« Dick (Less) Gephardt | Home | Patrick “Patches” Kennedy »
Tonight’s Blog was Brought To You by The Letters R and D
By Matt Margolis | June 26, 2003
I have to admit – I did not know who Lester Maddox was until he died earlier this week. Quite honestly it doesn’t even make a difference to me know who he was.
So after death, when the media was reporting on it, I learned he was a Governor of Georgia. He was also a racist and a segregationist.
But did you know he was a Democrat?
I didn’t – until the Media Research Center made mention of it. Actually, when they made mention of the fact that the news networks seemed to ignore this fact when reporting on his death.
Imagine that, a racist, segregationist Democrat. Well, if a senior Democrat in the Senate can be a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, I guess a Democrat can be a segregationist too.
What’s interesting is how the networks characterized Maddox’s views on race. Which was labeled by AP report Dick Petty as being “relatively moderate.”
ABC and CNBC never mentioned Maddox’s party. Neither did CNN, FoxNews, or NBC.
Maybe the media has come a long way from the Trent Lott fiasco.
I don’t think so.
As we all can remember, and as MRC has pointed out again, Trent Lott’s affiliations never seemed to be absent at all. If anything they enhanced the whole story.
Trent Lott became the symbol of Republican bigotry and racism. For a comment that was spun into something it was never intended to be.
Which ultimately damaged Lott’s career at the same time.
It’s all about the letter at the end of your name. The R or the D that makes all the difference in how the world, and especially the media, treats you. Trent Lott’s words meant to honor his friend became the new race card for liberals to play against Republicans.
The Democrats have been running scared since November of 2002 – when they lost big time in the election. They’ve been on damage control, “How can we damage the Republicans enough that we can be victorious in 2004?”
That’s what it’s all about. Everything the Democrats say and do has to do with one single day more than a year away.
Now, I’m not blaming them for have political aspirations. Recapturing the White House is always the goal of party not in power. However, it’s not the game that’s the issue – it’s how they play the game.
The lynching of Trent Lott was really the start of it all. Republicans = Racists = No civil rights for blacks. Yes, I’m very serious. Listen to what the DNC has to say about Bush’s judicial nominees, and you’ll see I’m not anywhere’s near exaggerating the methods of the Democrats of scaring their constituencies. The way the Democrats paint the picture, electing Republicans is like abolishing civil rights for minorities, the end of women’s rights (which in Democrat’s terms really means abortion – as if that is the only issue pertinent to women)
But if you ask the Democrats, it’s the Republicans not playing nice.
The moral of the story is, No matter what, if you have an R at the end of your name, you will be treated differently. You will be stereotyped as a racist, a sexist, a homophobe, an elitist, etc. etc. while the real racists with D’s at the end of their name get a pass.
Topics: Thoughts |
Related Posts:
June 27th, 2003 at 3:59 pm
All the Dixiecrats switched to the GOP in the 50’s and 60’s. Learn your history.
June 27th, 2003 at 4:39 pm
But notice EVERYBODY got Thurmond branded out as Republican/segregationist.
June 27th, 2003 at 7:24 pm
“The moral of the story is, No matter what, if you have an R at the end of your name, you will be treated differently. You will be stereotyped as a racist, a sexist, a homophobe, an elitist, etc. etc.”
Your right, the liberal media just made up all that stuff because they don’t like republicans. They’re so mean. It has nothing to do with the fact that republicans actually have outdated ideas.
June 27th, 2003 at 9:39 pm
point 1: Strom went republican and dropped segregationism in relatively close succession. maybe they are related? just a thought.
point 2: Lott says something vaguely racist, and the republicans show him the door. Byrd is pure racist, and the Dems say nothing. Sounds like a double standard to me.
June 27th, 2003 at 10:57 pm
Tony44,
If you knew your history, you’d know that the Dixiecrats were Democrats.
If you knew your history, you’d know that during the 1948 Democratic National Convention, a small group of Democrats walked out when the other Democrats chose to favor civil rights legislation in their party platform.
If all or most became Republicans years later, then I guess they finally grew oout of liberalism.
To the gutless troll who decided to be anonymous,
Tell me how Republicans have outdated ideas, but the Democrats have modern ones. Give it your best shot.
June 27th, 2003 at 11:37 pm
The Democrats don’t have to worry about ousting the Republicans in 2004 because “it’s the economy, stupid.”
June 27th, 2003 at 11:46 pm
So then, when the economy improves, does that mean you’ll give Bush credit for it?
Would you vote for him then, Shaggy?
June 28th, 2003 at 2:27 am
Shaggy, I think you need to get Velma to do your fact-checking for you. I’m old enough to remember the nonsense in the 60’s, and how some of the patron saints of “separate but equal” behaved back then. And contrary to what they may be teaching you in Junior High, they were, almost to a man, Democrats. They encouraged the police brutality, the lynchings, the cross-burnings, and both the subtle and not-so-subtle intimidation of both blacks and the civil rights activists who dared to venture south and fight for equality.
Sadly, no one remembers Fulbright’s position on race, or cares about the change in rhetoric that Byrd made, not because he ultimately believes in civil rights but because he knows where whence his votes come. The only bigot of the era that anyone conveniently remembers was Wallace, and he was an embarasment to the Republican party then, as well as now. He never gained party approval for his personal politics of racism, but he is the “Republican” most pointed to as the example of how evil the party was and still is.
You can call yourself anything you want, and “align” yourself with any party you choose, and it does not make you a representative example of what the party stands for. Michael Bloomberg of New York is an excellent example of that in this age.
So, Shaggy, before you decide to burn one and contemplate your navel in the Mystery Machine, place this in your pipe instead, and smoke it.
June 29th, 2003 at 5:30 am
I’m still waiting for Glenn “Fair and Unbalanced” Reynolds to even ONCE come out and Clue-by-Four one of those racist butt-nugget Dimocrat Adolf wannabes the way he brewed up a multi-week storm in a teacup over Lott saying “hey, you’d have made a great President” at Strom’s one-hundredth birthday.
I’m not holding my breath, though.
Byrd,
Gephardt,
Maddox…
That seems like at least three strikes to me…
Apparently it’s only OK when he’s sacrificing “his own” to appease the Dims. Either he’s terminally naive in thinking that that’s going to accomplish anything except for howls of laughter from the Dim side of the aisle or maybe we’re not really “his own” after all.
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
June 29th, 2003 at 1:42 pm
I’ll agree with the Bloomberg comment but my prior post has nothing to do with race. Matt made a comment about 2004 and I voiced my opinion. I see you didn’t do much to attack my opinion about 2004. Stick to the topic of my post, don’t change it.
June 29th, 2003 at 8:38 pm
Neither, Shaggy, does mine. Read it again. Perhaps again.
July 11th, 2003 at 3:47 pm
the economy is bad cause of the cigar totting clinton
July 11th, 2003 at 11:29 pm
It wasnt about what was getting done at teh desk, but rather what was goin’ on under the desk.