Google Ads


Site Stats

CO-Sen: You Tell Me What Ken Buck Is Talking About

by: James L.

Fri Sep 03, 2010 at 12:29 PM EDT


I'm flabbergasted:

Buck: "In the 1950s, we had the best schools in the world. And the United States government decided to get more involved in federal education."

There are no words.
James L. :: CO-Sen: You Tell Me What Ken Buck Is Talking About
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
CO-Sen: You Tell Me What Ken Buck Is Talking About | 83 comments
I'm very disappointed in our education system, because
we don't use red brick schoolhouses anymore, nor do schoolhouses have bells that are rung by rope in order to call students to class.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
Or
don't let black people go to school with white people?  
[ Parent ]
When I was growing up the people in my school
didn't care if you were white, blue, green or purple. Just so long as you weren't Black.
[ Parent ]
Green?
You mean lizard people were in our school system back then?

No wonder they're running the place today!

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
Sure,
there were lizard people scampering around the halls all the time, at least in my recollections of high school, but you didn't hear a bunch of liberal "biologists" crying about how they proved or disproved evolution. No sir. We had values back them.
[ Parent ]
I'm disappointed
that our schools look like prisons now, don't have any windows, and all look exactly the same.

26, white male, TX-24, liberal-leaning independent
[ Parent ]
That sums up
the tea party agenda in one sentence.  Take America back to the "glory days" of the 1950's, and let religion run the country too.


23, Male, Democrat, OH-13
We can't take us back to the 1950s!
Because at the beginning of that decade we didn't even have "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance!

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
Zing!


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Problem is they don't realize WHY...
The 1950s were our "glory days". Remember:

- Dwight Eisenhower refused to go along with conservative Republicans' plan to undo Social Security.

- Eisenhower oversaw one of the largest public infrastructure projects EVER with the building of the interstate highway system.

- The top income tax rate was 91%, so the super-rich were being heavily taxed to fund all this public spending.

- Oh, and because unions were so strong then, most Americans were being paid good wages with good benefits.

So the teabaggers really don't want us returning to the "socialistic" 1950s... They want us to turn back the clock another 50 years, to a time before The New Deal when regulations were scarce, the middle class barely existed, and the super-rich could get away with just about anything.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

[ Parent ]
Fuck yeah Eisenhower!
Fuck you Reagan!

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
Yes!
People's conceptions of the 50s vs. reality are so skewed. What a great comeback to anyone who trots out this line.  

33, male, Dem, OH-13
[ Parent ]
do they realize
How high taxes were back then?
[ Parent ]
First thing I think of when I read that
Was Brown V. Board.  Real nice there Ken Buck, Real nice.

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)
Yeesh
I didn't even think of that.  But really...what's the goal here?  I don't even know what he's saying here.

Male, 23, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
National Defense Education Act
When the Sputnik satellite was put into orbit by the Soviets in 1957, it provoked a huge debate about whether we were falling behind in math and science.  The NDEA was passed to provide scholarships for math, science and engineering students, improved training for math and science teachers, new curriculum etc.  One thing it led to was the "new math", which was the first in a long series of efforts by mathematicians to teach elementary students concepts that were pretty far beyond most of them, like set theory and number theory when what they needed was better basic math skills.

This was the first big federal effort in education that I remember, and many conservatives opposed it as federal meddling, even as they deplored that the evil Commies had (temporarily, as it turned out) passed us up in an important race with distinct phallic overtones.

Maybe this is what he is remembering, although the schools weren't so great then, which is why math and science ed really did need to be improved.  Also this was the time of "Why Johnny Can't Read" and other episodes of educational angst.  I'm not old enough to know if this sort of thing went on before WWII, but I kind of doubt it.

