That’s the context of the other “regrets.”

Mar 2, 2006 - 3:09 pm 15. markus:

vetetius — The facts that you raise are irrelevant to my point, which is that racist Southern voters abandoned the Democratic Party en mass after President Johnson and non-Southern Democrats finally decided to unequivocally support civil rights for blacks, knowing they would lose the South for a generation, as Johnson put it.

Those Democrats who voted AGAINST the 1964 civil rights act were ALL from the South, the only part of the country where the overwhelmingly majority of voters opposed the bill, and which at that was 100% represented by Democrats. The Republicans who voted against the bill, on the other hand, were not from the South, and they opposed it for principled ideological reasons. That same year their party nominated one of these “no” voting Senators for President.

The South was impressed, and for the first time started voting Republican, first in Presidential, then in Congressional races.

Mar 2, 2006 - 3:23 pm 16. quickrob:

Oh. That KKK thing…that was sooo long ago.

I mean, really, it’s not like he was caught drunk driving…or causing someone’s death…or, uh, yeah…that’s it.

And, for “mrbones” it’s not as if his decision to join the Klan didn’t effect his Senate career so it should certainly be included, at least passingly, in any account of his regrets concerning his Senate cereer.

Mar 2, 2006 - 5:53 pm 17. Rick Ballard:

Please Markus, Senate Majority Leader Johnson was instrumental in stripping AG Brownell’s ‘57 civil rights act of its most important elements. Johnson was a political whore of the very highest magnitude who believed that by garnering the black vote in in some of the northern tier states he might gain a majority that would endure.

He was wrong – and wrong still after he promulgated the “War on Poverty” to add a few more rentseekers to the Dem base. The Dems have been paying ever since and only an idiot would think otherwise.

It’s not particularly odd that those who pay taxes have little to say commending those upon whom the taxes are spent. Johnson was locked in New Deal ideology and never escaped. A “Master of the Senate” but an abject failure as a politician.

Mar 2, 2006 - 6:18 pm 18. Sandy P:

Roger, OT, found this at Vodkapundit, hope the link works:

Max Friedman has a few things to say about that and others.

Papa Ray

——

The betrayal of America

A Sick and Tired Writer

Max Friedman

The Augusta Free Press

He’s listing the commies, including our congressmen.

Mar 2, 2006 - 7:59 pm 19. flenser:

markus

racist Southern voters abandoned the Democratic Party en mass after President Johnson and non-Southern Democrats finally decided to unequivocally support civil rights for blacks..

That just isn’t so. Southern voters (unlike you, I cannot tell whether they were racist) continued to vote for Democrats in the House and Senate, as well as in their local state races, up until the 1990’s. They did indeed stop voting for Democrats in presidential elections, but in this they were like the rest of the country. I imagine that if a Zell Miller type ever won the nomination southerners would vote for him in a shot.

Mar 2, 2006 - 8:46 pm 20. Kevin Peters:

Roger:

When Arnold ran for office there were serious attempts by the Democrats to make a mild comment into proof that he was a nazi sympathizer. He never belonged to a Nazi group. His entire life was clear of any fact of any attachment to any nazi group yet the Times covered it as if it was a valid topic for discussion. When the current Pope was a young boy he, like most youths his age, joined the Nazi version of the Boy Scouts. It was virtually a requirement and he was drafted into the Army. Once again, there was no history of any pro-Nazi sentiments,any connection to the rump nazi groups that lasted after the war and numerous rabbi’s commented on the positive work he has done on Catholic-jewish relations and have no thought that they are working with a Nazi sympathizer. Yet, if you go onto some left wing web sites you can see him refered to as the “Nazi Pope” and the MSM treated this part of his life as if there was a question mark on whether or not he was suitable to take office. Long involved stories were done on this aspect of his life. Neither one of these gentleman had one ounce of a Nazi past yet it was discused as a valid topic of discussion and as a reason for questioning whether they were fit for office.
I just wish they held the same standard for Sen. Byrd. If they did they would have been a raging editorial war to kick him out of office for his unquestionable dedication to a racist hate group. Byrd did not get drafted as a child in the middle of the war. He didn’t make an off hand comment about a non Nazi member. He formed and led the Klan in his area, and there is doubt about his active ADULT participation.
If Sen. Byrd had an R after his name instead of a D he would have been hounded out of office years ago. The MSM would not have allowed him to stay. “Republicans Continue to be Led By KKK Stalwart” would have been the refrain until he was hounded out of office.No later apologies or rationalizing would have saved him.
Trent Lott. Robert Byrd. Look at what they both did. Look at what happened to each man. I have no problem with Lott being forced out of his Leadership position. But his action only hinted at a possible racist mind. Byrd actions are like the Rodney King tapes in comparison. Yet look at how the two were treated by the press. Sure, the MSM is balanced and have no bias towards the left. You betcha.

