Looks like there's not too many people left in Congress who were around to oppose desegregation. The wonders of progress.

I've wondered, exactly how long should Senators be allowed to serve? I mean, how well can you really represent a people when in your 90's?

I'm generally opposed to term limits, but shouldn't we do something about all these oldies like Byrd, Kennedy, and Thurmond? I mean, beyond just waiting for them to kick it. Maybe give them a senility test every few years?

-- Modified on 6/28/2010 11:04:01 AM

He filbustered against the '64 Civil rights act & opposed the nominations of Thurgood Marshall &
Clarence Thomas.

Of course, he later "regretted" his segregationist past.

In a 2001 telecast, he uttered the phrase "white ni-----"

Senility & term limits indeed.

Any bets on how many times these uncomfortable facts get mentioned by ...lets see..CNN, ABC, MSNBC, etal?...You get my drift.
It just dosent fit with their agenda so it didnt happen. Disturbing truths(documented in many places btw) isnt really that important when progess is on the march is it?

when he was 24.

      Give him credit for being able to see that he was wrong and admitting it, a trait rarely observed on this Board.

Section 1.2

Pria,
your wiki link didn't include Woodrow Wilson. Wilson was such a white supremacist that he actually RE-segregated the federal government. He also invited the Klan to attend his inaugeration. What else might one expect from a good ole boy from Staunton, Virginia?

as "history written in lightning", after a screening at the White House.

Btw, willy, notice that Woodrow Wilson has the same initials as you ?----------LOL !

which what he said publicly when he ran for Congress in 1952:

"When running for the United States House of Representatives in 1952, he announced "After about a year, I became disinterested, quit paying my dues, and dropped my membership in the organization."

     Your link offers no evidence to the contrary - simply writing a letter to the Wizard does not show membership - I imagine he was  trying to get a campaign contribution.

        Conclusion: there is no evidence he was a long time member of the KKK but only a member for about a year.

http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/index.php?news=383

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/820515/posts

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.obituaries/browse_thread/thread/36a6f4ed8bd62333/3d3dea00aa6a361c?lnk=raot

George Washington was also a racist .. I have to give Senator Byrd for changing his racist ways. I wasn't alive when racism was popular with the vast majority of whites, but I give credit to those who were,and had the wisdom to grow out of it..RIP Senator Byrd

but let's not remember him on the day of his death as a "long time member of the KKK," unless it's true.

is asking the impossible, or at least the "very unlikely".

For someone like Byrd to privately and sincerely renounce racism is completely unrealistic IMO. The best we can hope for is for the next generation to grow up without having racism being the norm. One of the keys to that is for the "victims" to get past the sins of the past. Easier said than done, but it's still necessary if we will ever truly become a "color blind" society.

The people of West Virginia had a choice and kept choosing Senator Byrd.  Shouldn't we respect the choice of the WV people?

Same goes for any other state.  The people have a choice every six years.  We should respect their choice. even If they choose the same same person every time.

As long as "victims" feel it is their right to perpetrate wrongs upon the DESCENDANTS of their victimizers; eventually they will re-create the racism they allegedly abhor.

...all of a sudden became an Inclusive State.

Now this will piss off the neo-cons, I think he was the only Dem Sen. to not vote for
a preemptive strike in Iraq in March 2002 (shame on the others Dems as well, Sen. Clinton included, so they share the shame too)…..he made a strong speech against it on the floor.

He at least evolved (as I hope we all do) , although, he was still way Big in the Pork Husbandry! Aren't they all if they're there more than 4 yeras.

Growing up then in the "where & the time frame" was a continious brain wash, at least he broke thru, not an excuse, but he changed before the rest of the state. And yes, I'm sure their may be latter racist quotes, WE of all colours /ethnics/sex have said the same in Context to 'comfortable' friends in our past. We strive to say less...........

Read the friggin' link !

this mentality applies to the ME, race relations in this country, ethnic cleansing in multiple countries throughout the world, etc.

As long as there is an environment of "us against them", the cycle will continue to repeat itself.

Democrats also started the Civil War, but that is a different topic. Democrats along with Strom Thurmond were the main opponents to any anti-lynching laws. Bitter fruit is the legacy of Sen. Robert Byrd.