[ Parent ]
If there's any mitigating factor here
It's that Colorado did not have segregated schools in the 50's (in fact, it was the southernmost state to have laws forbidding racial segregation.) If this had been, say, Rand Paul in Kentucky, it would have been goodnight. Still a stupid remark though.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08
Buck isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer
He might not know that.  
[ Parent ]
that's what is so scary
These people are stupid they don't even know how stupid they are.
[ Parent ]
I'll disagree
Buck's a pretty smart guy, he just says a lot of dumb things. He'd be winning this race by 6-8 points now if he didn't have the foot-mouth syndrome going on. But I'd argue he's got a better political IQ than someone like Angle.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08
[ Parent ]
He's not stupid.
He's just gaffe prone and ideologically pure.  Comparable to Rand Paul and Joe Miller, who are both of those things but intelligent (indeed all three have earned highly sought after professional degrees).  Angle is in a different league, as she has the trifecta: gaffe prone, ideologically pure, and I'm afraid not overly bright.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11
[ Parent ]
I'd say Miller is also at least decently intelligent
He might be more of a problem than, say, Angle.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
Is he saying...
that our schools were better off segregated? Are our schools worse off because black Americans can drink at the same water fountains as everyone else?

Dude is gonna Buckpedal (http://coloradopols.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=13473) from this, but as a minority, this is really offensive to me. How can anyone say--let alone a potential US Senator!!--that government intervention in our schools didn't help? One can certainly say our schools are still socially and economically segregated, but I don't know how anyone could make the claim that Brown v. Board of Education was bad for America....

I know he's not directly saying this, but that's what I'm implying from it.

NY-14, DC-AL (college) Distraught Mets fan

Of course that's exactly what he's saying
But as usual, it's said in an implied, thinly vieled way, to allow not only for him to backstep from it, but even get self-righteous about it and say "I can't believe you think this was about race."  But his target audience knows exactly what he was saying.
[ Parent ]
He could be talking about changes in curriculum
You know, the increasing favor of math and science after the launch of Sputnik.  Obviously the chief cause of moral degeneracy is that kids aren't studying Greek and Latin!

28, Unenrolled, MA-08
I think this is it
See post above.

But the statement is internally contradictory, because the whole reason the feds got involved through the National Defense Education Act was that we were lagging in math and science ed.

[ Parent ]
I'm sorry, but I lay a lot of blame ...
... at the feet of the more moderate and reasonable elements of the Republican Party.  Until real moderates like Olympia Snowe, and reasonable conservatives like Dick Lugar and Linsey Graham speak out much more forcefully about stuff like this, it's going to continue.

But they are scared to death of this wacko-fringe that has taken over their party.  John McCain had to spend over $20 million and move way to the right to keep his job.  Decent Republicans like Bob Inglis and Lisa Murkowsiw and Bob Bennett lost their jobs.  Any even minor percieved slight of El Rushbo is met with days and days of salavating apologies.

Still, until more sane elements of the GOP take back their party, this is going to continue.  And while the country is going to suffer for it, it's the Republican Party's responsibility to take care of these nut jobs.  They helped create them.

Education is the future of children
and stuff. There used to be a time when the government understood the importance of curriculums that educated people about the value of education or whatever. Now the government insists on controlling the unlimited expansion of federal intrusion into the value of educational achievement or whatever. Sure, it may be politically correct to teach everybody about condom distribution in math classes, but in the 1950's federal intervention didn't teach children about taking God out of schools, and putting him onto the football field, where he doesn't really belong. Touchdown dances, and cheerleading, for that matter, have become far too sexy for the good of anyone but the children. If liberal activist judges didn't insist on putting evolution into the pledge of allegiance, we could go back to the days when children understood the value of a dollar, and the need for discipline.
Also. Under God.
Made me smile :-)


38, Male, SP, NL / LMP, HU
[ Parent ]
I wish I could smile
but I am afraid our children are falling behind the Chinese in spelling, and that the federal government won't get out of the way of federal support for Chinese spelling bees.  
[ Parent ]
Chinese spelling bees, eh?
I thought the spelling bees back in middle school were hard, but I guess I should be grateful we only had 26 characters to work with instead of several thousand.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
No! Don't take us back to the 1950s!
We'll have to re-add "under God" to the pledge, and deal with all those reds in Congress all over again!

