Today, Democratic Senator and former presidential candidate Christopher Dodd officially announced his endorsement of fellow Senator and Presidential hopeful, Barak Obama. Interestingly, this is the same Senator Dodd who once sang the praises of another collegue in the senate who is a former Grand Dragon in the Klu Klux Klan, voted against the nomination of Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court and voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.In 2004, Dodd spoke in honor of Senator Robert Byrds 17,000th vote stating:
Now while I realize that this is hardly a big deal for most of you on the left, I do find it amusing that someone who recently sang the praises of a Klansman would endorse a black man for president.
I also wanted to bring to your remembrance how the PC police (i.e. Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and the National NAACP) once again gave a liberal a pass on “racially insensitive” comments. Just once I would like to see them hold their fellow liberals to the same standards.
BTW. I esspecially like the photos of each of them in their native garb.
Senator Dodd’s endorsement of Senator Obama is not surprising, especially when you consider that his one comment about Senator Byrd is the only issue that has been raised regarding Dodd’s stance on race or his relationship to minority interests. According to Ontheissues.org, Dodd is substantively in line with Clinton and Obama:
Additionally, there have been no other indications that Dodd has an ongoing affinity for hood-wearing, cross-burning hillbillies.
As his voting scores attest, Senator Byrd may be an out of step populist compared to the rest of his party, which is slowly dragging itself into the reality of the 21st Century. And no one can “whitewash” his record with the Klan which may be more extensive than Byrd publicly admits to.
That said, Byrd does have the distinction of being the “Dean” of the U.S. Senate, having been elected to more terms (8 full six year terms) and casting more votes (over 17,000) than any other member in history. He has publicly apologized for his association with the Klan (no matter how pro-forma it may appear) and, according to the NAACP staff on the Hill, has been a good partner. The same cannot be said of Trent Lott. As for Thurmond, well, may be rest in peace.
You wonder why some Democrats get a pass while Republicans, by and large, do not? Its because Republicans are consistently voting against the identified and substantive interests of the poor and political minorities. In spite of the rich GOP history as the party founded to end slavery, the modern version is simply a shadow of its former self. Today’s Republican Party in no way aspires to the same grand vision if its founders, yet the Democratic Party - while certainly not transformative in its leadership and vision in its recent history – is at least engaging in some transactional policy making that “Keeps Hope Alive” for many Americans.
__________________________________________
Did I say that I was surprised by the endorsement? I believe that my specific words were, “Now while I realize that this is hardly a big deal for most of you on the left, I do find it amusing that someone who recently sang the praises of a Klansman would endorse a black man for president.”
I was simply amused by the irony.
But as for Republicans, “...consistently voting against the identified and substantive interests of the poor and political minorities.” Let’s take a closer look at this. Shall we?
Republicans support the partial privatization of Social Security, which will take the money once was unlikely to ever be seen again, and place it into lock box, so that they can pass that money on to their children. For many, this will constitute most of the wealth that they will have to pass on to future generations. Additionally, because this money will be invested it will earn far greater return what they are paying into the current failing system. (See Social Insecurity- A Bad Investment For Black America) Democrats are in favor of continuing to rob blacks of this opportunity to pass on this hard earned wealth to their children.
Republicans agree with 72% of black parents in their support of school choice. But it is Democrats who have bought off by teachers unions who continue to force our children to stay in failing public schools (not that all public schools are failing mind you).
Republicans support the end of a practice that has killed twice as many African Americans as AIDS, Violent Crime, Accidents, Cancer and Heart Disease combined- Abortion (See Abortion = Modern Day Genocide!). But thanks to Democrats, Planned Parenthood have accomplished what the Klu Klux Klan could have only dreamed of… GOVERNMENT FUNDED GENOCIDE!
In the end, it is Democrats who for the last 50 years have ruled over the communities with the worst schools, highest crime rates, highest unemployment and poorest quality of life. And many of these communities happen to be largely black.
9 comments:
Craig - although I am not a supporter of Barack Obama, I'm having a difficult time following your somewhat tortured logic. Your blog headline tries to tie Sen. Obama to the Klan, then the body of your blog talks about the double standard imposed on GOP elected officials on the issue of race, along with a photo intended to "prove" Obama is an American-hating terrorist/ Manchurian candidate.
Help me understand your point, because I read your post as saying: Sen. Dodd endorsed Sen. Obama >> in 2004 Dodd paid Sen. Byrd a compliment >> Byrd is a former supporter of the KKK >> therefore Dodd endorsing Obama means Obama must be sympathetic towards the KKK. Huh??
