posted on March 8, 2001 09:46:00 PM
Please excuse the length of this reply; seems too many good Americans are fogetting something about thier Heros that they keep on electing . . .
This dialogue concerns the Frank Rich OP-Ed piece printed in the December 26, 1998, Saturday Journal; Scandals Sans Bimbos Need Not Apply, New York Times detailing Trent Lott and Bob Barr's appearences as speakers before a white superecist group called the Council for Conservative Citezens. The CCC (you know like the KKK). Both Lott and Barr denounced their involevement with the group and claimed that they had not known of its ideology when they went to addressed the group.
<<When the Senate convenes in January, its first order of business should be to review Majority Leader Trent Lott's fitness to serve as guiding light of the world's most deliberative body. You heard it right. Before the senior senator from Mississippi sits in judgment of anybody, most of all the president, Lott's colleagues ought to pass fresh judgment on him.
The need for a closer look arises from recent articles by Post reporter Thomas Edsall on Georgia Republican Rep. Robert Barr's keynote address to the Council of Conservative Citizens, a white "racialist" group that, among other things, publishes anti-black screeds capable of making bigots weak in the knees with delight. And Barr isn't alone. Lott and the council have kept company, too.
Barr's link with the council was first disclosed by Harvard Law Prof. Alan Dershowitz during the House Judiciary Committee's impeachment hearing. Barr initially screamed like a stuck pig, claiming he knew nothing about the council's alleged racist and antisemitic agenda. He only schmoozed it up with council members at their meeting, said Barr, because the group enjoyed the blessings of other big-name southern conservatives, including Trent Lott, whom the council presses to the bosom as one of its own.
Lott, now at the peak of his GOP legislative career and recognizing a banana peel when he sees one, demonstrated the public relations smoothness that helped get him where he is today by swiftly denying through a spokesman any council membership. Lott has "no firsthand knowledge of the group's views," said the spokesman. Would that those words had been uttered under oath.
No sooner had Lott freed himself from the group than the head of the council's national capital branch, Mark Cerr, embraced the senator as an active member who had spoken to the group in the past. And guess what? The Post next produced a copy of the group's newsletter, Citizens Informer, with who else but Lott on the front page delivering a suck-up speech to a council gathering in Greenwood, Miss., in 1992. Lott told those staunch proponents of preserving the white race from immigration, intermarriage and "the dark forces" that are overwhelming America that the council "stand[s] for the right principles and the right philosophy."
Lott spokesman John Czwartacki told me this week that the '92 event was just another case of a politician delivering a stump speech to a local group of unknown political pedigree -- no big deal. What's more, after being confronted with evidence of the 1992 speech and the group's views, Lott renounced the council and said he won't truck with the likes of them now or henceforth forevermore.
Well, not so fast.
If, as it is now being argued in Lott's behalf, the majority leader is not comfortable with xenophobic, race-baiting bigots, when did he first grow suspicious and really start keeping his distance from the group? Because contrary to claims that he participated in the council event in '92 because he didn't know any better, they seem to have been keeping company for some time.
On my desk is a copy of a page from the 1997 Citizens Informer with a smiling Trent Lott pictured meeting in his Washington office with council national officers William D. Lord Jr., president Tom Dover and CEO Gordon Lee Baum. Lord and Baum were also in the '92 photo. And who is Lord? The Post reports Lord was a regional organizer for the southern-based segregationist Citizen Councils. In the '60s, white Citizen Council members shared the Ku Klux Klan's views on civil rights but tended to speak and dress better and not slink around after dark in white hoods.
So much could be said about the Council of Conservative Citizens. But let's let Citizens Informer, the group's Web site and its other documents speak for themselves:
"Given what has come out in the press about Mr. Clinton's alleged [sexual] preferences, and his apparent belief that oral sex is not sex one wonders if perhaps Mr. Clinton isn't America's first liberal black president. . . . His beliefs are actually a result of his inner black culture. Call him an Oreo turned inside out" (H. Millard, 1998).
"Life Magazine, the glossy photo album of folksy liberals, has been enlarging depraved miscreants like John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King into national heroes for decades" (1998).
"The most important issue facing us is the continued existence of our people, the European derived descendants of the founders of the American nation. As immigration fills our country with aliens, we risk being disposed and, ultimately displaced entirely" (1995).
"A Formal Protest of the [Arthur] Ashe Statue unveiling ceremony will be held on the site of a Confederate Fortification with Battle Flags. . . . Those with confederate battle flags will assemble behind the statue. . . . Come early and dress formal (coat and tie) No racial slurs please" (Richmond Chapter, June 30, 1996).