...wait, your children learned about condoms in math class?  Huh, funny; my children learned abou condoms in English class, and learned about investment rate of return on car theft in math class!

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
Maybe we could add condoms to the pledge...
that way we wont waste valuable class time on it in segregated class rooms
[ Parent ]
I don't believe the U.S. or Colorado
had 'the best schools in the world' in the 1950s, or that the claim can be justified by evidence.

But it's never an argument about the real world with these people.  It's always about their narcissistic confabulations about their experiences.

My school didn't waste tax-payer dollars
taching us what "narcissism" or "confabulations" meant. They wouldn't dream of it. Not with the economy the way it was. We barely had the resources for an orchestra director, and I got some great yearbook quotes. What's happening to America?    
[ Parent ]
This guy is an idiot
not surprising coming from him.  I'm a conservative Republican, but I just can't support this kind of crazy.  Not that I would vote for Bennet, though, he is too liberal.    

38, male, conservative Republican, TX-3 currently (IL-13)
Just to help you out
the mods here don't like comments on personal political preferences, particularly from the right end of the political spectrum.  Statements like Bennet being too liberal are usually frowned upon here.  It's a double standard, but I think it's necessary to keep the atmosphere here peaceful.

I'm glad you're here and you've made some good comments, so I just wanted to let you know for your own benefit.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

[ Parent ]
Sorry
I'll try to avoid it in the future.  

I made the comment in part because I'm facing that dilemma here in Texas with Bill White.  I'm seriously considering voting for him because Perry sucks (can't vote for someone who talks about secession), but I can't get a feel on how he would govern.

38, male, conservative Republican, TX-3 currently (IL-13)

[ Parent ]
Actually..
.. as someone who started reading SSP addictively a couple of months ago, if there is one thing that turns me off about this otherwise fabulous site, it's this.

The man can say that Buck is an unsupportable kind of crazy, but not that Bennett is too liberal to his taste?

Yes, that's a double standard - and not even one which, to an outsider, makes a lot of sense moderation-wise. Calling a candidate any kind of names is one thing, for sure, but politely pointing out, on an aside, that a candidate is too liberal for one's taste? As a relatively new reader, I find the fact that what, in my view, is wholly innocent stuff like this, routinely gets reprimanded really off-putting.

My own political leanings are best, if imprecisely, called  socialist, for the record - so it's not out of ideological affinity with conservatives here that I'm remarking on this.

Take this for what it's worth - just feedback from an enthused but, on this count, somewhat estranged reader (who uses too many commas and long sentences..).

38, Male, SP, NL / LMP, HU

[ Parent ]
I'm with nimh
I think we could treat our conservative visitors a little better.  
[ Parent ]
Conservatives
I've found our Republican friends to be some of the better commenters on here, but maybe it is because they are more pressured to stick to the facts and avoid partisan statements.  
[ Parent ]
Totally agree with that
but we have had some real ugly meltdowns in the past too, some by folks who had been good contributors for a long time.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11
[ Parent ]
I don't necessarily fully agree with it in every instance
but I wanted to give BearsFan fair notice.  The mods don't ever seem to like this kind of comment.  Frankly I do see their point.  A relatively innocuous comment like "Bennet is too liberal" can lead to opposition from others and potentially a long de-rail about ideology.  I say that as we enter into a meta de-rail here.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11
[ Parent ]
Okay, but let's be fair then...
If this be the case we should not be asking Republicans who they are voting for or why they favor a certain candidate or position.

Let's help Republicans who want to post on the site by not asking them to voice an opinion that violates the rules.

(btw: not that anyone in the above thread has done this).  

[ Parent ]
It's a necessary evil
The mods here don't necessarily take a 'zero tolerance' view on this kind of thing, but they have to cut close on it to avoid pointless partisan derails (as spiderdem noted).