There are a number of issues where Obama can be legitimately attacked: He supports abortion on demand, he is extremely hostile toward 2nd amendment rights, he will not vote or do anything counter to the wishes of big labor, his resume is paper thin, he has never accomplished anything in his brief legislative career, he loves taxes, he is anti-small business, he believes in socialized medicine - the list is almost endless, and it's all fair game in a political contest.
However, trying to make him a "Ku Klux Klan supporting, terrorist sympathizing, Islam fascist extreme Muslim" is a dishonest and simpleminded attack. You of all people should be sensitive to being unfairly attacked based on support received from others during a campaign.
Ken,
No tortured logic here. Let me spell it out for you.
I was simply pointing out the irony in the fact that a Democrat Senator who got away with praising a man who served in the Klan (and contrary to my brother’s assertion never apologized- only tried explain it way) would then endorse a black man for President.
I never attempted to make any link. Those are your own mental machinations at work there.
If you were not trying to make a link, why did you post a photo of Sen. Obama wearing the clothes from his Africa trip, next to a KKK photo? That's no different than throwing around "Hussein" and claiming it has nothing to do with an Islamic slur, or the New York Times leading with sex line to slime McCain.
Ken -
You are missing the overarching point. Trent Lott says nice things to a man who disavowed his past and gets lynched.
Robert Byrd who still uses the "N" word on national radio gets a free pass.
It is called hypocricy - and what's worse, the Dem leadership take black people to the bank and give them nothing.
That 72% stat on school choice is very telling.
Craig/Aaron - I don't disagree with your perspective that there is a different standard applied to republicans versus democrats. My point is only that there is no connection between Senators Robert Byrd, Chris Dodd, Trent Lott, Barack Obama and the KKK.
Using the Sen. Obama in Africa photo does nothing but attempt to engage the xenophobic feelings of some Americans. Getting involved in these idiotic side discussions about Obama's middle name, and whether or not he's a muslim terrorist sympathizer, only serves to damage the republican party and any chance at retaining the White House.
1. To anyone with a brain it is obvious what you are doing with the picture and your lame attempt to rationalize it.
2. Craig & Aaron-
Lets be sincere in comparisons between Dodd and Lott.
Lott went farther than just complimenting Strom Thurmond, he said We would not have had all these problems with the black community had Thurmond won the Presidency on his segregation platform 60 years ago.
That is not just a compliment to an old man it appeared he was agreeing with Thurmond's 60 year old platform, and if he had only won things would have been better.
Ken is correct your logic is tortured.
Pop.
Anonymous,
“Lott went farther than just complimenting Strom Thurmond, he said We would not have had all these problems with the black community had Thurmond won the Presidency on his segregation platform 60 years ago.”
Once again, you are adding things that just don’t exist.
Here is exactly what Lott said:
"I want to say this about my state: 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 all these years, either. "
Where do you see him mention the black community? Only in your tortured mind!
On the other hand, it was Dodd who advocated for a Klansman to be in leadership during the Civil War: Here is what he said:
"You would have been a great senator at any moment....you would have been right at the founding of this country, right during the Civil War....I can't think of a single moment in this nation's 220+ year history where you would not have been a valuable asset to this country."
You are going to believe what you want. Just don’t pedal your lies here!
P.S. Anyone who would publically attack someone without putting their name to it is a Coward.
"...And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either. "
And what the hell did Lott mean by that if he was not talking about the Black Community and the fight for civil rights???!!! Global Warming? Cloned Sheep? The Dallas Cowboys????
Craig, you have got to take your blinders off and see what everyone else does: your boy was a racist, and Lott, in all this other mess you started, is the ONLY one who stood up and said that the country would have avoided all these "problems" if a racist bigot like Strom Thurman was elected president.
The fact is, the Republican Party is now labeled as the "small tent party of white, protestant males". Everyone else is a distraction to the leaders of the Republican party. The electeds are white (and male); the party officials are overwhelmingly white (and male). And you are telling me that THIS is the party of Civil Rights? THIS is the party of freedom and of anti-slavery??? It seems to me that the legacy of which you are so proud is long since gone from the Elephant like so many chewed up peanuts....
So David... since you are a mind reader now; what did Dodd mean when he said Byrd would have been a great senator during the Civil War?
Post a Comment