If a Republican appeared in blackface or klan robes 35 years ago

[whopis01]

There would be no one on this site defending them.

[guillaumeb]

1. And few in the GOP would condemn them today.

It is still acceptable as long as the proper coded language is used.

[whopis01]

4. Exactly. n/t

[Salviati]

27. Because one party has a functioning moral compass

and one does not.

[atreides1]

2. What if it were a moderate Republican?

Someone who didn't vote in lockstep with their party, someone who was progressive, someone who defended a woman's right to choose?

I know, Republicans like that do not currently exist in this dimension, but what if that were the case?

[whopis01]

3. I doubt anyone would voice support for them either.

I doubt that if an independent appeared like that there would be any defense for them.

[onecaliberal]

10. That's exactly why I had to reverse from my initial reaction. If we demand it from

republicans of course we must demand it from ourselves. Wrong is wrong.

[OnDoutside]

5. Was this site here then ?

[whopis01]

6. Of course it was. You must be a newbie.

Lol. You know what I meant.

[OnDoutside]

7. Just messing

[treestar]

8. I think you are right

The Republican would still be a racist, though, or at least, his positions on the issues could be read that way.

I know we went after Roy Moore for what he did in the 70s. But if he was now defending the right to choice, etc, we might think differently. But he is now the same.

[Ms. Toad]

9. Correct - but there is virtually no chance that said Republican

would have made significant changes in their life since then.

That is what makes the difference. Progressives generally believe in the power of change, redemption, and reconciliation.

Whether that is appropriate in this case - I don't know. But that's the reason the two scenarios are different.

[TCJ70]

11. To be a republican today is to support racist policies...

...and ideas. It could be reasonably assumed that the imaginary republican had not changed over nearly 4 decades.

[EffieBlack]

12. Well, almost no one ...

[whopis01]

16. Good point. I was being too optimistic perhaps. n/t

[maxsolomon]

13. I would still want to know the facts.

1. Is that him in the picture?
2. Which one is he?
3. Why are there so many of these Med School students in blackface?
4. Why did they put these photos in their yearbook?

It just seems unbelievable that such a thing would happen in 1985. I would still want to know HOW this happened, what were these people thinking?

[Iggo]

14. Well...

1. Yes. He said so on Friday.
2. Doesn't matter.
3. Because they're bigots.
4. Because bigots think their bigotry is hilarious.

[EffieBlack]

15. Perfect. Thank you.

[maxsolomon]

19. yeah, it's that simple.

and... now Northam's denied that it's him. so I have no way to know the particulars of it, which you're dismissing as irrelevant.

look, the dirty tricks that the GOP's pulled these last decades have made me suspicious as fuck, and not just when my white fragility is threatened.

ACORN being the shining example (Franken less so). Dems went along with that bullshit and voted to de-fund it, and when the truth got its pants on, the lie had crossed the finish line. now we live with the results of that rush to judgment.

[Iggo]

21. The book says it's him. He said it was him. Then he said it wasn't him.

1. The picture speaks for itself.

2. He said Friday it was him.

3. Now he says that wasn't true and that it's not him and that he never saw the picture before his staffer showed it to him, even though he also said he believes "then and now" that it's not him. Never saw it before and also believed then that it wasn't him.

So the book lied, and then he lied (why?), and THEN he told the truth?

I don't feel like stretching that far.

[maxsolomon]

22. Is too much work to just wait for the facts to emerge?

I'd imagine the NYT, WaPo, etc. have several skilled journalists dissecting every aspect of this story and the entire picture will emerge shortly - like by next Tuesday.

I want to know which statement is actually a lie, just like you. I can wait.

[Iggo]

23. The picture exists. He said it was him.

Those aren't facts?

[maxsolomon]

26. the picture's a fact.

his page, in his med school yearbook, facts. nicknamed "coonman" at VMI, fact.

[Iggo]

28. He also admitted it. That's a fact.

Everything else is just waiting around to find out which kind of a liar he is.

The stupid kind or the asshole kind.

Either one of those, notwithstanding all the racist shit, should disqualify him from being Governor.

The racist shit already disqualifies him.

[Codeine]

25. His denial is rank bullshit.

If a Republican told a whopper like that everyone here would piss themselves laughing, and you know that.

[maxsolomon]

29. Yes, everyone at DU would.

I agree.

[ananda]

17. One thing for sure.

No Reep would be asking him to resign,
and many would defend him just as they
defended Kavanaugh for rape.

[whopis01]

18. And would they be wrong for not doing so?

[maxsolomon]

20. actually, they are piling on and condeming it

quite gleefully, IMHO.

NPR even saw fit to interview a GOP Opposition Researcher yesterday morning.

[Codeine]

24. And we would laugh ourselves sick

if they tried to spin a story akin to that which he brought out in his press conference. Micheal Jackson my ass.

[Midnightwalk]

30. More thoughts

Do you mean like Northam? I don’t know what he registered as but he said he voted for GWB in 2000 and 2004. That makes him a Republican to me fairly recently. His lousy judgement lasted well past his “youthful indiscretions” in his mid twenties.

I agree with your point that his party shouldn’t matter to this discussion. His explanation contradicted itself and at best was that “those aren’t the right racist pictures”. Even if i found that persuasive ( and I don’t) it has been rejected by members of the offended community, African Americans. That to me is a very high bar to get over.

The people worrying about the political consequences are wrong in my opinion but let me grant for a second that we shouldn’t ignore that. In this case we move the Democratic lieutenant governor up to governor. I gather his replacement will be picked by the GOP legislation and that will impact legiy. But if the senate is run by republicans what legislation is going through anyway? Giving up our principles in this case is not just wrong but dumb in this case.