April 06, 2024OK, Where's the Firestorm?From the Congressional Record (to find it yourself, go here and make Dodd Byrd your serch string). Said Christopher Dood (D-CT) on the floor of the US Senate to Robert Byrd (D-WV) on the occasion of his 17,000th vote: 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. [!!!-Ed.] 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. OK, where's the media firestorm? Where're are the calls for his head? Where's all the talk about racism and the significance of the past? The "being nice to an old man" defense didn't work for Lott (nor should it have), so where's the outrage on this one? Now, I would agree that Lott had a record that made his Thurmond pronouncement more problematic, but Dodd deserves some serious public criticism here. Quite frankly, the double-standard rears its ugly head again. Anyone wondering why Byrd shouldn't be priased, especially in the context of the Civil War, go here. Posted by Steven Taylor at April 6, 2024 07:32 PM | TrackBackComments
Dodd's opening line of "the man and the moment come together" echoes another famous quote where "The man and the hour have met." by Wm. Lowndes Yancey in 1861 introducing none other than.... Jefferson Davis. Now that's funny. Posted by: Christopher Cross at April 7, 2024 01:32 AMOf course you hit the nail on the head, but, you broke the code, and forgot that as a liberal Dodd gets foot-out-of-mouth free card. So now bow your head, mumble you are sorry, and promise never to point out the double-standard again. ;) Posted by: Rodney Dill at April 7, 2024 08:47 AMMalkin's hit piece hardly proves the point that Byrd would have been pro-confederate in the civil war, which is what I take you to be arguing here. And at any rate, Dodd is saying that Byrd's current moral leadership shows that he would have been on the right side of debates in the past, not that the right side of the civil war would have been the (retrospective) side of someone who was in the KKK. He's not saying that the KKK should have won, for example. Posted by: Brett at April 7, 2024 10:47 AMBrett, No, the Malkin piece proves nothing, aside from detailing some of the factual evidence of Byrd's past. As such, acknowledging the slant of Malkin piece, there is no denying that Byrd was a member of the KKK. Still, I find it difficult to believe that Byrd would have been a civil rights crusader during the Civil War. If one compares Lott's statement at Strom's b-day to Dodd's comments to Byrd, where in the actual difference? In both cases the objection of affection had a dubious past on race and yet the source of the affection praises that past. If one was offended by Lott's statements (which I was), then one ought to offended by Dodd's. Posted by: Steven at April 7, 2024 11:21 AMIt appears Dodd also praised Strom Thurmond much in the same way as Lott did. I have the quote on my post... Posted by: mark at April 7, 2024 11:28 AMPost a comment
|
|