"Black rule in South Africa a total failure." "The increase of crime and barbarism in South Africa is nothing more than the emergence of the African ethos, so long submerged by strong pre-deKlerk National Party governments" (Citizens Informer, Winter, 1997-98).
"The Jews' motto is 'never forget, and never forgive.' One can't agree with the way they've turned spite into welfare billions for themselves, but the 'never forget' part is very sound" ("A Southern View," Citizens Informer, 1997).
"Our liberal establishment is using the media of television to promote racial intimacy and miscegenation. . . . all of the news teams on the major networks have black and white newscasters of opposite sexes" (Citizens Informer, 1998).
And as for Trent Lott's view of the council before the Citizens Informer article appeared in Edsall's story? A 1995 council promotional mailer quotes Lott: "America needs a national organization to mobilize conservative, patriotic citizens to help protect our flag, Constitution and other symbols of freedom."
Trent Lott's column regularly appears in the Informer newsletter (including its most recent issue in 1998) along with the publication's offensive racial columns and articles. However, Lott's spokesman said it would be wrong to associate his boss's noncontroversial and businesslike column, which is widely distributed, with the repugnant views and materials published by the council. Fair enough.
But has Lott really kept his distance from the council -- or are the ties long-running and cozy? And if the relationship is ended, when did he do it, and how clean is the break? Before hearing the case against Bill Clinton, the Senate and the country need to hear Republican majority leader Trent Lott's case for himself.>>
posted on March 8, 2001 09:52:42 PM
I see nothing wrong in posting a link to that KKK website. Actually, there are hundreds of them on the web. Many are worse than what KRS and Jamesoblivion have posted on these threads.
In order for us to be a better informed populace, the people must be given the available information by which to make or arrive at sound conclusions. We have a very active and outspoken Klan group in Northern Indiana. Perhaps you've caught one of their many illustrious appearances on the Jerry Springer Show. Big bellied, beer swilling, cussin' hilljacks, wearing white robes with all kinds of funny emblems stitched on.
The KKK websites, IMHO, speak for themselves: a lot jibbering nonsense from a segment of society that doesn't know its mouth from its a**hole.
Of course, this all my opinion and strictly on the hush-hush, QT.
*dayum typos*
[ edited by Baduizm on Mar 8, 2001 09:55 PM ]
posted on March 8, 2001 09:52:44 PM
krs - Hannibal had not been released then. The cannibal stories were sometimes true sometimes an excuse for the church to slaughter the heathens in the Carribean.
But Jamaica today? Surely that would hurt tourism. Ganjaville...
posted on March 8, 2001 10:16:26 PM
KRS(Ken): Racism is a cancer. So many people talk about how "open-minded" they are, yet they are unwilling to have frank, honest discussions about race relations, race-related issues or they become figidty when the topic is broached. They pay lip service, yet are afraid to "walk the walk" that they "talk."
Frankly, I prefer folk to be up front about their biases or prejudices. Don't sugar coat any of it, which is what Thomas Robb is doing with his newer style KKK. Remember David Duke, with all of his cosmetic surgery enhancements?
Again, I saw nothing wrong with the link. I LOL when I looked at it again.
But please remember, that this all on the QT, strictly hush-hush. Don't wanna get placed on "ignore" by anyone, ya know.
posted on March 8, 2001 10:34:41 PM
baduism, I thought David Duke looked like he had cosmetic surgery! When I saw him up close, he had that 'Michael Jackson' look to him. He was also wearing a ton of makeup.
posted on March 8, 2001 10:37:42 PM
I saw him on Politically Incorrect once. His face was shining from the makeup, and it looked like if he was grinnning any wider his face would break off.
posted on March 8, 2001 10:45:13 PM" thought David Duke looked like he had cosmetic surgery! When I saw him up close, he had that 'Michael Jackson' look to him"
posted on March 8, 2001 10:47:09 PM
krs, I promise the next time I see him I'll suggest that to him! We'll see if he gives me any bumper stickers then. (I'm surprised he even did in the first place, since I'm 'mixed'. Maybe he thought I was one of his few 'ethnic' supporters.)
Actually, KRS, I thought long and hard about John Ashcroft's appointment and I came to a rather different conclusion than you would think. I realized that it is stupid to protect the Stupid from themselves.