Mar 2, 2006 - 9:29 pm 21. David Thomson:

The odds are, thankfully, that we will no longer have to discuss Robert Byrd by this time next year. He should easily be defeated in November. And no, there is no way Byrdís former membership in the KKK would be tolerated if he were a Republican.

Mar 3, 2006 - 4:21 am 22. vegetius:

Markus:

“That same year their party nominated one of these “no” voting Senators for President”

Do you thnk Goldwater was unprincipled in his opposition to ‘64 Act??
How can you divine when oppostion is principled or unprincipled??

Mar 3, 2006 - 4:49 am 23. Poca Dot:

As the only columnist in West Virginia to oppose the man, let me give you a little advice: Put down the torn sheet.
Byrd has apologized repeatedly for his KKK membership, which ended seven years before I was born, and I am 52.
I have come around 180 degrees on this. I suggest others do the same.
The self-righteousness from the right is contemptible. How about getting him on something he did in the last 10 years. The last 20. The last 50!
(Poca Dot aka Don Surber, Charleston Daily Mail)

Mar 3, 2006 - 5:51 am 24. prokopton:

Poca Dot,

You COMPLETELY miss the point I think most people are making. You say get him for something he did in the last 10-50 years? The point is, if he had been a Republican he would have been “gotten” 30 or 40 years ago. He certainly would have still been electable in WV in the 40’s and probably still US Senate material even in the late 50’s. But the times would have caught up with a Republican former Kleagle shortly after that. Period.

This is just more proof of media bias – that is all. As to whether I think a Republican would still be run out of office if he was in Byrd’s situation, right now, today? It is impossible to answer – NO Republican could ever be in this situation – ever. All the former Klan republicans were run out of office in the 50’s and 60’s. – and rightfully so. So why wasn’t Byrd? Rhetorical question, never mind. Anyways, I choose not to debate impossible scenarios.

Mar 3, 2006 - 6:20 am 25. JeanneB:

I’d bet dollars to donuts the USA writer doesn’t even know about Byrd’s Klan history.

Much of the loony left these days lives in a world of “deliberate ignorance”.

Mar 3, 2006 - 6:36 am 26. byrd:

You’re right, Poca Dot. The self-rightoueness of the right is contemptible. How dare they feel good about themselves for never being in the Klan! That’s like being proud of never committing murder–it’s not something to be proud of, it’s a bare minimum requirement for being a decent human being. Too bad Byrd isn’t counted among those decent human beings.

But you go too far with the ‘don’t trash him for something he did 50 years ago’ stuff. Forgiveness comes easier for some things then for others. For some things, forgiveness doesn’t come at all.

More importantly, Roger’s post wasn’t a summation of all the bad things Byrd’s done in his life (did you think it was?), it merely notes a curious absence from his list of things he regrets.

Personally, if I had seen Byrd-like success in such a contemptible organization (do you mind if I appropriate your word for a moment?), it would be at the top of my regrets list–instead of carefully, strategically parsed out of the list. Which is the only conclusion I can draw to explain the people here who say it’s not dishonest because he was focussing only on his senate career.

Mar 3, 2006 - 7:23 am 27. reliapundit - the astute blogger:

roger -

what do you think of the fact that michael totten has omitted a star of david from his logo?

his blog is called MIDDLE EAST JOURNAL, and last time i checked JEWS lived there and their nation was an important aspect of current events there.

yet michael only displays a cross and a crescent – the symbols for christuianity and islam.

this is a glaring omission, too.

Mar 3, 2006 - 7:25 am 28. byrd:

I’ve been recently getting away from using a screen name on blogs, substituting my real name, tim maguire, for my alias. This seems like a good time to do it here.

Mar 3, 2006 - 7:27 am 29. triticale:

It should also be noted that Barry Goldwater had in fact voted for the previous Civil Rights Acts, and made it clear that his objection to the 1964 Act was that it gave the Federal Government power over things he didn’t think it should have, regardless of what was being enforced.

Mar 3, 2006 - 7:35 am 30. Gabriel Hanna:

I would second triticale. Barry Goldwater was a foe of segregation, ended it in Phoenix schools and the Arizona National Guard, and he left a minority-only college scholarship in his name when he died.

