Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Delete Your Account: MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Wonders If McConnell Is Better or Worse Than Segregationist Senators

Delete Your Account: MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Wonders If McConnell Is Better or Worse Than Segregationist Senators


The hot takes we’ve gotten from Democrats in the aftermath of Joe Biden’s praise of his ability to get along with segregationist Senators in the 1970s have been all over the map.

Former Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) said in an interview Thursday that Biden’s comments on Democratic Sens. James Eastland (MS) and Herman Talmadge (GA) were not that big a deal in the scheme of things. Why? Because Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Jeff Sessions (R-AL) were “pretty stinky, creepy people themselves” and Democratic Senators like Biden critic Cory Booker (NJ) had to work with them, too, she stated.

Sen. Kamala Harris (CA) ripped Biden’s remarks, suggesting he was “coddling the reputations of segregationists.” On the other hand, civil rights icons and Congressmen John Lewis (D-GA) and James Clyburn (D-SC) both defended Biden, saying they had to work with some pretty bad people back in those days, too.

MSNBC‘s “All In” host Chris Hayes had his own special take on it all in the midst of the controversy, and took to the Twitter machine to wonder out loud:
Something I've been mulling since Biden's comments yesterday, whether a US Senate effectively run by men like James Eastland and John Stennis is or is not preferable to a US Senate run by Mitch McConnell?




852 people are talking about this
He followed up with a little bit of “WhatAboutBothism”, perhaps in an attempt to make his initial tweet sound more… measured:





293 people are talking about this

Twitter being Twitter, there was actually a debate between liberals in the comments:

you are asking this question based on the premise that they are very different?


Is there a difference? Here's Eastland bragging about having JFK's "whole program bottled up." No different from McConnell being the "grim reaper."

This is another way Biden's "civility" argument is wrong. Eastland didn't work with LBJ, he lost to him.   http://www.lbjlibrary.net/assets/documents/archives/oral_histories/eastland/Eastland.pdf 




56 people are talking about this



If the question is, "Would a Senate in which there were more overt racism but less polarization be 'better' than what we have today?" then the an answer is “the Senate would function more smoothly, but the country would be worse for it."


Mitch McConnell is a racist. He doesn't have to say the words; it's in his deeds, his actions, his politics. Election security is but one example.




See Jodi Jacobson's other Tweets

It has always been a reactionary institution.  The Senate was a better place with the likes of Eastland & Stennis - despite their abhorrent views on race.  Unlike McConnell, they were committed to having the Senate be a productive house of the national legislature.




See Dennis P. Crawford's other Tweets

In the end, there was no clear winner in the debate. But there was one casualty: Common sense.

—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

Source: https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2019/06/24/delete-account-msnbcs-chris-hayes-wonders-mcconnell-better-worse-segregationist-senators/?utm_source=rsmorningbriefing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=510a37d5c1467835e54832ab27cef3df

No comments:

Post a Comment