Former U.S. Senator Jesse Helms dies at 86

He took an active role in North Carolina politics early on, working to elect a segregationist candidate, Willis Smith...

How long does the world stop to mourn the passing of an unrepentant white supremacist?

How long does the world stop to mourn the passing of an unrepentant white supremacist?" was he a white supremacist? or did he just happen to disagree with issues such as affirmative action?

Do you have evidence he was part of a white power group, like the KKK?

Good riddance to Jesse Helms, racist and right-wing fanatic. The world today is a slightly cleaner place.

I don't know that Helms was a white supremacist. I think he was a segregationist who basically believed that there was nothing wrong with restricting housing sales, maintaining the integrity of school districts without quota systems, or giving jobs to the most qualified candidates based on aptitude tests which might favor whites and on other ill-defined intangibles such as the perceived "ability to get along with others".

The paradoxical thing about almost all supremacists is that they are usually deeply afraid that they may not be supreme. Whether Helms was a supremacist, though, a segregationist or whatever, he served the people of his state, at their choice, for 30 years in the Senate. I'm not sure that we're actually mourning the man here as simply noting his passing. But if he is being mourned it is not for the embarrassment that his racial views proved ultimately to be.

"How long does the world stop to mourn the passing of an unrepentant white supremacist?"

The world, you say?

America, far more racially integrated than where you or any other other non-Americans posting here hail from, is the only country on this planet where you might find a 'racist' or 'segregationist' politician?

a segregationist who basically believed that there was nothing wrong with restricting housing sales, maintaining the integrity of school districts without quota systems," So, what do you call a non-white guy who basically does the same? Have you ever tried to buy or rent a place in Harlem?

or giving jobs to the most qualified candidates based on aptitude tests which might favor whites" The NYPD hired a number of people who failed the test by long shots. My mother has passed civil service aptitude tests, she isn't white. Friends I know who took these test past them too, I don't get you when you say the test favors a person's kind. and on other ill-defined intangibles such as the perceived "ability to get along with others". Again, this isn't limited to whites. Right in my birth home of Miami, even my cousins are part of an organization to keep certain areas "Cuban" and keeping out everyone out and their organization gets money from the government!

The man lived in a time where things were like that. Kind of like being in a gang, you need to be with them or your against them. Believe me, they think like that.

He is a great man. I admire those people working for GLBT, also those online services like the one BiLoves. Many of my friends there have spent their careers working for equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons. I think they are really very great.

skipthesong,

I don't get your point. Did you think I was praising Helms? I was not. I was calling him a segregationist as opposed to a supremacist. There are segregationists of every hue and creed I think.

A rose by any other name is still a rose. Whether it's Ishihara or Helms, I have no love for bigots.

Well, a bigot by any other name is still a bigot. However, a supremacist and a segregationist are different things. Only one of them may be called a bigot with any certainty.

He took an active role in North Carolina politics early on, working to elect a segregationist candidate, Willis Smith, to the Senate in 1950.

Why do they always leave out the fact that most segregationists were Democrats during that timeframe in our history. Not saying right or wrong just interesting that they omitted that fact about Willis Smith. I have no doubt people that were born latter after the civil rights movement and not as familiar with history had no doubt when they read this article that Willis Smith was a republican. Jessie helms was a Dixie democrat by the way until the party got smart and ditched that brand of politics in the South. It was then that he switched to being a Republican.

My personal opinion on the man, divisive which is how he liked it, and a throwback to another era that thankfully we moved on from, but he didn't unlike George Wallace another famous dixiecrat.

Willis Smith (19 December 1887 - 26 June 1953) was a Democratic U.S. senator from the state of North Carolina between 1950 and 1953.

Jesse Helms was a hell of s Senator. Oh I didn't agree with a lot of his stands, but unless you lived in those times you can never understand.

YEAH!!! He was a racist. That's how he was raised. Through men likes Helms we have made many advancements and we had to change as a nation.

So, I hope Jesse Helms is remembered as a great American. < :-)

"That's the way (Helm) was raised."

Just like the Right Reverand Wright... Just like Obama bein' in his 'church' for twenty-ought years...

Uh, oh. Did I just say that out loud?

I don't get your point. Did you think I was praising Helms? I was not. I was calling him a segregationist as opposed to a supremacist. There are segregationists of every hue and creed I think."

Sez, there was a time when people did things that we look at NOW as wrong but they thought they were right. I don't know much about Helms, just only heard his name a few times. What I was trying to point out, is that because one is against affirmative action, that doesn't make them a white supreamist, espeically someone from such a backwoods area of North Cal., where a lot of people are bearly getting by. Would it be correct if I was to be called a bigot if I pushed without any halt in favor of affirmative action?

and I don't think we need to dwell so much on the past only what is in favor of what you want.

"There are segregationists of every hue and creed I think." But in the US, that is not how we are suppose to look at it. I will tell you the truth, I have relatives who would never let an Anglo get near any females in our family and I do understand the whispering snide and snickers my mom got for marrying my dad. Some of them when they were young would seek out Jews and Italian-Americans who moved to Miami, But, in the US, you really won't be listened if you were to call them racist/supremacists.

It is basically a one way street in the US. I personally think guys like Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan are just racist as this Helms guy was, but again, calling them as such would get you laughed out.

skipthesong,

If what you were trying to point out is that being against affirmative action doesn't make someone a supremacist, then we are pointing out the same thing.

I don't think that it is a one-way street in the US. I think guys like Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan are called racists all the time. At the moment, the blogosphere is making a living off of charges of racism against Obama and his wife. Nobody is laughing because ignorance and hatred are often stickier than knowledge and civility.

sezwho: guess who greeted jessie this morning? A black St. Peter. And he told Jessie to take his seat - at the back of the bus.

unscrejects: A black St. Peter - he was black? Didn't know that. Then again, they didn't have photos in those days. I guess you learn something new everyday.

American political office by and large have been filled by people like Helms. These men have done more to slow progress in America than anything else, and to apologize or even justify their years of stupidity by attributing it to simply a way of thinking then that demanded their acquiescence is disturbing.

We all have to take responsibility for our actions and claver arguments that delineate some unique family attitude or neurosis is hardly worth listening to. I contend that the world is a much nicer place without Helms and his like minded friends.

"American political office by and large have been filled by people like Helms."

LOL. The ignorance here astounds.

unscrejects,

If you had a point there, I missed it. And if that was just a little leavening in the loaf, it still baked our rather hard and flat, I thought. St. Peter doesn't have to be black for the joke to work.

Helms was never going to be popular with blacks and in his later years--as America matured and got over the nastiness that attended school integration and so on--he was increasingly an embarrassment to whites. But so what? He was still a segregationist and not a supremacist.

Why do they always leave out the fact that most segregationists were Democrats during that timeframe in our history.

Because white southern Dixiecrats had about as much to do with true Democratic Party principles as the PDRK has to do with a democratic republic. They were actually a third party who conveniently voted for the Democratic Party at a national level when it suited them. As soon as the national Democratic party started taking stands on racial integration, and civil and voting rights, white supremacists like Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond started crossing over in droves to become Republicans.

Nixon's "southern strategy" -- that former RNC chairman Mehlman had to apologize for -- was designed to lure more unrepentant white supremacists into the Republican fold. People must never forget that, when it came time to choose, David Duke chose the Republican Party, not the Democrats. (Of course, some people might mention former KKK member Robert Byrd, but the Senator had long ago publicly recanted his views and disavowed his association with that group. The key word here being unrepentant supremacist -- something Byrd is not.)

Maybe the Republicans can cue up Trent Lott again to say nice things about his fellow Republican Helms -- just like he said that America would have been better off if the racist Thurmond had been elected president.

Actually, I think it's quite funny to watch the racial connoisseurs try to tell us there is a fine-hair distinction between segregationist and supremacist. LOL, now nobody wants to keep themselves apart from others because he or she thinks the others are better.

yabits,

There's more than a fine-hair distinction between segregationists and supremacists. Of course, if you want to redefine the words so that they mean the same thing you are free to try to do so.

Did everyone forget what segregation was? It was a political agenda to keep the races apart. An agenda inarguably supported by the KKK. Segregation systematically denied otherwise qualified non-whites jobs, loans, sufficient public services, educational opportunities, and other things. Imagine needing medical help and being told that "this hospital only serves whites." Such was the reality of segregation. Have it your way, call segregation and supremacy different things. Just don't forget what either means.

Ole Jess passed away, the Klan....errr I ment the Republicans are morning his passing...

JoeBigs - "Ole Jess passed away, the Klan...errr I ment the Republicans are morning his passing..."

You mean, "I meant the Republicans are mourning his passing..." right?

Yeah, well, please don't try to equate Republicans with the Klan - that dog won't hunt.

Yeah, well, please don't try to equate Republicans with the Klan - that dog won't hunt.

Actually, that dog really won't hunt. Especially when one realizes it was members of the Democratic Party of the United States that help found it and supported it.

Hey Yabits,

As soon as the national Democratic party started taking stands on racial integration, and civil and voting rights, white supremacists like Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond started crossing over in droves to become Republicans.

George Wallace missed being part of that 'Droves' thing by the way.

George Corley Wallace Jr. (August 25, 1919 – September 13, 1998), was a United States politician who was elected Governor of Alabama as a Democrat for four terms (1963-1967, 1971-1979 and 1983-1987) and ran for U.S. President four times, running as a Democrat in 1964, 1972, and 1976, and as the American Independent Party candidate in 1968. He is best known for his pro-segregation attitudes and as a symbol of Bigotry during the American desegregation period, which he modified after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace

Next????

sailwind,

That is a good one. Hopefully, people will start to realize it is better to look at the people themselves and not make sweeping judgements and generalizations against innocent people.

He is best known for his pro-segregation attitudes and as a symbol of Bigotry during the American desegregation period, which he modified after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Unlike Helms, who never repented of his racial bigotry, Wallace asked forgiveness of African-Americans. If people want to back earlier in the man's life, they'll find he was a judge with liberal views on civil rights until he ran for governor and was defeated on the basis of those views. Never let it be forgotten that, when he stood blocking the path at the University of Alabama, it was a Democrat who ordered him to stand aside.

Oh, how those Republicans squawked at the violation of states' rights!

Re: Former Senator Edward Brooke

One of the most liberal Republicans ever elected, in one of the most solidly BLUE states ever: Massachusetts. Opposed Nixon on just about everything, and was not someone who sided with Jesse Helms on many issues.

I do declare, I just love it when Republicans use the Democratic electorate of a liberal state to provide them with cover. No wonder David Duke thought his home would be there. Yes, enough said.

kinniku says:

Hopefully, people will start to realize it is better to look at the people themselves and not make sweeping judgements and generalizations against innocent people.

This from guy who just above claimed that Klan was founded by the national Democratic Party. ("the Democratic Party of the United States") That is not the first time I've read that ridiculous claim on JT -- and it's fitting to use the passing of the bigot Helms to debunk it.

The pattern was very clear: A lot of former white supremecists repented and chose to stay with the Democratic Party. Those who wanted to wanted to keep their bigotry, like Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond, disguised it under the rubric of "states' rights" and joined the Republicans. We should not forget that it was only very recently that former RNC Chairman Mehlman came out and apologized for the Republicans' "southern strategy" to lure racist southern whites into the Party. But it sure worked.

Helms was not unlike a lot of politicians of his day - he was a product of his times and was a segregationist. When segregation's time passed he moved on to fighting communism - particularly in Latin America. Jesse Helms is hated by the left for his opposition to discrimination against whites. He was right to oppose affirmative action, quotas, and busing. These policies are simply racist and a civil rights issue in which Helms was on the correct side of. As far as I know, Helms never used racially offensive language and did not advocate that whites and blacks be treated differently in the eyes of government. In all of his time in the Senate, he was for just the opposite. He loved to tweak the left and he was proud that he was a southerner. Elitist's in the media and the political left couldn't stand that about him; the fact that he believed that he was morally superior to them - and in fact was.

kinniku writes:

That is just the point, isn't it? Senator Brooke was a liberal Republican. There are others, just as there are conservative Democrats. Why do you assume people are of a certain party just because they don't like to see others being lumped together?

Like the Democratic Party, the Republican Party had broken into several factions. Since the time of the Civil War, both parties have undergone a tremendous shift. Edward Brooke represented the Republican Party of Lincoln; Jesse Helms, a new strain of Republicanism that started soon after Lincoln was assassinated. Southern racist whites could not, for reasons of pride and face, admit to associating with the party of Lincoln until the national Democratic Party made clear moves to support the cause of racial equality. People like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms were among those who made it OK for racist Southern whites to call themselves Republicans. (And no, I don't agree with Trent Lott in thinking that the US would have been better off if Strom Thurmond had been elected in 1952. On the contrary.)

Ronald Reagan ratified the notion that white racists are welcomed within the Republican Party when, using a Nixon southern strategy tactic, kicked off his presidential campaign in Philadalphia, Mississippi -- the very site where three civil rights workers were murdered in cold blood in the early 1960s, with the complicity of local law enforcement. Racism often masquerades behind the name of "conservatism."

Wolfpack writes:

Jesse Helms is hated by the left for his opposition to discrimination against whites.

LOL!!! Careful there. It takes decent people like former governors Sanford and Hunt to truly redeem the state. Helms was nothing better than a stain and nothing worse than a total embarrassment.

Those who are witness to those who try to cover up the racism of people like Helms with "anti-communism" would do well to remember that people like Helms and J. Edgar Hoover went after civil rights leaders (such as ML King) by claiming they were acting on behalf of communists.

The conventional wisdom cited to explain the parties switching constituencies in the South identifies LBJ's sponsorship of the civil rights legislation as its origins. The "Dixiecrats" used "state's rights" to justify segregation and that was compatible with the traditional Republican emphasis on limiting the role of the federal government.

If you believe Helms was an embarrassment in one of the American Houses of Congress, check out Denise Kucinich. He'll have you ROTFLOA in the (Congressional) aisles.

What a nutter.

USAR

ANOTSUSAGAMI,

It's pretty easy to imagine needing medical help and being turned away because of your race. You have only to imagine needing medical help and being turned away because of your insurance status.

I don't think anyone has forgotten what segregation means. And so far I have not heard anyone argue that segregation is acceptable. However, I fear that some have forgotten that the conflation of terms leads to a loss of clarity.

Helms certainly was ignorant back in the 60's due to his support for segregationist policies. However, he changed just as many of his time and heritage did. What didn't change is that he never stopped forcefully advocating his political views. He was wrong about segregation, but he wasn't wrong about his opposition to communism and affirmative action discrimination. This can be seen in his political ad against affirmative action in his campaign against Harvey Gant in 1984 (although I was the ignorant one in 84' because I voted for Gant in the first election that I was eligible for). Also, it you would stop and give it just one second of thought you would realize that there is no connection between anti-communism and racism.

yabits,

I will keep it brief because it seems my response to you was considered 'irrelavent' while yours before and after were not.

I never said the Democratic Party founded the KKK. Please read before you post. However, members of the party at the time did help found it and even some Democrats living today were members of it. Calling people names doesn't change that.

Helms was probably a racist at one time, they were certainly not few and far between in that time. That doesn't change the fact that painting all people with the same brush is futile.

yabits,

Since the time of the Civil War, both parties have undergone a tremendous shift. Edward Brooke represented the Republican Party of Lincoln; Jesse Helms, a new strain of Republicanism that started soon after Lincoln was assassinated.

I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways. You can't say that Brooke was in his time machine representing the Lincoln Republicans and then at the same time get indignant when someone points out the members of the Democratic party at the time helped found the KKK.

Pointing this out is not the same as defending Helms. It is a just a way of pointing out the party-bashing solves nothing. Both sides have had the undesirables.

"It's pretty easy to imagine needing medical help and being turned away because of your race. You have only to imagine needing medical help and being turned away because of your insurance status."

In what country? In America? In Jesse Helms' state?

Are you for real?

Well ole Jess is no more and another piece of that era is gone. I say good riddance to that by gone era.

BTW just to be fair (since I am an Independent Voter) most white southern Democrats of that era were also racist.

You wrote the following: "Especially when one realizes it was members of the Democratic Party of the United States that help found [the Klan] and supported it."

The people who founded the Klan, it can be safely said, had no connection with the national Democratic Party or its principles. I believe it is safe to say that, if you could bring those Klansmen into the present day, a lot of them would have more in common with Republicans like Jesse Helms and Trent Lott, and they'd regard the racists who repented (Byrd and Wallace) more as traitors.

The regional faction of Dixie-crats who ran things in the South had little in common with the national Democratic Party that we all know -- and which you tried to paint with the brush of the Klan. We all should know that as the dust of the history of the Civil War had settled, those who were still racists in their hearts gravitated as if pulled by a magnet to the Republican Party -- the party of "small government" (a lie), and the party of (wink, wink) "states' rights." It no longer had much to with Lincoln, who had undertaken the biggest move in history to use the power of federal government against rebellious states.

Jesse Helms stands as a perfect example of that legacy. On the other hand, the vast majority of the victims of racism and their progeny have chosen to affiliate with the Democratic Party. And with good reason. Wherever he is, Jesse Helms must be smiling at the thought of people who imply that African-Americans are too dumb to realize that they are joining the party that gave birth to the Klan. Which, when you extract the twisted logic out of kinniku's statement, is one disturbing conclusion.

It is a just a way of pointing out the party-bashing solves nothing. Both sides have had the undesirables.

When you have to go back to the 1870s in a unique region of the country to point out the undesirables among the Democrats, and we can point to modern day figures like Helms, I guess that says it all.

When the Republicans defend unrepentant bigots like Helms and Thurmond, they should be bashed and with vigor.

Yabits, you are inventing history. Look at the 1964 Civil Rights Act:

"In the Senate, Minority Leader Everett Dirksen had little trouble rounding up the votes of most Republicans, and former presidential candidate Richard Nixon also lobbied hard for the bill. Senate Majority Leader Michael Mansfield and Senator Hubert Humphrey led the Democrat drive for passage, while the chief opponents were Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, of later Watergate fame, Albert Gore Sr., and Robert Byrd. Senator Byrd, a former Klansman whom Democrats still call "the conscience of the Senate", filibustered against the civil rights bill for fourteen straight hours before the final vote. The House of Representatives passed the bill by 289 to 126, a vote in which 79% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats voted yes. The Senate vote was 73 to 27, with 21 Democrats and only 6 Republicans voting no. President Johnson signed the new Civil Rights Act into law on July 2, 1964."

Source for the article cited above [8:25 post] -

http://www.gopusa.com/opinion/mz_0808.shtml

The problem with so many diehard GOPUSA.com regurgitators is that they view and present history as if through a straw.

Nobody ever denied that southern-style Democrats like Jesse Helms (in his early career) were not racist. Only that they didn't represent the Democratic Party at a national level. And, apparently unwittingly, KoolAid's little snippet proves that much. Democratic leading Senators Mansfield and Humphrey fought for the bill and a Democratic president signed into law.

What KoolAid fails to note is that the Democrats propelled Humphrey in '64 as one of their standard-bearers. Meanwhile, the Republicans chose as their leader, Barry Goldwater, one of the Republican senators who stood shoulder to shoulder with the racist Strom Thurmond in opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The former southern white racists who repented and admitted their mistakes, like Byrd, tended to stay with the Democratic Party and align themselves with national Democrats. Those who maintained their racist outlook, no matter how covertly, tended to follow Strom and Jesse Helms into the welcoming Republican fold.

It's what the Republicans' "southern strategy" was designed for. (And what former RNC Chairman Mehlman had to recently apologize for.)

Well said RedMeatKoolAid. The fantasy that Democrats and their media allies argue is that the Republican party was opposed to civil rights. The fact is that the 60's civil rights legislation passed only because of the Republican party's overwhelming support. If Republicans had opposed it, it would have failed given that they were a minority in Congress. The leading opponents were Democrats - those are the facts. As mentioned, Senator Byrd; opponent of civil rights and a former leader in the KKK, is still to this day a leading member of the Democrat party. Democrats hang their argument on the fact that some notable conservative Democrats of the day switched party affiliation (including Helms). It was not just southern Democrats that became Republicans during this time. Many conservative Democrats from other parts of the country became Republicans due to the excesses of the Liberal social/cultural rebellion and the their weakening on opposition to communism. Ronald Regan is a good example of one such Democrat.

Why are non-American posters obsessed with a thread like this?

If I were negatively obsessed with another nation's political obituaries, my fellow countrymen would cross the street when they saw me comin'.

And rightly so.

USAR

yabits says:

When the Republicans defend unrepentant bigots like Helms and Thurmond, they should be bashed and with vigor.

Say what? You don't think these men changed over time? If you can find anything that Jesse Helms (or even Strom Thurmond) had said or written after they changed party's that can legitimately be considered bigoted then I would like to see it. Democrats and the media do not villify Al Gore Sr, Sam Ervin, or Robert Byrd who have similarly changed on civil rights. Shouldn't you also attack them with vigor? I've even seen Senator Byrd make a statement using the n-word not too long ago.

wooooohoooooo! I cracked a beer when I heard.

Barry Goldwater, one of the Republican senators who stood shoulder to shoulder with the racist Strom Thurmond in opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

I wouldn't exactly call it shoulder to shoulder.

Goldwater supported the Arizona NAACP and was involved in desegregating the Arizona National Guard. Nationally, he supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the constitutional amendment banning the poll tax. However, he opposed the much more comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1964. While he did indeed support the civil rights cause in general, he believed that this act unconstitutionally extended the federal government's commerce power to private citizens in its drive to "legislate morality" and restrict the rights of employers. Since Dixiecrats were the main opponents to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and previous civil rights legislation, Goldwater's opposition to the 1964 Act, in which he was joined by only four other non-southern Republican senators, strongly boosted Goldwater's standing among white southerners who opposed such federal legislation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater#Libertarian_views

More like he held to his libertarian views about Government but the man sure was in no way shape a racist or a bigot. Civil rights act of 57 was under Eisenhower by the way another one of those 'Republican' types.

"What KoolAid fails to note is that the Democrats propelled Humphrey in '64 as one of their standard-bearers. Meanwhile, the Republicans chose as their leader, Barry Goldwater, one of the Republican senators who stood shoulder to shoulder with the racist Strom Thurmond in opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act."

I believe Goldwater voted for similar Civil Rights Acts in 1957 and 1960. And that he had pushed for integration of our armed forces two years before Truman did so.

Goldwater is a little before my time but from what I have read the '64 act's Title VII ("equal employment opportunity") was the reason for his opposition. Goldwater believed, correctly and presciently, that if government "can forbid such discrimination, it is a real possibility that sometime in the future the same government can require people to discriminate in hiring on the basis of color or race or religion."

IOW - he saw clearly that gov't mandated "affirmative action" would come to pass.

I imagine he kept to himself what he knew Johnson's bogus, vote-buying 'War on Poverty' would do to black families and to our inner cities.

Posters can engage in all the revisionism and denial they want to. The fact is that Jesse Helms never repented of his racist and bigotted views. On the contrary, he held to them proudly and stubbornly as part of his "tradition." I note with some irony, and find it fitting, that he died the same week as Bozo the Clown.

The fact is that, in the year the Civil Rights Act was passed ('64), Goldwater won his home state and the most hard-core, racist, segregationist states in the nation - a belt that ran from Louisiana to South Carolina. Racist southern whites were now turning towards Republicanism. Folks like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms paved the way.

The fact is that, at the time, the Republican Party, thanks to folks like Helms and Thurmond, helped devise a conscious strategy to attract southern white racists into the party. It was called the "southern strategy" and it was what the Republican Party chairman recently felt the need to apologize to African-Americans for.

There are some vestiges of that element that still remain in the Republican Party -- most notably in defense of charged symbols like the Confederate flag.

I imagine [Goldwater] kept to himself what he knew Johnson's bogus, vote-buying 'War on Poverty' would do to black families and to our inner cities.

LOL!!! If Goldwater kept that to himself, that would have been the one and only thing. The man was never at a loss for words when he had something to say.

Oh, and one should not forget the comments made by then Republican Majority Leader, Trent Lott, when Jesse Helms' old buddy, Strom Thurmond, kicked the bucket. Lott said America would have been better off if the arch-segregationist Thurmond had been elected president.

After Thurmond's death it was learned that he truly did father a child by an African-American woman who was a domestic worker in their house. And never publicly acknowledged his daughter while he was alive. Yes, those are some of the southern traditions.

And a rebel yell goes out to you, Trent. Can't wait to hear what you've got to say about ole Jesse.

America is a better place now that this hypocrite and racist is gone.

Yabits, you have some vaild points but if the south (never been) is as monolithic and as racist as you paint it how to explain the election in post-Katrina Louisiana of a Republican governor? - and one who is not white.

Is this yet another Republican 'southern strategy' in the making?

RMKA, it may be simpler than that.

Many Euros get their education on American culture and society from Spike Lee and Oliver Stone movies. Then there's that strange Michael Moore individual...

I appreciate the Euros' contribution to the US economy via Hollywood, but it does have drawbacks that they're completely unaware. Caveat emptor.

USAR

yabits,

As others have noted, you do have many valid points. However, you seem to be selective in favor of painting all of one party with the same brush. I stand by my comments that both sides have their negative history (in the 20th century as well) and they both have their undesirables.

Why are non-American posters obsessed with a thread like this?

If I were negatively obsessed with another nation's political obituaries, my fellow countrymen would cross the street when they saw me comin'.

And rightly so.

USAR

Actually I am American and I am an Independent voter who believes that the Southern Republicans today would have been Southern Democrats if this were the 60`s......

Very few Republicans believe in civil rights any more. They are ready to hang anyone that does not wear a flag on their lapel.

Many of these folks that claim to bleed red white and blue are the same folks selling us out to the Chinese. That in my book is a sad state of affairs.

Ole Jesse was a staunch anti equal right GOP flag wearer. But given the chance he would have sold us out to the highest bidder. Many of those flag wearers are doing just that.

Those folks in my book are traitors to the US and should be dragged out and given the boot out of the States.

The boot kicking should have started with WJC for allowing the Chinese to get a foot hold. Then followed by booting GWB and his dick for selling out our nation.

But with me I am not married to a party and am willing to look beyond the party that they belong to.

That is why I can say that Jesse was worth sewer water and I am glad that one more piece of a horrible past has died out!

"Actually I am American and I am an Independent voter who believes that the Southern Republicans today would have been Southern Democrats if this were the 60`s..."

JayBee, and I'm an independent who is largely conservative and who believes that if John Fitzgerald Kennedy were alive today, you and other leftists would label him a "right wing fanatic".

USAR

JayBee, and I'm an independent who is largely conservative and who believes that if John Fitzgerald Kennedy were alive today, you and other leftists would label him a "right wing fanatic".

Todays Conservatives are not conservatives, if they were they would not be selling out America to the highest bidder. They would control government spending, hold off on all the pork being wasted in Washington.

Not even old Mc is immune from the pork spending. He may claim to be but he is not.

BTW, Jesse was not a true Conservative......I have seen very few Republicans be Conservative when it came to the government.

Hell I hate to say this but ole Bubba was a better Conservative than most of the so called Republican Conservatives today.

BTW for those that dont know Budda was Bill Clinton`s nickname.....

JFK was far from resembling todays Conservitives.

the end of an era, and not a particularly good one...have a nice trip jesse, see ya at the resurrection

Yabits, you have some vaild points but if the south (never been) is as monolithic and as racist as you paint it how to explain the election in post-Katrina Louisiana of a Republican governor? - and one who is not white.

The south used to be pretty monolithic for decades thanks to the suppression of African-American voting. Louisiana is quite a unique state, then as now, and Mr. Jindahl is not the first Republican governor of recent past. Buddy Roemer switched parties while in office and Mike Foster was elected outright.

I actually like the new governor and wish him well in the positive changes he wants to bring. I have nothing against ethical people who look upon all citizens as having truly equal rights and opportunities.

RedMeatKoolAid,

In what country? In the US. In Jesse Helm's state? Probably there like any other state.

You don't know this?

Senator Jesse Helms was an awesome Senator, and his like will be missed. Like him or not, one has to admire the man for sticking to his guns, even when he was outnumbered 99:1 in the Senate. He stood for what was right, spoke out against things he disagreed with, and spoke out for things he did agree with, and despite the media tearing him to shreds, and people painting him as a hick from the Sputh, Senator Helms was a true Southern Gentleman in every regard. The USA is worse off today because he is gone....

Senator Jesse Helms was an awesome Senator, and his like will be missed

hahahahahahahahahaha

one has to admire the man for sticking to his guns

hahaha like hitler did? yeah, always an admirable trait that. he wasnt a gentleman, he was a bully and a small minded evil little bigot.

Sure, that sticks....even though Senator Helms hired a black man as one of his top aides when he was in office as Senator back in the `70s....would a bigot do that?

anyone can be nice once

A bigot sure would! In the same vein as racists saying "I have black friends." Remember slave owners used to have black "employees" that were even allowed in the Master's house and spoke for the master to the other slaves. I see no difference.

Hmmmm...

All these comments about Senator Helms beign an alleged bigot and racist of some sort make me wonder what everyone has to say about the distinguished Senior Senator from West Virginia, Democrat Robert Byrd? After all, if Senator Helsm is an alleged or accused bigot and racist, what does that make Senator Byrd who was (and still is, to my knowledge) a high-ranking member of the KKK at one time....

I'd like to tell you what I think about Byrd but the moderator deems it worthy of deletion so you'll have to imagine. I'll give you a hint:its not a pretty picture

Sure, libscombe: it is people who take the same attitude such as the one you have that keep glossing over Senator Byrd's legitimate record, but bash men like Senator Helms unnecessarily....