George Allen Is Toast
Tweet
Stick a fork in the senator from Virginia. He. Is. Done.
Teammates: Allen used "N-word" in college
"Allen said he came to Virginia because he wanted to play football in a place where ‘blacks knew their place,’" said Dr. Ken Shelton, a white radiologist in North Carolina who played tight end for the University of Virginia football team when Allen was quarterback. "He used the N-word on a regular basis back then."
A second white teammate, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he feared retribution from the Allen campaign, separately claimed that Allen used the word "nigger" to describe blacks. "It was so common with George when he was among his white friends. This is the terminology he used," the teammate said.
A third white teammate contacted separately, who also spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of being attacked by the Virginia senator, said he too remembers Allen using the word "nigger," though he said he could not recall a specific conversation in which Allen used the term. "My impression of him was that he was a racist," the third teammate said.
A few weeks ago, Mike Stark asked George Allen if he had ever said “nigger”. Apparently he lied. Shock.
43 Responses to “George Allen Is Toast”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
allen’s racist tendencies are old news. a revelation that he used the n-word in college isn’t going to have an effect on the campaign. he is running for senator in virginia after all.
Allen did a no-no in college long ago? Why he’s not fit to serve in the Senate! You are absolutely correct OW. Those Republcans are horrible. Get rid of him.
Your Buddy,
Sen Robert Dugger Byrd
This sounds like part of the Southern Strategy to me.
Get a group of “anonymous” buddies to accuse Allen of being a racist which is already being excused because of indiscretions of his youth, or can be outright denied.
Whatever tolerant people think all of this will play quite well to Allen’s base along Tobacco Road.
So he just mentally replaces that word with “macaca” and that’s all right, then?
Stop apologizing for this racist prick.
I would love to see a conservative, just once, admit the relationship between the conservatism of the national party, and the social conservatives of the South. I mean, do they not understand white voting patterns in the South at all? Do they really think that all those old segregationists became liberals — the people segregationists hated most?
Let’s see. 19 teammates were asked if Allen was a racist. 14 said absolutely not. 2 had no real recollection of Allen. 3 said he used the “N-word: Of those 3, two won’t even tell us their names, and the third is a Democratic donor. And you’re automatically accepting this as fact, with not the least bit of skepticism, or questioning?
John,
The “Democratic donor” you mention has in fact voted for both Republicans and Democrats. Also his detailed anecdotes don’t seem to sound like he made them up. I mean who invents stories of being called “Wizard”?
As for the anonymous sources, true, their crediblity hasn’t been established. Still, seeing how ruthless Allen has been, I don’t blame them. In addition there’s that whole fear of being harassed by freepers that people generally don’t want to happen.
Basically, the ideal should be that if someone is running for high office, their credentials should be so impecable that out of a small group of people like 20, none should be indicating that said candidate has racist tendencies.
The most disturbing thing in that article gets little mention– that Allen put the cut off head of a deer he’d just hunted into the mailbox of a family– just because they were black. In the South. I mean, anywhere that would be pretty horrible, but in the south, after a decade where lynching was used to “punish” black people for trying to vote or move into neighborhoods?
That’s a lot sicker and indicative of a serious pathology than using a racial epithet. In fact, I’d say it’s sociopathic. It’s not just college hijinks. It’s criminal, for one thing, and shows an irrational and dangerous level of hatred.
There’s something very strange about this man. In the early 70s, after civil rights, this California-bred man is acting like a KKK-er from the 20s. And the only possible reason he could have for that is because he hates– not because he was raised in a place where racism was expected, not because he was going to benefit materially from acting like a racist… but because he enjoyed terrorizing people.
I know it happened in college and a lot of us did things in college we’re not proud of. Goodness knows there are plenty of people who have grown beyond their racism and shouldn’t be judged by an earlier stage of their life. But George Allen keeps -acting racist now-. As an adult, he met with racist groups, displayed the confederate flag, had a noose as office decoration, and called a man of Indian descent by a racist term. And this while he’s serving as an elected official! It’s as if this is so important to him he can’t stop even when it’s self-destructive.
