[paulv]

> You have absolutely no room to be calling someone else "intellectually dishonest".

* You did know that Clinton called Byrd a "friend and mentor" but didn't know that Byrd repeatedly & profusely apologized for his racism.

* You did know that Thurmond "apologized" for his racism but didn't know that Thurmond didn't really mean it.

* You call me out for not providing a source (which ceejayoz provided below) but ignored purephase's request for you to provide a source above.

Not to mention that we started this thread with your (incorrect) claims about Byrd + Clinton but now we're talking about Thurmond.

Convenient. Maybe next time you should try googling for a few minutes before you press submit.

[Turing_Machine]

>You did know that Clinton called Byrd a "friend and mentor" but didn't know that Byrd repeatedly & profusely apologized for his racism.

No, actually, I did know that. I just didn't believe him at the time, and still don't.

>You did know that Thurmond "apologized" for his racism but didn't know that Thurmond didn't really mean it.

According to whom? You?

> You call me out for not providing a source (which ceejayoz provided below)

A source which a) showed that your "quotes" were grossly out of context and b) when tracked back to its actual source showed that Thurmond did repudiate his segregationist stance.

> Not to mention that we started this thread with your (incorrect) claims about Byrd + Clinton but now we're talking about Thurmond.

1) No, this thread started with Thurmond.

2) My original claims about Byrd were:

a) Hillary Clinton called him a "friend and mentor" and a man of "eloquence and nobility". That is correct. I even provided a link to the video of her saying it.

b) Robert Byrd was a Kleagle (recruiter) in the KKK. That is also correct. He was also later the Exalted Cyclops (head) of his local chapter.

c) Byrd once wrote "I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side. ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds." That is also correct.

I can only conclude that by "incorrect" you mean "100% correct".

If you have any factual links to refute any of those claims, please provide them. Not "Well, he later said he was sorry, yadda-yadda".

Are a), b) and c) above factually correct or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.

> Maybe next time you should try googling for a few minutes before you press submit.

Maybe you should try reading for a few minutes before you press submit.

[paulv]

Despite his repeated apologies and support of legislation that helped people of color, you're not willing to believe that Byrd was genuine when he apologized. But you do believe Thurmond was genuine. Okay.

It has become clear that this conversation is a waste of my time.

[Turing_Machine]

>But you do believe Thurmond was genuine.

I believe nothing of the sort. I explicitly said "Thurmond absolutely was a racist." How is that not clear?

You are, to be blunt, lying. Hint: that doesn't actually work when my original words are here for all to read. I would recommend sticking to out of context quoting from obscure sources in future.

I take it, then, that you can't refute my factual statements, despite declaring them to be "incorrect", repeatedly?

You cited Thurmond's "I have nothing to apologize for" out of context as evidence that he never claimed to have given up segregationist views, even though when (laboriously) tracked down to its original source, his very next sentence was in fact just such a claim.

And you have the nerve to call someone else "intellectually dishonest".

> It has become clear that this conversation is a waste of my time.

Agreed.