Unlike Byrd, he was no racist.

Mar 3, 2006 - 8:48 am 31. Libby Sosume:

Scuse me. Just happened by and saw that you folks were talking about politicians expressing regrets. Good topic.

Question: Has President Bush ever expressed regret for anything he did? Please give me a link. I will accept regrets for things that happened even before he became a politician. Just point me to an example.

Thanks in advance.

Mar 3, 2006 - 8:49 am 32. Doug:

Someone above posited the question, if so many people in Congress in the ’50s and ’60s were racist, why do conservatives spend so much time harping specifically on Robert Byrd?

Simple: ‘Cause he’s the only one who didn’t switch to the GOP.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:00 am 33. Libby Sosume:

PS, We don’t have to go back before he was born-again (for example, the drinking). That was another life, and I’m sure he already expressed his regrets to God. (Otherwise how did he get a new life out of the deal?)

Just want to see public regrets for things he did in his current life. There must be something he regrets, and I’m sure he has expressed his regret somewhere. Please post a link.

Thanks in advance.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:01 am 34. sixteenwords:

It’s just not the case that Republicans weren’t in the Klan, although many of them didn’t become Republicans until they felt they had been forced out of the Democratic Party by the Democratic embrace of civil rights.

The GOP has had the distinct “advantage” of never opposing the Klan and never supporting civil rights, they just reap the whirlwind.

And that’s okay, because they aren’t interested in principles, they’re interested in power. It’s hard to slide your friends a no-bid if you aren’t in power.

And by the way:

Being in the Klan still couldn’t be one of Sen. Byrd’s regrets from his service in the Senate, since (as has been pointed out) he wasn’t in the Klan while he was in the Senate.

It’s fun to watch wingers being intentionally dense, most of the time we’re stuck watching the real thing, and that’s more frightening.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:02 am 35. WVwarrior:

You all are overlooking the fact that in West Virginia, the fact that Byrd was once a member of the KKK might actually be a selling point for some voters. I suspect this realization is what made Poca Dot do a 180. (Don’t get me wrong – I’m not accusing him of being a racist, just of realizing that plenty of West Virginians are.) If not a selling point, at the very least, many West Virginians are completely indifferent to Byrd’s ex-KKK status. Plus, it’s not like it’s been a secret all those times that he’s been re-elected. What makes you think it’ll make a difference this time around?

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:03 am 36. Herbert92X:

Byrd was referring to his regrets in his senate career. His Klan involvement was many years earlier. How hard is this for you to undestand or do you just wish to demagogue?

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:20 am 37. Libby Sosume:

C.mon, c’mon folks. I need some regrets. I want to write a letter to Senator Byrd and shame him — show him how a real man expresses regrets. I need some examples.

Even one example. Please, one good example of President Bush regretting his actions at any time (even before he was President) — but let’s be fair, only since he became a new born-again Christian (everything prior is excused by God).

Please post links.

How about that thing at the debate? Didn’t he express regret for something in response to a question about his regrets? What was it? Help me remember.

Thanks in advance, folks. I know you’ll come through for me.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:20 am 38. Libby Sosume:

“As a young man, Byrd was a Klan member briefly during the 1940s. He quit more than a decade before his first election to the Senate in 1958. He is now 84 years old. In 1993, CNN anchor Bernard Shaw asked Byrd to name his worst mistake. “That’s easy,” he replied. “The greatest mistake I ever made was joining the Ku Klux Klan. And I’ve said that many times. But one cannot erase what he has done. He can only change his ways and his thoughts. That was an albatross around my neck that I will always wear.” – Salon

That’s the regret statement on the table. I need something to match or top that. I will quote it in my letter to Byrd, to put him to shame. Just one regret. President Bush must have regretted something he did, sometime. Just point me with a link.

Thanks in advance.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:28 am 39. Dark Jethro:

Libby:

“Just want to see public regrets for things he did in his current life. There must be something he regrets, and I’m sure he has expressed his regret somewhere. Please post a link.”

And I want to see Bill Clinton show genuine regret for abusing the WH Travel office, for illegally acquiring FBI files, for obstructing investigations, for chasing interns on the clock when he should have been accepting OBL, and not responding to the first 5 attacks Al-Quaeda launched against us.
I want to see Jimma Cahtah express regret for not retaliating properly for the act of war Iran committed by seizing our Embassy, for allowing himself to be bamboozled by the North Koreans into giving them Nuclear Reactors, for certifying Hugo Chavez’s highly contested election in 48 hours, but characterize our election process as a “banana republic.”
I wish Reagan was around to express regret that the Marines in Beirut were walking guard with unloaded weapons.

You can’t always get what you want, sweetheart.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:30 am 40. markus:

“Do you thnk Goldwater was unprincipled in his opposition to ‘64 Act??”
READ FIRST, then post. As I said: he and other Republicans “opposed it for principled ideological reasons.”

flenser — “Southern voters… continued to vote for Democrats in the House and Senate, as well as in their local state races…”

Right. Some Southern voters continued to vote for Democrats in the nineties. Some Southern voters even plan to vote Democratic THIS YEAR. I’ll bet anything a few even vote for the Green Party! It is almost certain that we can find at least one black man in Louisiana who admits he voted for David Duke! Finally, bears do tend to shit in the woods.

None of which has any bearing on my point that the unmistakable overall trend has been for the white southerner majority to go from voting for Democrats to voting for Republicans, beginning with a SHARP, OVERNIGHT switch in the Presidential race between ‘60 and ‘64 — 24% to 87% in Mississippi, slightly less but similar elsewhere in the deep South. You can say that most Southern whites today that support Republicans do so because of their stand on issues other than racial ones, and I’ll probably agree with you. But no serious person can argue that the initial shift (to Goldwater), and the concurrent switch in parties by a whole generation of ELECTED SOUTHERN LEADERS, like Strom Thurmond, wasn’t almost entirely about race.

triticale — “Goldwater…his objection to the 1964 Act was that it gave the Federal Government power over things he didn’t think it should have”

That’s right, the civil rights movement was a question of whether the Federal government and unelected judges had a right to overturn the CLEARLY STATED and DEMOCRATIC will of the majority of a states citizens to be free from outrages like white girls going to proms with black boys, or having to live next door to black family.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:31 am 41. Libby Sosume:

PS, in my letter to Senator Byrd I will also point out that he coiuld have erased that KKK thing very easily, by becoming a born-again Christian. If he had dome that, like President Bush did, we wouldn’t be having this discussion today.

Thanks in advance for any links you post that I can include in my letter to Byrd. I’m sure you folks will come through with some fine regretting that President Bush has done.

Cheers.

Mar 3, 2006 - 9:32 am 42. MrBuddwing:

Libby: When George W. Bush turns 88 and is in a more reflective mood, I’ll let you know.

As for me, I will continue to marvel over the fact that today, in the U.S. Senate, is a former member of the Ku Klux Klan. I guess if you belong to the right party and have the right voting record, voters will forgive anything.

Mar 3, 2006 - 10:01 am 43. Knucklehead:

Did George W. Bush “erase” his “KKK thing” by becoming a “born again” Christian? I didn’t know he had a “KKK thing”. Details, please.

Mar 3, 2006 - 10:12 am 44. miguel:

What about Strom Thurmond? I get a feeling that the right was waiting for Strom to die so that they could begin attacking Byrd. I know, I know, Strom wasn’t in the KKK, but he was a hard-core segregationist and racist and Carolinians kept electing him to the senate for 50 years.

Let’s face it, MOST white people that grew up in the south in the first half of the 20th century were hardcore virulent racists. Look up any southern politician from that time and you’ll find something nasty about him.

Mar 3, 2006 - 10:13 am 45. vegetius:

Markus:
“Do you thnk Goldwater was unprincipled in his opposition to ‘64 Act??”
READ FIRST, then post. As I said: he and other Republicans “opposed it for principled ideological reasons.”

You’re right. I was talking without closely reading your post. I apologize.

Mar 3, 2006 - 10:30 am 46. Libby Sosume:

Dear Knucklehead:

C’mon, now! You know as well as I do that George Bush “erased” his drinking problem by becoming born-again. We’re not supposed to be even talking about it now, because that drunk thing was his former life and all that counts now is what’s happened since he got born into his current life.

There can be no talking about that woman Bush knocked up, or the person Laura ran over with her car, or the AWOL thing, either.

President George W. Bush is a new man — in his 30s (?), apparently.

If old Senator Byrd had been so smart. Instead of having an albatross around his neck, he could have just fessed up once to God and been done with it.

By the way, has anyone yet located an example of President Bush having public regrets over something he did? I’m still need of those examples, to show that wussy-lib Senator Byrd how a real man acts.

Mar 3, 2006 - 11:28 am 47. MrBuddwing:

Libby:

“By the way, has anyone yet located an example of President Bush having public regrets over something he did? I’m still need of those examples, to show that wussy-lib Senator Byrd how a real man acts.”

Can you offer any examples of what President Bush needs to publicly regret? I know you’ll come through – thanks in advance.

Mar 3, 2006 - 1:11 pm 48. Kevin Peters:

Roger:

I see, having a drinking issue in your 30’s is the same as being a leader in the KKK around the same age period. And if that is true you may want to rid your party of a man who still has a drinking problem, the Senior Senator from Mass. Do I think Sen. Byrd is trying to push the KKK agenda.No. The main point is the double standard in the MSM. A Republican who had even a minor brush with that organization would never be allowed to apologize or be given a second chance. There would be no examination of the period and the region, there would be no examination of the record of the last twenty or thirty years that would show that those old idea’s had been removed from his or her soul. Look what happened when a Major democrat came out for Bush in the last election and gave a withering speech against Kerry. David Gergen jumped on the fact that he had worked as an aide for Lester Maddox for two years and thus it was OK to suggest that his speech on Kerry could be ignored because he was obviously a racist. He wasn’t in the KKK. And this work as an aide was just a one or two years after Byrd’s attempt to crush the civil rights act. And this Democrat’s record as a southern Govennor was highlighted by an outstanding racial record,he had support from many liberal African American organizations because of his fine work in bringing racial harmoney to his state, he even made the regionally unpopular move of oppossing the stars and Bars on any flag or State flag pole. But the moment he came out against Kerry he was called divisive and his two year work as a minor aid for Maddox was used to ignore his Foreign Policy attack on Kerry.

He was never in the KKK. He had an outstanding civil rights record in office for the area and there was never an attack that called him a racist when he was a card carrying Democrat. He is still a Democrat. But the moment he came out for President Bush and attacked Sen. Kerry on his Foreign policy views his short time as an aide for Maddox was highlighted, his outstanding civil rights record as Govenor and Senator was ignored, and Gergen jumped right on the
“well, he must be a divisive(translate racist}, remember he worked as an aide for two years in the 60’s for Maddox.” When he was a loyal Dem. this was never brought out. Zell Miller was considered a valuable member of the party.I beleive that he spoke for Clinton at the first or second Democratic National Election Party and there were no MSM stories taking note of his work as an aide. No , he was on the same team as the MSM so he was a good guy. There was never an attempt to use the extremely minor, whem compared to Byrds shoddy past, connection to segragation against him. No, this didn’t happen until he marched off the reservation and supported President Bush. Then his minor record was repeated by the L.A Times, the N.Y.T. and the Washington Post to reject his ideas behind the smear of racism. When he was loyal, we look at his excellent civil rights record and know that he harbors no KKK views. When he doesn’t back the MSM candidate then his past is treated as current news. I don’t care about Sen. Byrd and I don’t think his KKK White Hood leadership position is evudence of his current civil rights views. It is the remarkable double standard the MSM practices and how the racist label is thrown as a weapon even when there is little to no evidence. There standard isn’t based on what any invidual did or is doing. The only thing that matters is what side of the fence the politician is on. Compare Zell Miller’s short work for Maddux with Byrd’s KKK leadership, his outstanding Civil Rights record, it is equal or even better then Byrd’s. And he is still a Democrat. Yet when he crossed the line to support President Bush the racist label was brought out to hit him, even though it wasn’t brought out when he toed the party line.

Mar 3, 2006 - 1:30 pm 49. papertiger:

Perhaps Goldwater objected to the 64 civil rights act because of the Government funded law suit clause. The 64 civil rights act makes it mandatory that the governmetn entity on the recieving end of civil rights litigation must pay the total court and legal fees of both the states defence and the litigants lawyer fees, regardless of the outcome.
The ACLU , all the while claiming they are a “not for profit”, have used this clause to run Christians and Boy Scouts practicly out of the country. Over a million in lawyer fees paid out by San Diego county to the ACLU for kicking Boy Scouts out of Balboa park. “Not for profit”?

There are principled reasons for oposing the 64 civil rights act today, how much more so back in Barry Goldwater’s time?
Just like there are a hord of political whores who will scream “racist” if ever a polititian were to be principled enough to attempt to amend the civil rights act.
All of those whores being members of the exempt media or the Democratic party -

Mar 3, 2006 - 2:42 pm 50. Former CNN Watcher:

At the same time that Bull Connor was turning fire hoses and German Shepherd attack dogs onto civil rights marchers (1963), he was a member of the Democratic National Committee.