Look at it this way: many people think things through: they see that if (a) occurs, and is allowed to run its course, then (b) will be the obvious result. This is where those who oppose John Ashcroft, the CCC, Trent Lott, Bob Barr, Senator Byrd, Conservative Christian Coelition, the Republican Agenda in general, spend their time trying to warn those who just do not or will not think things through. I now feel that it's a waste of time.
My New Strategy is: "I Told You So!"
Let them appoint Asscroft! Let Bush pass his 1.6 trillion tax break for the rich! Let the average person see exactly how much money they'll get back. Let the Republican Right overthrow the U.S. Constitution (e.g. Nixon and the No-Knock laws - remember those? And Ronny R. admitting that he lied to Congress during the Iran-Contra investigation, etc.) so that they can have their racist agenda! Let the Republicans roll back employee job safety! Let the Republicans Destroy what's left of our wilderness and sell off our national treasures to commercialization. Let them charge User's Fees to National Parks so that Poor Families can't afford to go there! Let the small farmer be gobbled-up by the big combines and then triple our food prices (and deny that they have a monopoly!) Let's allow them a Free Reign, a Free Hand to Destroy all that we are proud of, of the progress that we have made into Democracy for All - not just the rich! Let them GO!
Then, after it's all done, we'll simply tell them: "I TOLD YOU SO! for the rest of their miserable lives.
No, my posts now are not for Them: they can Have Their Way! No! I'm for the rest of us who think Things Through and I'll keep the torch burning bright! You can count on it!
posted on March 9, 2001 06:16:22 PM
In the information provided by the Klan website that is linked above, the organization defines itself as a political one and disavows any association with major political parties, much to their relief I'm sure. Yet there is a tendency today to want to label all political opinion as liberal or conservative. The term moderate is used on occasion but with increasing infrequency, and one might say sincerity considering its recent applications.
From reading the information and goals of the Klu Klux Klan I would conclude that the organization would most likely be considered conservative since their views about government seem to coincide most closely with what is today defined as a conservative agenda in the ways that it would narrow and limit the scope of government. Does anyone else have any views on how the Klan could be classfied in relation to contemporary political thought?
As much as I would like to think so, they can't be considered outside contemporary political though since they are apparently real people and a part of it.
I can certainly sympathize with that reaction. But if their express purpose is to gain power and influence through our political system, I think that their goals bear careful scrutiny and analysis.
posted on March 9, 2001 07:43:56 PM
I think the KKK have just as much right as any of us do to publish what they want, but they're only hurting themselves by portraying themselves as serious. They claim they have infiltrated everything and have their "people" in high places, etc., but they've been claiming all this junk for years. Where are all these executive-types? Wouldn't such a "powerful" group want to be represented by their "elite" instead of the ones that turn up on the talk shows, etc.
Groups like this prey on the meek & weak using their ignorance as a way to aquire their "power". Any person that has an IQ above 15 can see through these psycho's.
I have no doubt that the Klan exaggerates its present position in American society in order to attract members and from the newsreports that I have read their membership is increasing, especially among the young and through their internet sites.
I hate to use this analogy which has so often become a standby in similar discussions, but no other example in recent history serves so well. Nazism in Germany. The same attitudes of early dismissal. And there are no IQ tests required for voter registration. So, I'm not so sure that it should be taken too lightly.
posted on March 9, 2001 08:06:45 PM
I cant remember exactly, but cannibals from the Caribbean used to be called CARIB. This was in the early 17th century. Maybe the late 16th. Settlers from England wanted plantations there to grow crops and start a colony..but had to battle the fierce Carib's.
Pardon the small intrusion. Read a book about them once.
This idea that all members of the kkk are idiots is not true. While
living in Mississippi, I became aware that people from
all strata of society are aligned with the kkk...business leaders,
police officers, court officials, doctors, lawyers and politicians.
So, you are right on target. This group must be taken very
seriously. Their numbers are growing as they merge with other
racist groups such as the Aryan Nation, skinheads etc. Without
their robes they function as leaders in religious organizations and
political offices.
And now, with the internet, they can spread their agenda all over the
world. It's a frightening prospect!
posted on March 9, 2001 09:30:51 PM
Yes, Helen, I would think that an open acknowledment of membership in the Klan or like organizations would be the kiss of death for politicians or other professionals in most areas of the country. I would further suspect that some people who support the Klan would never officially join because the risk of discovery would be too great.
And then who knows how much political support the Klan may receive from citizens who rally around ideas or political candidates that promote the Klan's goals and yet those citizens are absent the awareness of the consequences of their actions.
....that IS the joke!!