If my home-state elects a man who pretty obviously wants to bring back the glory days of segregation, at this late date, then there really doesn’t seem to be much hope for that place.
It’s not that he was racist as a college student. It’s that he is still showing all the signs of racism now, as an adult and as an elected official.
John apparently has reading comprehension difficulties.
Let’s see. 19 teammates were asked if Allen was a racist. 14 said absolutely not. 2 had no real recollection of Allen. 3 said he used the “N-word: Of those 3, two won’t even tell us their names, and the third is a Democratic donor.
First, not all 19 were teammates. Some were those who knew Allen in college.
Second, 14 did not say ‘absolutely not’–7 said they didn’t know Allen well enough. 2 said they were bothered by Allen’s fondness for the flag of traitors. And 7 said they didn’t see Allen as racist.
Additionally, the person John describes as a Democratic Donor also supported GOP candidates.
Holy God, that deer thing is simply insane! This man should be sent home immediately! Go back to California, you shameful carpetbagger!
Paaru, do you have confirmation of the deer thing? If checked out, I would think that would pretty much be all-she-wrote for George Allen. show up at an appearance with a deer head and say “you dropped this”
I’ll still bet that he’s re-elected to the Senate. I live in Virginia, and Allen’s instincts about these people may be the only thing he has ever been smart about.
Parru wrote:
Your home state was the first (and so far only) one to elect a black candidate to be governor since the forced elections during Reconstruction, when Doug Wilder won in 1987. Even though I’m a conservative Republican, I voted for Mr Wilder, primarily because his GOP opponent, Marshall Coleman, was best described by the slang term for the rectum.
But if I still lived in Virginia, Senator Allen would have my vote!
And can we get a show of hands here from everyone who has never used the words “nigger” or “queer” (not meant as odd) or “faggot” (not meant as a piece of wood)?
My hand is not raised.
But if I still lived in Virginia, Senator Allen would have my vote!
Okay, i’ll bite. Why?
Racists like George Allen belong in prison. This is why we need hate speech and hate crime laws. So people like this can be put behind bars for the rest of their lives.
I don’t think Allen belongs in prison, but I think whatever family he terrorized with that deer head might deserve a civil judgment against him. More importantly, he doesn’t belong in the Senate representing Virginians. He should just go back to California.
Now if Allen had been in the KKK it would be okay for him to be in the Senate representing West Virginians.
“Now if Allen had been in the KKK it would be okay for him to be in the Senate representing West Virginians.”
Okay, so the right wing idiots here are completely missing the point. When recently asked on the record if he had used the “N word” Allen said no. He had never used it. Well, that’s a fucking lie now isn’t it?
Allen could have said, “Well, in my misspent youth, when I was irresponsible …” and gone on to repudiate his racist past, as Senator Byrd has done. But he didn’t do that. He instead chose to lie.
So he’s a racist and a liar. I guess that makes him The Perfect Storm Republican candidate. Good luck with that guys.
And can we get a show of hands here from everyone who has never used the words “nigger” or “queer” (not meant as odd) or “faggot” (not meant as a piece of wood)?
My hand is not raised.
Mine is, but then, I’m not a bigot.
Duros asked:
Because he has been a good senator and he’s a Republican.
I moved away from Virginia before he was elected senator, but I did have the opportunity, which I took, to vote for him for governor.
Aaron wrote:
OK, we have one vote against freedom of speech.
Michael wrote:
Never, huh, not even once?
Did Byrd “repudiate” his past before or after speaking about “white niggers,” which, of course, he then had to “repudiate.”
As always with the left, it is do as we say and not as we do.
Pretty sure the left has a better record on civil rights than the right does, Hedley. Recall that it was LIBERALS who won that fight, and segregationist CONSERVATIVES who lost. The white vote in the South is the most lopsidedly right-wing in the entire country — and it’s because of race. The more black people as a percentage of the population of a former confederate state, the better GWB did among white people. Look it up. This South has always been polarized by race, and now that Southern whites control the GOP, the GOP has a bad, bad race problem. Chanting Byrd’s name won’t help you here, Hedley.
Of course, Byrd voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Votong Rights Act of 1965 but why quibble with facts when “do as we say not as we do” works so well for the left.
Dana, there are limitations to freedom of speech. Racism and hate speech should not qualify as freedom of speech. Racist hate speech is an incitement to violence and oppression of human beings. Anyone who uses hate speech towards racial minorities should be prosecuted and go to prison. Period.
Allen is not unlucky; he is clumsy, fatally clumsy. There is always an important undertow to racially charged speech. Nothing is trivial in this area.
Strom voted against civil rights. White conservatives voted against civil rights. Barry Goldwater voted against civil rights. If you want a fact-based debate on race issues in the South, Hedley, I will take you on any time. But the central fact is this: liberals won. Conservatives lost.
“As always with the left, it is do as we say and not as we do.”
And as always with the Right it’s, “Quick, look over there…”
And what does the Left do, Frame? Why, secure civil rights for all Americans, as promised by our founding, shining principles. And what does the Right do? Why, stand in opposition to it. What else is there to know about the Left and the Right on civil rights?
but doctor the right’s civil rights are being violated when they are prevented from demonizing gays and blacks and non-Christians and furriners and …….
I wonder which side of the civil rights debate the cons here would have stood on if they were around in 1964. Hmmmm. That’s a head scratcher.
I see the Democrats have discovered “Swiftboating.”
Congradulations.
Isn’t it funny to hear the right defend itself against allogations of racism? Their best defense is to keep bringing up Sen. Byrd. But with Rush, Lott, Allen, Schwarzenegger, Coulter, O’Reilly, Robertson..and the list continues…inside their camp, it’s like a bunch of Floridians claiming Canada is just as balmy because of the weather around Vancouver.
Hey, Mike, don’t feign surprise when the chickens come home to roost. You guys made it alright to dredge up things from 30 years ago. Don’t bitch to us, bitch to Rove.
Michael wrote:
And can we get a show of hands here from everyone who has never used the words “nigger” or “queer” (not meant as odd) or “faggot” (not meant as a piece of wood)?
My hand is not raised.
Mine is, but then, I’m not a bigot.
Never, huh, not even once?
Never, Dana. Not even once.
I love these conservo-trolls. You can’t tell if they are for racism or against it. You can’t tell if they’re for swiftboating or against it. The only thing you can tell about them is — you guessed it — that they really, really hate liberals. That’s all their pathetic, dying, failed movement has left to offer. Another helping of hate, please, Mike!
By the way, several more people have come out to say that Allen lied about using the N-word in the past. One of them is Larry Sabato, amazingly. This is how the Senate is won back: one surprise at a time. That 50 state strategy is looking better all the time.
Oh, good. This means we can look forward to another one of Oliver’s “God damn those uncivil conservatives” posts.
Sometime, you know, every now and then, it’s good to ignore the meaningless stuff and focus on the big picture.
I get such joy out of that.
I’m wondering even though these charges against Allen are well documented and apparently true, is your use of the phrase “swiftboating” now an admission that that whole campaign was a pack of lies?
“You can’t tell if they are for racism or against it.”
They’re for it.
Aaron wrote:
What part of “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . ” do you find confusing? Where in “Congress shall make no law” do you find the right of the legislature to limit speech?
Of course, if you do wish to hold that “there are limitations to freedom of speech,” would it not be the government (now controlled by Republicans) which would set those limits? If you believe that “there are limitations to freedom of speech,” why can’t Congress pass a law making it a felony to criticize President Bush?
The Supreme Court and the Congress sets limits on freedom of speech. Ever heard of “fire in a crowded theatre”? Brandenberg v. Ohio?
Also look at Wisconsin v. Mitchell which upheld hate crime legislation.