Roy Edroso: Rightbloggers Shade Helms' Civil Rights History
In 2002, when blogs were young, Republican Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott said former Senator and racist icon Strom Thurmond should have been President of the United States. Some rightbloggers denounced Lott's comments, and congratulated themselves for it. Lott's subsequent fall, said John Podhoretz at National Review Online, showed that "the party of personal responsibility... has just cleaned its own house with record speed." This remains a rightblogger point of pride: as recently as last May, Conor Friedersdorf at the Atlantic cited the Lott/Thurmond affair as proof of "the rejection of racism by mainstream conservatives."
Last week former Senator and racist icon Jesse Helms died. Six years after Lott/Thurmond, housecleaning is apparently less of a concern for rightbloggers. A very few acknowledged in their eulogies that the late Senator held noxious racial views, at least at one time ("Even though he opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he abided by the law and 'got with the times,' as they say"). But most didn't see the need to mention them, and those that mentioned them did so favorably, or blamed them on someone else.
"He 'opposed civil rights'?" said National Review's John J. Miller in reaction to an obituary of Helms. "Uh, no. He opposed a particular vision of them." "Helms wasn't always my cup of tea, but it can hardly be said that he opposed civil rights," said Say Anything. "He opposed things like affirmative action... and I hardly think that government programs which mandate preferential treatment based on skin color have anything to do with 'civil rights.'" (Presumably that was what Helms was trying communicate to Carol Moseley-Braun in that elevator.) "I just never paid much attention to him," The American Mind sheepishly admitted. "I probably bought into the idea that he was a white Southern racist and anti-gay." Well, as long as he's sorry...
The VDARE Blog did mention Helms' opposition to actual civil rights, and quite cheerfully, adding, "Of course, the evolution of scientific research — as opposed to political correctness — has, in recent years given Helms' reservations a solid foundation in scientific fact."
If Helms did have some problems with race, other rightbloggers argued, that was the Democrats' fault. At AOL's Political Machine, "Dave" said Helms "was a racist bigot in his years as a Southern Democrat... So the problem with Jesse Helms can't be his segregationist past, or else the Democrats would be craven hypocrites on this issue." The Conservative Voice credited Democrats with electing Helms in the first place: "The thing you must remember is democrats elected Jesse Helms and kept Jesse in office until HE decided to step down. There are simply not enough registered conservative republicans in the state to do that." (Actually, The Conservative Voice believed Helms' appeal went beyond Democrats and Republicans, and indeed beyond the technical electorate: "Contraray [sic] to many reports you will hear over the next few days, Jesse represented the huge majority of North Carolinians, even those who never voted in their lives.")...
Read entire article at Village Voice
Last week former Senator and racist icon Jesse Helms died. Six years after Lott/Thurmond, housecleaning is apparently less of a concern for rightbloggers. A very few acknowledged in their eulogies that the late Senator held noxious racial views, at least at one time ("Even though he opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he abided by the law and 'got with the times,' as they say"). But most didn't see the need to mention them, and those that mentioned them did so favorably, or blamed them on someone else.
"He 'opposed civil rights'?" said National Review's John J. Miller in reaction to an obituary of Helms. "Uh, no. He opposed a particular vision of them." "Helms wasn't always my cup of tea, but it can hardly be said that he opposed civil rights," said Say Anything. "He opposed things like affirmative action... and I hardly think that government programs which mandate preferential treatment based on skin color have anything to do with 'civil rights.'" (Presumably that was what Helms was trying communicate to Carol Moseley-Braun in that elevator.) "I just never paid much attention to him," The American Mind sheepishly admitted. "I probably bought into the idea that he was a white Southern racist and anti-gay." Well, as long as he's sorry...
The VDARE Blog did mention Helms' opposition to actual civil rights, and quite cheerfully, adding, "Of course, the evolution of scientific research — as opposed to political correctness — has, in recent years given Helms' reservations a solid foundation in scientific fact."
If Helms did have some problems with race, other rightbloggers argued, that was the Democrats' fault. At AOL's Political Machine, "Dave" said Helms "was a racist bigot in his years as a Southern Democrat... So the problem with Jesse Helms can't be his segregationist past, or else the Democrats would be craven hypocrites on this issue." The Conservative Voice credited Democrats with electing Helms in the first place: "The thing you must remember is democrats elected Jesse Helms and kept Jesse in office until HE decided to step down. There are simply not enough registered conservative republicans in the state to do that." (Actually, The Conservative Voice believed Helms' appeal went beyond Democrats and Republicans, and indeed beyond the technical electorate: "Contraray [sic] to many reports you will hear over the next few days, Jesse represented the huge majority of North Carolinians, even those who never voted in their lives.")...