How about stopping people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson Sr. who perpetuate the notion of "us against them."

Yes many of the Southern Democrats in the early 20th Century were members of this "civic organization".  That particular demographic group are now the "Christian Right of the Republican Party".

It wasn't always the case the the Republican party was the conservative party and the Democrats were the liberal party.

When the Republican party was formed, it was most certainly a very left wing party, even in comparison to today's Democratic Party. Just read their early party platforms. Nobody in the Democratic Party today would advocate for "free homes for the People" has the Republican Party once did.

When Truman desegregated the Army, this pissed Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond so much that he ran for President as a candidate of the States Right's Democratic Party.

The States Rights' party platform read like a racist diatribe, but it also sounded quite familiar to some of the ideas we still hear from today from one political party.

Here is the platform in it's entirety:

"1. We believe that the Constitution of the United States is the greatest charter of human liberty ever conceived by the mind of man.

2. We oppose all efforts to invade or destroy the rights guaranteed by it to every citizen of this republic.

3. We stand for social and economic justice, which, we believe can be guaranteed to all citizens only by A STRICT ADHERENCE TO OUR CONSTITUTION and the avoidance of any invasion or destruction of the constitutional rights of the states and individuals. We oppose the totallitaran, CENTRALIZED BUREAUCRATIC GOVERNMENT and the police nation called for by the platforms adopted by the Democratic and Republican Conventions.

4. We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race; the constitutional right to choose one's associates; to ACCEPT PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT GOVERNMENTAL INTERFERENCE, and to learn one's living in any lawful way. We oppose the elimination of segregation, the repeal of miscegenation statutes, the CONTROL OF PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT BY FEDERAL BUREAUCRATS called for by the misnamed civil rights program. We favor HOME-RULE, LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AND A MINIMUM INTERFERENCE WITH INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.

5. We oppose and condemn the action of the Democratic Convention in sponsoring a civil rights program calling for the elimination of segregation, social equality by Federal fiat, REGULATIONS OF PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES, voting, and local law enforcement.

6. We affirm that the effective enforcement of such a program would be utterly destructive of the social, economic and political life of the Southern people, and of other localities in which there may be differences in race, creed or national origin in appreciable numbers.

7. We stand for the check and balances provided by the three departments of our government. We oppose the usurpation of legislative functions by the executive and judicial departments. We unreservedly condemn the effort to establish in the United States a police nation that would destroy the last vestige of liberty enjoyed by a citizen.

8. We demand that there be returned to the people to whom of right they belong, those powers needed for the preservation of human rights and the discharge of our responsibility as democrats for human welfare. We oppose a denial of those by political parties, a barter or sale of those rights by a political convention, as well as any invasion or violation of those rights by the Federal Government. We call upon all Democrats and upon all other loyal Americans who are opposed to totalitarianism at home and abroad to unite with us in ignominiously defeating Harry S. Truman, Thomas E. Dewey and every other candidate for public office who would establish a Police Nation in the United States of America.

9. We, therefore, urge that this Convention endorse the candidacies of J. Strom Thurmond and Fielding H. Wright for the President and Vice-president, respectively, of the United States of America.

....and former Republican Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott said that of this, "When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re PROUD of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either."

Problems like what? Problems associated with not making blacks 2nd class citizens?

The likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton do more to set race relations back fifty years than do the likes of the late senator Byrd.

Everyone knows that Byrd was a dinosaur and his bigotry served as an example of what "was" wrong with this country. For the likes of Jackson and Sharpton to wield any influence and maintain any power the "race wars" must continue. If "they" ever win, whatever the fuck that means, then what the fuck do they do? Their days of having any influence will be over and so will their power.

after all, the American people made a choice and chose Bush. I'm sure you had nothing but respect for the people's choice.

My point was the people calling for term limits are not the voters in the state or district that clearly want to reelect these long serving public officials!

Term limits were a major point in the GOP's Contract With America.  Then they won the majority in both house in 94.  After that the Republicans stopped talking about term limits until now that they are again in the minority!

The Gingrich GOP did indeed bring forth several variations of a Constitutional Amendment to enforce term limits. All garnered a large majority of GOP votes and even a minority of DEM votes. The least stringent had virtually all the GOP voting in favor, but it was the Dems that blocked the 2/3rds required.