Yes, the anti-lynching resolution doesn’t really do anything to pay back those thousands of Americans killed simply for the color of their skin. But, I think it speaks volumes about the 12 Republicans who didn’t co-sponsor the bill and Bill Frist’s actions to defend them. Voting to condemn lynching should be a knee-jerk vote, something you do with your brain turned off – sort of voting yes or no on a “America Is Great” bill. Yet 12 Republicans… 12 southern Republicans seem to have decided that the political calculus of appeasing the racist southern vote was more important than condemning racial terrorism.
Good to know.
Can’t offend their core constituency, can they?
Now Republicans are pro – lynching…
Welcome back.
//sigh//
All they had to do was sponsor simple legislation.
Oliver, Shame on even you.
Dugger
Frank, lynching may not have been a Democratic or Republican issue, but it most certainly always has been a Southern conservative issue. Or do you think it was liberals who were murdering civil rights activists in Mississippi?
at least you could have some debate on the “America is Great” bill. same cannot be said of lynching.
What I’m hearing from you, Oliver, is that you have no idea why some people didn’t go along.
The Washington Post has no idea, either…
I suspect that there was some other, non – racist reasons, why they did what they did.
Actually, yes, those senators who didn’t sign on – regardless of party – should be ashamed. This isn’t simply condeming Rick Santorum calling Democrats nazis, this is a formal senate resolution that any senator should have no trouble being in favor of.
I dont see any reason why those senators who didn’t sign on wouldn’t offer up an explanation as to why. If its no big deal then they should say so. Has anyone heard any reasons offered from the estranged 12? I haven’t yet.
This is the stupidest thing I have ever read at your site. Because some Senators didn’t sign on as co-sponsors, it makes them “pro-lynching?”
Does the same go for Kent Conrad, Jack Reed and Jeff Bingaman? All three are Democrats and were not co-sponsors of the legislation. Tell them to resign Oliver. I mean, you don’t want Democrats who support lynching representing your party do you?
This kind of nonsense from people is getting ridiculous and it isn’t just liberals. Conservatives pull this kind of crap as well. Some idiot will say something outrageous and people will say, “If so and so doesn’t condemn this, it means he supports it!”
Enough already.
What non-racist reasons could there be? And if they are standing on some “principle”, then a. Why did “Kitty Killer” forbid a recorded vote and b. Why aren’t the pro-lynching Senators rushing to the mike to condemn what those reasons are?
They’re scared of having to go back to their constituencies having voted against lynching. It’s the simplest explanation for the whole thing, which ties up the content as well of the geographic origin of the Senators in a tidy little package. Ockham’s razor and all.
What non-racist reasons could there be?
This is unreal. A person is now a racist if they didn’t co-sponsor a resolution? This wasn’t legislation. It’s not a law. It’s a piece of paper that says, “Oh by the way, we’re sorry that people in the past didn’t pass anti-lynching legislation.” Get a grip.
And Oliver, I didn’t ask you whether or not they should be ashamed. I asked if you were going to say that Kent Conrad and Jack Reed are pro-lynching. They must be according to your logic and as such, why would you want Democrats who support lynchings part of the party that defeated the Nazis (snicker)?
Again, I ask, what non-racist reasons could there be?
Ken Conrad and Reed added their names to the resolution, by the way.
And don’t forget we’re talking about southerners here – even people from North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Virginia, Kentucky and Georgia – despite both senators from those states co-sponsoring the bill.
‘Southerner’ is a big, scary word, I guess – adds a lot more punch to the post, even if it doesn’t serve reality well.
The issue is a tad more complicated.
Read this, but be warned, it´s dense.
The point, in brief? Congress doesn´t have any right to make an apology. It wasn´t Congress´ fault; it was the fault of the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court has issued no apology.
I´ve no idea what the individual reasons for not signing the bill were…for all I know, every non-signer could have been KKK at one point. But for a guy like Oliver, who makes a living being smart, signing this bill shouldn´t be, as he put it, “a knee-jerk vote.” The truth is more complicated.
Adding a link to your comment must be “a tad complicated” as well. Perhaps you should issue an apology.