Sen Chris Dodd (D-Conn) makes racist comments - needs to step down.

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Well there's a difference between voicing your political views and downright lying. Heartsurgeon has crossed the line one too many times.

So have many many many other posters here in this forum(yes including me) but that is my subjective opinion. You are entitled to your opinion of HS but he is far from crossing the ban line if history is any guide around here.

If you don't like his threads or posts - you are more than welcome to not read them. We all make choices - I suggest you choose to ignore his posts.

CkG

 

[SuperTool]

So what's the conclusion, should Dodd step down from Senate Majority leader post like Lott did, or not?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
So what's the conclusion, should Dodd step down from Senate Majority leader post like Lott did, or not?

It's obvious the left hasn't gotten to the awareness stage in all this yet - let alone outrage. Yes, Dodd doesn't have a leadership post but that sure doesn't give him a free pass now does it? Didn't think so...

CkG

 

[SuperTool]

Frist should give Dodd his post for 1 day, then Dodd can step down

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Frist should give Dodd his post for 1 day, then Dodd can step down

So you are saying that Dodd can make an apparently racist remark(in the same exact vein as Lott) and you are ready to pass it off as a joke.

Interesting.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Media silent?

CkG

Lott honored Thurmond at that time by asserting that if he had been elected president in 1948 running as a member of the segregationist Dixiecrat Party, then "we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years."

That's pretty much blatantly supporting segregation and racism.

Dodd was merely honoring Sen. Byrd on the casting of his 17,000th vote along with many other members of the Senate. Dodd mentioned NOTHING of Byrd's personal views.

"I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia that he would have been a great senator at any moment,"
Oh any moment? You mean when he was in the KKK?

"He would have been right at the founding of this country. He would have been in the leadership crafting this Constitution. He would have been right during the great conflict of Civil War in this nation."
Oh really? A member of the KKK would have been right during the Civil War?

conjur - if you think Lott's statements are racist in nature I fail to see how you can ignore Dodd's. They are infact quite similar in nature.

Now again - I don't think either had racial intent like I stated earlier but it's quite interesting how the democrats are reacting(or not) to this.

CkG

Again, Lott was specifically referring to the Dixiecrat party (and its racist, segregationist views).

Dodd was referring to Byrd in general and mentioned NOTHING about Byrd's history of being in the KKK.

If Dodd was being racist, so were Senators Frist and Stevens (both Republicans) in their respective remarks:

"Without question, when history is written, Senator Byrd will hold a prominent place as a Senate legend. "

and

"But nothing has separated ROBERT BYRD from each Senator in the Senate"

In fact, from the last quote there (from Republican Senator Stevens), Stevens is calling all Senators racist...according to *your* thinking, CkG.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Media silent?

CkG

Lott honored Thurmond at that time by asserting that if he had been elected president in 1948 running as a member of the segregationist Dixiecrat Party, then "we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years."

That's pretty much blatantly supporting segregation and racism.

Dodd was merely honoring Sen. Byrd on the casting of his 17,000th vote along with many other members of the Senate. Dodd mentioned NOTHING of Byrd's personal views.

"I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia that he would have been a great senator at any moment,"
Oh any moment? You mean when he was in the KKK?

"He would have been right at the founding of this country. He would have been in the leadership crafting this Constitution. He would have been right during the great conflict of Civil War in this nation."
Oh really? A member of the KKK would have been right during the Civil War?

conjur - if you think Lott's statements are racist in nature I fail to see how you can ignore Dodd's. They are infact quite similar in nature.

Now again - I don't think either had racial intent like I stated earlier but it's quite interesting how the democrats are reacting(or not) to this.

CkG

Again, Lott was specifically referring to the Dixiecrat party (and its racist, segregationist views).

Dodd was referring to Byrd in general and mentioned NOTHING about Byrd's history of being in the KKK.

If Dodd was being racist, so were Senators Frist and Stevens (both Republicans) in their respective remarks:

"Without question, when history is written, Senator Byrd will hold a prominent place as a Senate legend. "

and

"But nothing has separated ROBERT BYRD from each Senator in the Senate"

In fact, from the last quote there (from Republican Senator Stevens), Stevens is calling all Senators racist...according to *your* thinking, CkG.

Lott's statement: "I wanna say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of him. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either."

Dodd's statement: "It has often been said that the man and the moment come together. I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia that he would have been a great Senator at any moment. Some were right for the time. ROBERT C. BYRD, in my view, would have been right at any time. He would have been right at the founding of this country. He would have been in the leadership crafting this Constitution. He would have been right during the great conflict of civil war in this Nation. He would have been right at the great moments of international threat we faced in the 20th century. I cannot think of a single moment in this Nation's 220-plus year history where he would not have been a valuable asset to this country. Certainly today that is not any less true."

