Lynching
What's my old senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) doing on this list of Senators who wouldn't appologize for lynching?
Shame on you, Senator Conrad.
He's the only Democrat who wouldn't co-sponsor. Guess which party the other senators are from?
Update: Conrad has now co-sponsored the resolution.
posted by Luke Francl @ 12:55 PM |
| 
7 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
So let me get this right. It is fair to criticize someone who doesn't apologize for not doing something in which he never had the power to do anyways, namely, pass an anti-lynching bill?
Does the resolution call for reparations; are the co-sponsors willing to resign their office out of the shame?
No, it's meaningless posturing that's only meant to stroke their egos, for votes.
I really, really want to know. Please tell me how this meaningfully affects a single person.
The resolution basically says, "We didn't pass an anti-lynching bill until the 1950s. Sorry about all those black guys who got hung up on trees."
What's controversial about that? Nothing. What's pathetic is that some senators wouldn't agree to that sentiment. What, do they think lynching was OK?
Murder was (and still is) illegal.
This is a waste of time.
-Censored
Of course lynching was more than just murder... Others have said that it was terrorism, and I'd have to agree with that.
Was.
Why not apologize for burning witches?
Censored
At least the witches got a show trial.
Lynching is pure vigilanteism, and it went unpunished because racists in the Senate filibustered anti-lynching legislation for decades. Lynching was essentially legal in the South.
This week, the Senate finally apologized for its error. But 15 senators from YOUR party wouldn't affirm their support because they don't want to upset their racist base.
Post a Comment
<< Home