Mar 3, 2006 - 2:48 pm 51. Dark Jethro:

Isn’t it funny that Libby can’t offer actual names or any proof of her accusations, just hit and run innuendo. Another liberal drive-by.

Let me give you a couple of names of real people, Libby. Do a search and tell me if their assailants who hold, or held, public office have expressed their regrets:

Mary Joe Kopechne

Juanita Brodderick

I’ll give you a hint: one was killed, the other raped.

Mar 3, 2006 - 2:55 pm 52. markus:

Kevin — I don’t think Zell Miller is a racist. And I don’t watch TV so I could have easily missed it but I had never heard that he was accused of racism or association w/ maddox by anyone in 2004.

I liked him when he was Governor and I remember reading James Carville’s glowing endorsement of him for Gore’s veep in the spring of 2000. Then, at the age of 70 or so, he turned into a ideological Republican almost overnight in 2001. His new rhetoric and policy stands were appaling and perplexing for me as a Democrat. But it was no excuse for calling him racist.

Mar 3, 2006 - 7:21 pm 53. Kevin Peters:

Markus:

Gergen brought it up 10 minutes after the speech and the LAT and the NYT brought the Maddux connection a day or two later. When Miller endorsed Clinton at his first Presidential Convention it was not brought up. I do think Matthews pointed out the double standard. I don’t think any of the people who went after Miller think he is a racist either. They wanted to discredit him and of course the racist charge is like a republican calling a Democrat a liberal. It’s automatic and the slander gets tossed out on the slimest hint of it. Miller is a conservative Democrat and he was a positive sign of the Big tent Democratic Party until he backed President Bush. Then he suddenly became a racist because, well everyone knows that white Republicans, or any Democrat that supports a Republican, are all racists.And of course black republicans are all Uncle Tom’s. When Stalin wanted to get rid of someone they were called supporters of Trotsky. The facts didn’t matter. He just needed to tag them with something before he got rid of them.

Mar 3, 2006 - 10:49 pm 54. klrfz1:

So if Markus is defending a racist, doesn’t that make him a racist too? Do you regret your racism, Markus? Oh, that’s right. No Democrat ever has to regret being a racist. How convenient for you.

Demokkkrats!

Mar 4, 2006 - 4:44 am 55. Kevin Peters:

klrfz1:

I doubt that Byrd still retains his white hood views of the past. There isn’t any proof from his voting record from the last 30 years to show that he has any “keep them in their proper place views. My point is that the MSM and the left would never had let his unquestionable rank racist history be forgotten if he had an R in front of his name. And the fact that they go out of their way to manufacture signs of racism where there are none.That is why Miller, Arnold, and the current Pope are perfect examples of how they treat conservatives. They take the slightest hint or minor connection to anything that hints of racism and try to blow them up until they can ruin that persons life and drive them from the public square. And if they have cases like Sen. Byrd they ignore actual histories and give them a pass. There is no way I can look into Sen. Byrd’s soul but I doubt that his foul association of his 30’s has any influence on his political actions today. And if they still are there I don’t see any evidence of them. It is the enormous double standard that the Press and the left have regarding racial issues and how they use the ‘racist” tag to bludgeon political opponents. It is the exact method that Sen. McCarthy used against the ‘reds” and the left treats him as the anti-christ(McCarthy was a drunk and a demagogue, but the left rarely examines the embrace of Stalinism that many of the victims of McCarthy believed in), they don’t seem to know that they are borrowing from his playbook.

Mar 4, 2006 - 9:18 am 56. ArthurStone:

Um.

He wasn’t a member of the KKK during his 47 year political career?

Mar 4, 2006 - 11:49 am 57. Libby Sosume:

I’m just amazed that none of you can provide me with even a single example of George W. Bush regretting something he did.

I guess he must be pure as Jesus.

Mar 7, 2006 - 12:00 pm 58. MrBuddwing:

Libby Sosuyu:

“I’m just amazed that none of you can provide me with even a single example of George W. Bush regretting something he did.”

Well, when you laze off and ask other people to do your homework for you, the results tend to be disappointing. I for one am disappointed that you couldn’t come up with a single example on your own; maybe there’s no there there, after all.

Libby again:

“I guess he must be pure as Jesus.”

I doubt it. But maybe (to bring this thread full circle) purer than Robert Byrd. Maybe.

Mar 7, 2006 - 3:49 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: