Robert Byrd vs. Strom Thurmond

Note the author of each of those. Also note that Byrd was a member of the KKK for decades and was responsible for the first two filibusters of the Civil Rights Act. More and more, I'm noticing this kind of bullshit phony reporting, and it's getting under my skin.

I searched some of his quotes and found an interesting one, when commenting about race relations.

"They're much, much better than they've ever been in my lifetime ... I think we talk about race too much. I think those problems are largely behind us ... I just think we talk so much about it that we help to create somewhat of an illusion. I think we try to have good will. My old mom told me, 'Robert, you can't go to heaven if you hate anybody.' We practice that. There are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time, if you want to use that word. We just need to work together to make our country a better country, and I'd just as soon quit talking about it so much."

ROFL..terrific!

in that article you linked to it said that byrd was only like in the kkk from early 1940s to like when he ran for something in 1952. that's not decades. is that what you're mad about? was it actually decades? i mean, the articles just talk about their political careers without passing judgement, I dont understand what you're mad about. the titles? oh i know why you're mad, cause you watched glenn beck last night. good thing I happened to watch him too or else I wouldnt know where you're coming from. "you have to go beyond what the news tells you. you have to go beyond what the politicians tell you. you have to go beyond what I [emphasis by beck] tell you" -glenn beck

that episode was a train wreck. i was embarrassed for him when he suggested a liberal conspiracy of altering the past, like we cant even get our candidates elected consistently, how are we supposed to pull that off? I like how he held those two dudes hands after that because I dont think they would have had a narrative that made sense without him being there leading their answers.

My point in posting this is demonstrate the hypocrisy of the author.

You have two men with similarly sordid pasts regarding race hate. Both make an apparent change at some point in their life. One is excused, the other is not.

I'd lightly contend that Strom Thurmond's character change was more genuine, but to progressives (ironically, the biggest racists of them all), this doesn't seem to matter.

did you read the articles? I really didnt see a problem with them. I think it was nothing but fair to thurmond.

you seem to be caught up in the titles.

I'm caught up in the hypocrisy of t people like you.

Trent Lott was ousted because of what he said about Storm Thurmond. Yet Bill Clinton can say Byrd was just a good old boy trying to get elected with nary a hint of backlash.

I did read the articles, and your missing of the bias demonstrates my point about hypocrisy. I didn't catch Beck until this afternoon. He pointed these articles out on the radio, Thursday, IIRC.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk.

lets just say that you successfully proved the hypocrisy of both me and bill clinton (not bad company I might add). you still didnt demonstrate anything about the articles you posted which is what I'm calling into question. I can only assume that you cannot demonstrate anything dealing with the articles you posted, but then one must ask, if you did read the articles and yet could not and cannot find anything specifically objectionable (the fact that bill clinton exists aside), why would you post them here complaining about them?

I'm tiring of debating you. Black and white evidence isn't enough for your closed mind.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk.

if you're going to set up strawmen at least pick good examples before burning them.

If the articles are fair, why weren't quotes of Byrd's racist rantings included in his article? They certainly were included in Thurmond's. You're ignoring the slant here buddy. In my opinion Preacher is over-emphasizing the slant a little but you at the same time are ignoring it. Not at all surprising to those of us who have read these debates over the past year or so.

The author is obviously a liberal. Since he is a political reporter. He is going to give his liberal slant on his articles.

The guy wrote a biography of Ted Kennedy. He devotes 8 pages to the crash that should have ended Kennedy's career and sent him to jail. I would read it if someone bought it for me. I won't pay for it.

ok so to test that hypothesis I counted all the neutral =, positive +, and negative - references to civil rights in each article.

strom =7 +5 -8
byrd =3 +3 -6

but they are different lengths so i weighted them to the same page number

strom =7 +5 -8
byrd =3.75 +3.75 -7.5

I didnt like that so I reweighed them to the same negative value

strom =7 +5 -8
byrd =4 +4 -8

I dont know. Strom had like more references total because I think it was more a narrative through his career than byrd's. I dont think either article reallly made their subjects look good on civil rights. But at least you dont agree that it's black and white, honestly, politics is stuck in an eternal twilight. Nothing is ever simple.

^^
douchebag. Strom loved black people. Well at the least black women.