Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Racist VA Judge Resigns after Online Remarks Publicized
Outsports Discussion Board > Outsports > Politics & Religion
fantomas
Methinks he ain't the only person with considerable power expressing racist, homophobic, etc. ideas in an anonymous forum.

CNN: Richmond judge resigns after racist remarks online

Black Press/Richmond Free Press: Judge to step down after remarks revealed
MIB
QUOTE
fantomas:
Methinks he ain't the only person with considerable power expressing racist, homophobic, etc. ideas in an anonymous forum.
Aw, don't be so hard on yourself, ft.
gmginsfo
The only racist remarks I read in either coverage were those relating to the DNA connection and ban against interracial marriage. This Judge told it like it is as far as MLK, JJackson and ASharpton go, whose records (bogus thesis, Mistressgate and TBrawley, respectively) are facts the press chooses to ignore and their advocates actively suppress. His comments about the decay of the civil rights movement also rang true, and he should know as one who formerly worked within it. In sum, I don't know what was worse about the Judge's conduct, parts of his initial postings or his BS apology afterwards.
MIB
What an idiot. One less fool on the bench.
TomFord
gmginsfo: The press has hardly chosen to ignore King's plagiarism, Jackson's mistress or Sharpton's Tawana Brawley scam. We all know about them, don't we? And I see references to them in the press all the time.

Sharpton will have a hard time being taken seriously until he apologizes and makes amends for the scam. His role in the Brawley affair was the subject of countless articles and editorials throughout this campaign (every time there was a debate, the papers here had someone going on about how he needs to apologize for the fiasco). Jackson's profile has fallen considerably since the mistress scandal. I'm sure some would be happy if they retired from public life (or were drawn and quartered depending on your level of outrage), but where would that leave Bill Clinton and other politicians who have managed to live down scandals while still staying in the spotlight?

Now, with King, what would you have the world do? Are his accomplishments as a civil rights leader so tied to his academic writing that we should stop revering him now that we know about the plagiarism? I suspect that part of the reluctance to strip him of his degree is because of how died and what he means to all Americans. But the press has covered it. And he still means a lot to Americans, regardless.

Joe Biden managed to live down his plagiarism scandals. The Neil Kinnock rip-off wasn't the only one; there were other stolen speeches, as well as a serious plagiarism incident during his law school years. Isn't he still a senator? I don't see the press covering this any more consistently than they cover King's problems, so I'm not sure where you see a double-standard.

And of course King's advocates work to contain talk of this. That's what advocates do. I'm pretty sure the Biden 2002 campaign didn't issue press releases reminding everyone about his past scandals.

Back to the judge: racialists change their tune all the time while still singing their silly song. A century ago, the talk was that blacks would die out because they were physically inferior. Instead of realizing that the low mortality rate among blacks was a result of poverty and Jim Crow laws, they claimed that the race was inherently sickly.

Now these same racialists see black athletes and decide that the opposite is true: blacks have it in their DNA to be strong and athletic.

It's always something.

[ March 14, 2004, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: TomFord ]
fantomas
I agree about the criticisms of Revs. Jesse Jackson, who despite two visionary campaigns for the White House has primarily operated as a Grade A hustler, and Al Sharpton, who despite some very beneficial moments of activism, often operates as a buffoon. He has been supported throughout this campaign by conservative Roger Stone and others, and what's tragic is that he doesn't appear to realize the damage this is doing to his credibility--that is, the damage now among black and Latino supporters who actually once believed that this man wanted to serve their interests. Trashing Martin Luther King, Jr. is tiresome to me, but then in his lifetime, more so than any other black leader, he represented what white racists (or racialists?) hated more than anything else: a charismatic black leader who had the force of history, and the argus of religion (isn't that an oxymoron), behind him. That he lived as long as he did was a miracle. I say to this creep, pick another target, please. Like Hazel O'Leary. Or Condoleezza Rice. Or Clarence Thomas, who is about as disgraceful a black public figure as has ever appeared in the annals of American history--grossly unqualified, unspeakably angry, and invested with far too much power for his own, and our, good.

As I mentioned to a friend who was really upset by this man's comments, a far worse example of a hardcore anti-black homophobe presides over our Supreme Court. William H. Rehnquist has a long and distinguished history of anti-black actions, from harassing black voters in Arizona, to arguing for upholding Plessy v. Ferguson, to urging Richard Nixon to support a constitutional amendment (yep, not a new thing with him) to allow limitations to Brown v. Board of Education, to supporting racial and anti-Jewish residential covenants, to urging defiance of anti-segregation laws and statutes, and on and on. So this Virginia judge actually would have a way to go to catch up with the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

I accept that there are many people of all races (including some black people) in this country who hate black people and who rue the day that 1) the North won the Civil War and/or 2) that the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments not only were passed, but upheld. Even in 2004, there are many people who simply cannot bear the thought of people of different races and ethnicities being equal--and in the case of African-Americans, many of who have some European ancestry because of the 400-year slave system--of being actually related to white people. I also accept that there are hateful, racist black people as well, who, if they had state and societal power, would try to oppress whites (and I don't mean simply out of revenge), though in most cases, as history has shown, in states where non-whites have power and whites are a minority (Mexico, Jamaica, Barbados, Bermuda, Venezuela, Panama, South Africa, etc.) such examples are less common, Zimbabwe now being a notable exception (and even there, blacks who disagree with the dictator there are attacked and killed as swiftly as whites). All in all, there's no way to keep racists off the benches, but I'm glad that this man was exposed for what he was. I agree that his apology was pure BS, and he should have just said, as a good Confederate, kiss my *ss, and then deal with the consequences.

And now, a quote from William Rehnquist's own pen:

""The Constitution does not prevent the majority from banding together, nor does it attaint success in the effort. It is about time the Court faced the fact that the white people of the south don't like the colored people; the constitution restrains them from effecting thru (sic) state action but it most assuredly did not appoint the Court as a sociological watchdog to rear up every time private discrimination raises its admittedly ugly head."

[ March 14, 2004, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]
jqueer
QUOTE
gmginsfo:
The only racist remarks I read in either coverage were those relating to the DNA connection and ban against interracial marriage. This Judge told it like it is as far as MLK, JJackson and ASharpton go, whose records (bogus thesis, Mistressgate and TBrawley, respectively) are facts the press chooses to ignore and their advocates actively suppress. His comments about the decay of the civil rights movement also rang true, and he should know as one who formerly worked within it. In sum, I don't know what was worse about the Judge's conduct, parts of his initial postings or his BS apology afterwards.
There's reasonable proof out there that JFK didn't actually write Profiles in Courage, for which he won a Pulitzer Prize. But that's less known than the King plagarism. Should that Pulitzer be rescinded? That's a prize actually given for writing, as opposed to the Nobel Peace Prize, which was given for actions verifiably taken by King. Or is the press largely ignoring the Profiles issue because Kennedy was white. No the issue is swept under the rug because Kennedy was a national heroe who died tragically, as was King. The color of the skin has nothing to do with it.

As for Jackson and Sharpton, they're going nowhere fast. Certainly legitimate criticism was leveled at them, but that was hardly the heart of the scandal.

The comments actually quoted about the current state of the civil rights movemment rang hollow rather than true, particularly in the first articl. We don't have complete transcripts of the posts, but what was in the articles were merely generalities with no argument to back them up.

In the National News article, the judge is quoted saying “When I was younger, I participated in the civil rights movement. It was the motto then of just give everyone an equal chance. … Then I started hearing, well what else is whitey going to give us? Then it became a call for reparations … The things that so called bigots pointed out – illegitimacy, lack of sexual morality and every Black man wanted a white woman. I thought all of that was a bunk of stuff designed by bigots to preserve the old way. I don’t guess I have to tell you what I think about their promises now. Every one of them has come true. … I have long since removed myself from the civil rights movement and generally see it for the scam that it (is) and was.”

I'm sorry, rehashing old sexual bogey men from the 50's is racist. If you want to bemoan the sexual decadence of the current American society, fine. There's lots of stuff happening out there that doesn't look good, but to place it all on the shoulders of Black America is ridiculous. What about the excesses and abuses of White America? Have portions of the Black community created the perception of afirmative action and civil rights advances as baseless entitlements? Sure, but that's a very narrow view of both entitlement programs in the US and the Black community as a whole.

If you want to talk about DNA being behind the successes and failures of racial groups in general, there's a whole lot of rednecks out there making this judge's DNA look very suspect. I used to think one of the nice things about being Jewish is that we don't have rednecks (or any equivalent) in our family tree. I've learned different. Dig deep enough in any ethnic family tree and you'll find traces of things you wish you hadn't. Bringing DNA into the discussion may be valid, but it is certainly a double edged sword.

In short, the evidence as presented is fairly damning. I am open to the possibility that a more extensive reading of the posts in question would to some degree contextualize the comments and perhaps even mitigate some of the more outrageous parts. However, the fact that the judge chose to withdraw from public life rather than make an issue of the entire record indicates to me that it is likely the entire record has been reflected well by the articles in question.
bobblehead
fantomas,

I agree w/everything in your post...

But has the Black Community ever acknowleged Bayard Rustin - have they ever given THE man who (practically singlehandedly) started the groundwork for the civil rights movement - his props!

Or - should he be denied his legacy... cuz he was gay?

How many schools, highways, buildings etc... are named after Bayard Rustin?

Q: Why doesn't black America embrace his memory?

Can you spell homophobic?


.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2010 Invision Power Services, Inc.