Originally posted by Murdr
... Criticizing what he said, why he said it, the validity of his statments, thats cool. So why bring up the KKK? He wasnt a Robert Byrd or a David Duke. Even if he was, what does that have to do with what he said in his speech? Absolutely nothing. What does that have to do with the validity of his claims? Absolutely nothing. I wonder what the next tact will be when that generation that lived through the civil rights changes eventually die off. ...
We'll be mostly dead in about 20 or 30 years. Enjoy the wait. Thanks for caring.
And what a person says in the context of the associations which define his belief structures is very crucial. Because the Klan's ideals impart a subtext for anything said by someone who belongs, or belonged, to it. You join the Klan because you believe what they believe, right? This ain't like joining a bowling league. So if you believed in ethnic hatred enough to join the Klan, or even hang out with them, that colors (no pun intended) anything you say to the ears of people who aren't into genocide.
You're born with your race - you choose to join the Klan. And that choice carries forward. Saying that it doesn't matter if he is or was a member of the Klan is very disturbing.
Afterall, anyone in an elected office in this country should believe that "all men are created equal", right? The KKK doesn't believe that - quite the contrary. So just who is this man representing?
Note that I'm not talking about Zell specifically here, I'm talking about the generalization you made about association with a hate group being irrelevant.
All that being said, I don't know squat about Zell up til this week, but what I saw wasn't impressive. It was not what I would expect from a statesman. However, from what I saw of his tirade, there was nothing racial in it.
-DoK