So again - why are these ssssooooo different that the left shouldn't be up in arms like they were with Lott's statment?

But just incase you forget my position on this(since you seem to be gathering some straw) - I don't think either were racist or praising the racist views of the person they were trying to praise for thier service to the Nation. But again - if there was outrage for Lott's statement I don't see how or why there isn't outrage over Dodd's...well...yes, actually I do know...

CkG

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Media silent?

CkG

Lott honored Thurmond at that time by asserting that if he had been elected president in 1948 running as a member of the segregationist Dixiecrat Party, then "we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years."

That's pretty much blatantly supporting segregation and racism.

Dodd was merely honoring Sen. Byrd on the casting of his 17,000th vote along with many other members of the Senate. Dodd mentioned NOTHING of Byrd's personal views.

"I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia that he would have been a great senator at any moment,"
Oh any moment? You mean when he was in the KKK?

"He would have been right at the founding of this country. He would have been in the leadership crafting this Constitution. He would have been right during the great conflict of Civil War in this nation."
Oh really? A member of the KKK would have been right during the Civil War?

conjur - if you think Lott's statements are racist in nature I fail to see how you can ignore Dodd's. They are infact quite similar in nature.

Now again - I don't think either had racial intent like I stated earlier but it's quite interesting how the democrats are reacting(or not) to this.

CkG

Again, Lott was specifically referring to the Dixiecrat party (and its racist, segregationist views).

Dodd was referring to Byrd in general and mentioned NOTHING about Byrd's history of being in the KKK.

If Dodd was being racist, so were Senators Frist and Stevens (both Republicans) in their respective remarks:

"Without question, when history is written, Senator Byrd will hold a prominent place as a Senate legend. "

and

"But nothing has separated ROBERT BYRD from each Senator in the Senate"

In fact, from the last quote there (from Republican Senator Stevens), Stevens is calling all Senators racist...according to *your* thinking, CkG.

conjur, show me where Lott mentioned the dixiecrat party in his statement.

And I have to agree with one of those you mentioned. Byrd will be a ledgend, an ex-KKK member lasting that long in the Senate. It's amazing, the stuff ledgends are made of, at least in the democratic party it is.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Mods, I think you need to take a good long hard look at Heatsurgeon and his posts, I feel his banning is long overdue as well. There is no rhyme or reason to his blatantly anti-Democratic party, anti-Liberal posts. He will go out of his way to take quotes way out of context and distort them to fit his own twisted political views. Heartsurgeon, either you tone it down some or leave, I think everyone (even some of the conservative members of this forum) is getting sick of you.

Give us a break Anne, we have to have an occasional laugh in here

 

[heartsurgeon]

the only two posters on this forum that have not been disingenious in this thread are CAD and me.

CAD gives them both a pass, feels that neither one intended to offend or posit racist views.
I actually believe both the comments are at least inappropriate, and quite possibly racist.

different conclusions, consistently applied to both Republican and Democrat.

how the rest of you can claim one statement is racist, and the other isn't just identifies you as blatant partisans (like i didn't know that already)

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
the only two posters on this forum that have not been disingenious in this thread are CAD and me.

CAD gives them both a pass, feels that neither one intended to offend or posit racist views.
I actually believe both the comments are at least inappropriate, and quite possibly racist.

different conclusions, consistently applied to both Republican and Democrat.

how the rest of you can claim one statement is racist, and the other isn't just identifies you as blatant partisans (like i didn't know that already)

Oh, don't get me wrong - they both should have been more aware of what they were saying but I don't find them totally innapropriate given the context of where the comments were made. Both comments were made to try to make a couple of old geezers feel better and to thank them for their service to the US gov't. What I do find inappropriate is the double standard that is being applied here by some. No one is going to convince me that the two statements aren't similar in nature - enough so- that if the bar for "racism" is set low for one it needs to be set low for the other by the people originally setting the bar. I just choose to set the bar higher than both of their comments

CkG

 

[heartsurgeon]

my exact sentiments.

you know, i wasn't "there" when the comments were made.
i doubt they were intented to offend anyone
i do believe that they were insensitive

racist? who knows what evil lurks in the heart of men...

but to pillory Lott, and then give theat santimoniuous drunk Cris Dodd a complete pass on making the same blunder that Lott did, is just to much for this kind hearted country doctor to let pass without some condemnation.

 

[josphII]

Again, Lott was specifically referring to the Dixiecrat party (and its racist, segregationist views).

Dodd was referring to Byrd in general and mentioned NOTHING about Byrd's history of being in the KKK.

If Dodd was being racist, so were Senators Frist and Stevens (both Republicans) in their respective remarks:

"Without question, when history is written, Senator Byrd will hold a prominent place as a Senate legend. "

and

"But nothing has separated ROBERT BYRD from each Senator in the Senate"

In fact, from the last quote there (from Republican Senator Stevens), Stevens is calling all Senators racist...according to *your* thinking, CkG.

your first sentence is totally false. what lott said was 'we would nto have all these problems if you would have been elected president.' i have no idea how you extract support for racist from that comments. what dodd said was worse, however, both statements were politically dumb.

 

[Jhhnn]

Amazing level of reading non-comprehension, JosphII, or you just haven't been following the thread. Lott's actual statement, once again-

?When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we [in Mississippi] 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.?

When ol' Strom ran for president, it was in 1948 on the racist Dixiecrat ticket, in revolt against Truman, the party mainstream, and their stance on civil rights. Very straightforward. Lott's praise of that candidacy and what it stood for is also very straightforward. And you don't have to go to left or even moderate sources to find condemnation of it-

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel121602.asp

And you really don't have to take my word for it when I describe the dixiecrats as racist--

http://hnn.us/articles/1152.html

Or consult Salon, Joe Conason's journal, from Dec 11, 2002 for a little historical perspective-

http://www.salon.com/politics/conason/2002/12/11/bush/

Lott's sympathies have also been expressed on other occasions-

http://victorian.fortunecity.com/brambles/499/Racism/Lott-CCC/lott-ccc.html

Despite far extended attempts to equate the two, Sen Dodd's remarks and history in no way compare to Sen Lott's. And the Repubs will once again employ their time honored pandering to prejudice in an attempt to win the South, with coded phrases and carefully crafted messages aimed at the white male voter-

http://www.newpittsburghcourier.com/index.php?article=1990

And that's not to accuse modern Republicans of being racist, but of being more than willing to exploit racist sentiment, even to foster and maintain it for their own purposes.

 

[heartsurgeon]

He would have been right during the great conflict of Civil War in this nation

O.K., let's examine this statement. If Robert Byrd were a Senator, or any political leader during the Civil War he would have been in favor of slavery, against the emancipation proclamation, and on the side of the Confederacy. As recently as 1964, he was a vociferous opponent of the Civils Right Act.

What part of this do you not understand?

He only changed his opinion about blacks when he HAD TO in order to retain office. During the Civil War he would have been a typical successionist southerner, and fully in favor of slavery, as this was the cultural norm of his southern peers at this time.

liberals sicken me with their duplicitous, slippery morals and their ability to rationalize any abhorant behavior on the part of their politicians "because we have to defeat Bush/Conservatives/Republicans"

Ted Kennedy claiming Bush doesn't deserve our trust - this from the mouth of a drunk, a liar, someone guilty of at least vehicular manslaughter for killing Mary Jo Kopechne while driving without a valid license under the influence of alcohol, a cheat (sending someone to take a college exam for him)

"Sheets" Byrd, perportedly reform "Grand Keagle" of the KKK, claiming Bush has damaged the country.

and now that drunk from Connecticutt, Dodd, slamming Lott for chosing his words poorly, and insensitively, and then DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

these liberals are not immoral, they are amoral.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

He would have been right during the great conflict of Civil War in this nation

O.K., let's examine this statement. If Robert Byrd were a Senator, or any political leader during the Civil War he would have been in favor of slavery, against the emancipation proclamation, and on the side of the Confederacy. As recently as 1964, he was a vociferous opponent of the Civils Right Act.

What part of this do you not understand?
He only changed his opinion about blacks when he HAD TO in order to retain office. During the Civil War he would have been a typical successionist southerner, and fully in favor of slavery, as this was the cultural norm of his southern peers at this time.

liberals sicken me with their duplicitous, slippery morals and their ability to rationalize any abhorant behavior on the part of their politicians "because we have to defeat Bush/Conservatives/Republicans"

Ted Kennedy claiming Bush doesn't deserve our trust - this from the mouth of a drunk, a liar, someone guilty of at least vehicular manslaughter for killing Mary Jo Kopechne while driving without a valid license under the influence of alcohol, a cheat (sending someone to take a college exam for him)

"Sheets" Byrd, perportedly reform "Grand Keagle" of the KKK, claiming Bush has damaged the country.

and now that drunk from Connecticutt, Dodd, slamming Lott for chosing his words poorly, and insensitively, and then DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

these liberals are not immoral, they are amoral.

So you are blaming Dodd for supporting what you THINK Byrd WOULD have supported during the civil war?

 

[myusername]

Lott's statement: "I wanna say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of him. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either."

Dodd's statement: "It has often been said that the man and the moment come together. I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia that he would have been a great Senator at any moment. Some were right for the time. ROBERT C. BYRD, in my view, would have been right at any time. He would have been right at the founding of this country[/b]. He would have been in the leadership crafting this Constitution. He would have been right during the great conflict of civil war in this Nation. He would have been right at the great moments of international threat we faced in the 20th century. I cannot think of a single moment in this Nation's 220-plus year history where he would not have been a valuable asset to this country. Certainly today that is not any less true."

Trent Lott's statement not only strongly implies that Thurmond's racist/segregationist politics were appropriate in the day, he explicitly states that both he [Lott] and his state are *still* proud of this history, and furthermore implicitly states that both he and the state *still* feel that segregation would have been a better alternative to that which resulted in the current environment.

Dodd's statement not only makes no implicit or explicit reference to politics of race, it refers to events that occurred before Byrd was even born. Dodd is not referring to a point in Byrd's life - as Lott was referring to a point in Thurmond's life - but to historic events/times at which he feels Byrd's leadership would have been beneficial to the nation. First and foremost, since the Civil War happened before either of them were born, there is certainly no way of knowing what Byrd's views at the time would be. Hell, if he had lived then, who even knows what he would be like, considering he would have been raised in an entirely different environment. Dodd is certainly guilty of effusive hyperbole, but there is no racism in his remarks.

Failure to understand the difference indicates that you are a whiny little partisan bitch.

 

[heartsurgeon]

you are reading connotations into Lott's statement that are your opinion.
He never said anything that was out and out racist, just insensitive, and some people might interpret as racist.
Indeed, i feel his comments were most inappropriate.

you rather curiously are not reading connotations into Dodd's statement.
He never said anything that was out and out racist, just insensitive, and some people might intrepret as racist.

I don't know which claim is more outrageous,
that you claim to read Lott's mind and know his praise was aimed towards Thurmond racist views of the past,
or that you Byrd, a son of the south, a Grand Keagle in the KKK, would somehow have had racially "sensitive" views about blacks during the era of the Civil War.

Your partisanship is blinding.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Mods, I think you need to take a good long hard look at Heatsurgeon and his posts, I feel his banning is long overdue as well. There is no rhyme or reason to his blatantly anti-Democratic party, anti-Liberal posts. He will go out of his way to take quotes way out of context and distort them to fit his own twisted political views. Heartsurgeon, either you tone it down some or leave, I think everyone (even some of the conservative members of this forum) is getting sick of you.

Another Stalinistic attempt to suppress political opinion by an "enlightened" leftist, I see.

 

[drewshin]

dodd's and lott's comments were both very insensitive, but not racist, and they should have both given some thought to what they were saying before saying them.

i dont think dodd should step down, i dont think trent lott should have had to step down either, but he did anyways which was great! LOL
he was a bad representative of the republican party IMHO.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Dodd finally apologizes!!!

Wow - only took him two weeks! I wonder where the media is on this....oh wait...it doesn't matter when....oh you know...

CkG

 

[heartsurgeon]

Dodd said Wednesday he is sorry if anyone was offended by his comments during the April 1 tribute of Byrd after the West Virginia senator cast his 17,000th vote.

"Words can sting and hurt," Dodd told The Associated Press. "If in any way, in my referencing the Civil War, I offended anyone, I apologize."

Dodd said he was not thinking about Byrd's Klan membership or his vote against the Civil Rights Act when he made his comments

here's the real lesson CAD:

the NAACP never accepted Lott's apology, despite his repeated public pleas for forgiveness...the NAACP gave him [Dodd] a seal of approval by having their Connecticut chapter say a private phone call [apology] is OK

Appeasement doesn't work with the Liberals, they just plan hate conservatives and wish them ill.

 

[Gaard]

Appeasement doesn't work with the Liberals, they just plan hate conservatives and wish them ill.

fact or opinion?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Appeasement doesn't work with NUMEROUS Liberals, they just plan hate conservatives and wish them ill.

fact

CkG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

:Q:Q:QDodd apology is not enough:Q:Q:Q

The president of the Greater New Haven NAACP is not satisfied with U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd?s apology for his sweeping praise of a Senate colleague who has a checkered past on matters of race relations.

Doh! I see this is finally getting a little attention....however the president of Connecticut's NAACP accepted Dodd's apology. Most interesting...

CkG