Lately, with a lot of new Republican or Republican-leaning users registering, the frequency of these warnings to avoid partisan cheerleading on a site that is still pretty overwhelmingly Dem-supporting has increased, but it's also worth noting that there have been plenty of occasions where conservative Dem vs. liberal Dem. vs. REALLY LIBERAL Dem ideological derails have occurred, and the mods and some more coolheaded users were hostile to that as well. I think even a few short-period bans were handed out from time to time.

It may seem harsh or unwelcoming to see this sort of policing going on, but I think it's critical to maintaining this site's popularity as something of a refuge from the cascade of offensive garbage that pollutes the comment sections of most political news/analysis sites. And I think pretty generally it's handled about as tactfully and politely as one could hope.  

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09

[ Parent ]
Agreed
And I think the moderators actually do a pretty good job of not overreacting, IMHO.  
[ Parent ]
You have it exactly right.
Thanks for your comment, and for the kind words.
[ Parent ]
I do appreciate..
... the work that is being done to keep this site level-headed, detail-oriented, unapologetically wonky, and wary of partisan discussion. It's an amazing site, and definitely my current addiction (when previous ones have included sites like pollster.com and the political science blog The Monkey Cage). And of course, considering the standards of discourse in the comments sections elsewhere on the political web, I see why keeping a tight leash on any partisan conversation is necessary.

I guess it's partly just the selective application of this principle that rankles - Dems can say stuff about Republican candidates that Republicans are reprimanded for saying about Democratic candidates. I'm as left-wing as they come, and I don't think we're that sensitive to the mere expression of dissenting political opinion.

(Again, when politicians are called names etc that's obviously different - just talking about the expression of political opinion such as the one this thread started with, which seem to be OK for Dems but not for Reps.)

Other than that, I guess a few times that I was kind of surprised / turned off by these reprimands might also just have been cases of a reader being a little overzealous.

I'm aware of the irony that I have now created a big thread-derail by bringing this up .. sorry about that! Wanted to speak up about this once, won't do it again!

38, Male, SP, NL / LMP, HU

[ Parent ]
Spot on
I still remember a comment thread on here during the Democratic Primaries about how this was the only sane political website on the net after the other major ones (DU, DK etc.) coalesced behind their favorites.  
[ Parent ]
My favorite thing back then
was that people would post things on SSP about the presidential primary, which EVERYBODY EVERYWHERE was talking about 24/7, and nobody would give a fuck.  We'd ignore it and talk about the ID-01 primary or something.  

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11
[ Parent ]
And that's why this blog is awesome.


party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
In the 1950's comment boards
weren't overwhelmed with people complaining about the failure of the federal government to educate people in the educational system about a little thing called manners. Maybe if they weren't so busy trying to take over the educational system to satisfy the minorities and the teachers unions, blogs would be the way they were in the 1950's. We had the best educational system in the world then. Period. Question mark. ALL CAPS.
And now look at us.  
[ Parent ]
BTW, he actually said Bennet
with one t.  And spelled it correctly.

Unless he spelled it incorrectly and actually meant Bennett with two t's, in which case I'd agree with you.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
Time to clear things up
Spiderdem is correct that we generally ask people to stick to political analysis rather than discussions of their personal preferences. This is particularly true for non-Democrats, as this is a progressive site. We've made this request because we find that discussions of personal preferences tend to lead to derails and often don't add much in the way of analytical insight. I think it's fair to say that whether Travis Childers is too conservative for your tastes doesn't really impact anyone's understanding of his re-election chances.

So BearFanTX's comment was pretty innocuous, but it goes without saying that Michael Bennet is going to be "too liberal" for a self-described "conservative Republican." I'll grant that the anecdata is somewhat interesting - conservative Republican says he won't support Ken Buck - and we aren't chastising BearFan here. But for the purposes of SSP, a poll showing Buck losing support among Republicans would be a lot more interesting.

As for other concerns about our moderation style, all we can say is, walk a mile in our shoes. Last year, we had many ugly derails which all manner of pleading could not put a halt to. So we banned a bunch of the worst users and gave time-outs to others. Since then, things have improved markedly. And the SSP you see now is a product of extremely vigilant moderation since then. I'm not sure there are many other blogs out there which have comments sections as intelligent, thoughtful, and free from vitriol as ours.

So things might look peachy keen now, and I can even understand why a newcomer might think the iron fist seems gratuitous. After all, the comment boards are so pleasant here, right? But trust us - it's not gratuitous, and the pleasant community you find here exists precisely because we've been stern. We don't want any backsliding - and neither do you. People who were here for the messy months in 2009 have repeatedly expressed their gratitude for the tight ship we run here. Asking us to moderate in any other way is an invitation to turn the comment boards here into the kind of free-for-all shouting matches you see at almost every other blog.

SSP is a labor of love, produced for basically no money by dedicated progressives who simply love the game. It's not going to be all things to all people. We aren't saying we're not open to feedback - of course we are. But we've been at this for a long time, and have a very good sense of what works and what doesn't. And right now, things are working - extremely well. We just had our second-biggest month of all time (after only October of 2008), so I think this assertion is on the money.

[ Parent ]
Thanks James
I think I speak for almost the entire SSP community when I tell you that I really appreciate the work that goes into this. This is the only political site I post at, and I go here at least seven or eight times a day (sometimes more).  
[ Parent ]
Thank you kindly
I don't mean to sound like a cheesy customer service voiceover, but your continued readership really means a lot to us. You guys are the fuel that keeps us going!
[ Parent ]
Having done my time as a moderator elsewhere
(of a private board of politically aware widows and widowers)

I appreciate the angst that you go through, the difficulties that come with most decisions.

It's a difficult balance -- while undermoderation can leave excellent contributors feeling unprotected, overmoderation can stifle discussion. I see none of that here, at least as it relates to the core discussion on the site.

Congratulations, and stay alert!

[ Parent ]
I also have previously been a moderator
on a board devoted to discussions of food. Believe it or not, there can be very nasty fights on such a site, or any other. But certainly, where controversial topics like politics or religion are discussed, a lot of moderation has to take place to avoid letting a site degenerate into puerile name-calling.

So while I might make some calls differently, I definitely appreciate the hard work that goes into keeping this place civil and very interesting, rather than yet another boring place of either uniform views or constant, sterile vituperation. I also haven't forgotten that I'm not perfect and had to be put in line a couple of times. Good work, guys!

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

[ Parent ]
Curious
Have you ever thought of putting this as a "sticky" or something.  I tend to find the "fine line" often misinterpreted by others...even regarding my own posts.  I'm often told that my posts violate the rules even though they don't, but then other regular users get it wrong from time to time with baffling misunderstandings of the rules.

Just always been curious why y'all don't have at least a series of gentle guidelines for posting.  Could be the basics of what the blog is about and the very specifics of what causes immediate bans.

It would help a lot of people, especially new users and moderates and even Republican die-hards.  While those aren't your target audiences, they are here and they often provide balance and the point of view to make people think more.

I worry the confusion about the ability to discuss policy AND politics causes some over-focus on polls on this site (disclaimer: I hate polls).  The ability to talk policy as it relates to politics, for one, is a point that really could use some clarification, as some folks get on the "no policy here" bandwagon at even the most mundane times.  

[ Parent ]
So is Buck endorsing segregation...
Or is Buck just endorsing that we spend MORE on our public schools? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on supporting either, but he really needs to understand why we had "the best schools in the world" in the 1950s, save for the horrible racial segregation policies.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)
Sounds like he's talking about the....
Sounds like he's talking about the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare which was created and made a Cabinet-level agency in 1953, as a precursor to the Department of Education in the 1970s.
He'll probably win anyways
n/t
Not if he's dancing in the end zone
like you while Bennet works his ass off.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11
[ Parent ]
The polls say he'll win

[ Parent ]
No the polls say he's ahead by about 4%
right now with about 10% undecided, according to pollster.com.  They don't say he'll win.  And he probably won't if, on top of being outhustled in terms of $$$, he continues to make statements that are or may be seen as derogatory towards women and minorities.

Not sure how the court of opinion will deal with this particular statement, but he's not in such a lock-down position that he can afford any serious gaffes.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

[ Parent ]
Sure, but how many politicians
come back from such a deficit this late in the game? Especially given the composition of the electorate, which is heavily and increasingly Republican. Moreover, let's face it, only the left is likely to consider this statement racist, and they aren't voting for Ken.
[ Parent ]
4 points is nothing
with 2 months to go. In fact, it's nothing in the face of a superior GOTV operation -- so 4 points on Nov 1 isn't conclusive either.

I suspect that Jane Norton would have had a bigger lead at this point, however.

[ Parent ]
Last cycle alone
Kay Hagan, Al Franken, and Jeff Merkley all had deficits in the neighborhood of 4% at this point.

Jim Webb in 2006 was down about that at this point too.

I'm sure history has seen many more examples, and has seen some examples where the polling was just wrong (Dewey v. Truman anyone?).  It's not as late as you seem think.  

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

[ Parent ]
They were on the same side as the wave

[ Parent ]
Only the right wouldn't consider that statement racist
That aside, a 4% lead hardly equals a win, with two months left of campaigning, that can evaporate.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
[ Parent ]
Democrats consider every Republican position bigoted
Iraq War- anti-Arab. Gay marriage- homophobic. Illegal immigration- anti-Hispanic. Even tax and spending cuts are allegedly meant to disenfranchise minorities. I don't think non-Democrats listen to these attacks any more.
[ Parent ]
First rule of politics.
  Say what you mean, and mean what you say.  Schools in the fifties were segregated.  It's not our fault your side is making a record number of unhinged/unconsidered comments this cycle.  But I'm sure Ken Buck will go on to blame the media and develop a huge persecution complex.  It's what conservatives do when they are cornered for making a unwise statement.

24, Male, GA-05
[ Parent ]
Move on.
I don't think this comment is steering the conversation in a helpful direction. Time to move on.
[ Parent ]
STFU Ken Buck, you stupid cracker
...I figure one good racist sentiment deserves another.

Someone should ask Ryan Frazier over in CO-07 if he feels the same way. Or heck, Michael Steele. Michael Steele always makes things better (for Democrats).

Or, uh, maybe Buck hates the G.I. Bill? No wait, wrong decade again.... Yeeeah, good luck getting out of this one, Bucky.  

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

This is really not an okay comment
That type of language is completely unnecessary - and unwelcome - here.
[ Parent ]
Related?
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pos...

(post by yours truly)

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

It's pretty transparent what he is saying
But you would think he'd be smart enough not to say it in public, but radicals aren't too smart sometimes.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
We've been hearing a lot of things
we didn't think we'd hear major-party candidates say in public, right? Am I wrong to observe that these kinds of remarks have proliferated since 2008 and were a lot less commonly stated by major politicians or candidates before then? OK, sure, there was Trent Lott - and he was forced to give up his position as Republican Leader in the Senate. What are the consequences now?

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
You are correct on all counts
The last election brought a lot of this forward.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
[ Parent ]
Wow
Please tell me he's not referring to Brown v. Board of Education.  Actually, please tell me he is referring to that.  That would be a big help for Michael Bennet.

26, white male, TX-24, liberal-leaning independent
Maybe, I'm the odd man out,
but I think it is a stretch to say Buck's comment is some sort of segregation comment.  

The common perception is that the US was the world leader in education and just about everything else in the 50's.  Some of that may be romanticizing, but if it is factually true, then to imply that he meant something different is not right.  You can't just 'interpret' what you want into what someone says.  How many times has the right done that to Obama, among others?

Trent Lott is a different situation because Thurmond ran on a segregation platform.    

True
However, it seems to me like one of those Republican code-speak things that can sound fairly innocuous, but really isn't so.

26, white male, TX-24, liberal-leaning independent
[ Parent ]
This is what I think too
Oh the 50's, when we were a MUCH more progressive nation.  :)  
[ Parent ]
CO-Sen: You Tell Me What Ken Buck Is Talking About | 83 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox