Barbour and the CCC

Wednesday, July 8th, 2009

Some commenters to today’s morning links post are insisting that Haley Barbour has no connection to the white supremacist, neo-confederate Council of Conservative Citizens.

In fact, he does. In 2003, Barbour attended a barbecue fundraiser sponsored by the CCC. Money from the event went to buy school buses for a “private academy,” the term for private schools established in Mississippi so white parents don’t have to send their kids to public schools with black kids.

When the CCC posted a photo of Barbour at the event on its website, Barbour refused to ask them to take it down. His defense:

“Once you start down the slippery slope of saying, ‘That person can’t be for me,’ then where do you stop? Old segregationists? Former Ku Klux Klan?”

Even if you buy that argument (and I’ve argued that I don’t think politicians should necessarily return campaign contributions from questionable sources), there’s a difference between refusing the support of someone with racist views and allowing your likeness to be used on a racist organization’s website, particularly for fundraising purposes, or to show off the group’s connections to political power.

Barbour also claimed he didn’t know what the organization represented when he attended the barbecue, a dubious proposition given that the CCC had repeatedly been in the news in prior years due to its connections to other GOP politicians.

Barbour’s going to have to come up with some better excuses if he wants to run for president. And the GOP ought to think long and hard before it considers him a legitimate contender for the 2012 nomination Unlike his unfortunate comment about black people and watermelon back in the 1980s, this is all relatively recent.

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

76 Responses to “Barbour and the CCC”

  1. #1 |  Mark Seven | 

    You’re trying to insinuate that Gov. Barbour is a George Wallace racist, and he is not!
    ‘When the photo caused a stir, Barbour was quick to call the CCC’s segregationist views “indefensible.” ‘

  2. #2 |  Mark Seven | 

    Show me a piece of legislation Gov. Barbour has signed, or an executive order he’s ordered that is out and out racist. From what I understand Gov. Barbour gets a good percentage of the black vote in Mississippi. Are you saying the blacks in Mississippi are too stupid to know better than who to vote for without being told how to vote by some snot-nosed DC liberal?

  3. #3 |  Mark Seven | 

    And yes Balko, you are a liberal. No matter how many times Andrew Sullivan tells you to call yourself a libertarian.

  4. #4 |  skootercat | 

    Yo Mark, there’s a nice way to say that.

  5. #5 |  Nick T | 

    Mark, try reading AND comprehending. Radley I think is talking about whether a connection exists and whether that creates a political problem for Barbour. Not that he is in fact racist, but that he is connected to questionable organizations. He is also clearly not commenting on whether people who voted for him are stupid or not entitled to come to their own conclusions on this issue.

    I know this, because I *read* what Radley wrote.

    Oh and you’re calling Radley liberal for going after a Republican politician (yawn) that’s original and a strong sign that you have a really solid argument to begin with and are not desperate to score points.

  6. #6 |  Nick T | 

    Oh, and I hope someday someone comes to defend me by saying I’m NOT a George Wallace style racist. What a compliment!

  7. #7 |  flukebucket | 


    I figure he would do about as well as Goldwater did in 1964.

  8. #8 |  Michael Pack | 

    The race card is being played so much it has lost it’s value.Obama got a pass about his racist minister and is leading a take over of much of the economy,Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have been fawned over all weekend due to their views about Michael Jackson .Meanwhile,Larry Bird is accused of having too many white guys on the Pacers.We all know blacks are better at basketball or is that racist too!I don’t care for Barber in general,but,he’s no worse then black pols that run D.C. or Detroit.

  9. #9 |  Mark Seven | 

    And I’m sure all the educated readers of this site are aware that there is a member of the Ku Klux Klan in the US Senate. As a matter of fact he is the President Pro-tem of the Senate and 3rd in line of Presidential succession. I will not call him a “former” member of the KKK because I don’t believe that is something someone can shake.

  10. #10 |  John Jenkins | 

    How is it possible to conclude that this does not present a political problem for Barbour? Just because a former KKK member can continue to get elected in West Virginia, doesn’t mean that he could hold national office (Robert Byrd would get his ass kicked in a national election). It’s not even a defensible comparison.

    The issue is not whether Barbour is a racist, it’s whether his connection to a racist organization is a political liability, and the answer is an unequivocal yes.

  11. #11 |  CDH | 

    I don’t think it really matters much (with respect to this particular thread) whether or not Barbour is racist or supports the CCC. What matters is that he has a link to them and thus has to deal with it. It might not be fair, but that’s the reality of politics in the 21st century.

    (Then again, maybe it is fair; I’ve never really thought of him as a viable national candidate and thus haven’t paid a tremendous amount of attention to him.)

  12. #12 |  MassHole | 

    but but but but but Robert Byrd!

  13. #13 |  Johnny Clamboat | 

    Mark, this is what you posted on the wrong thread:

    Haley Barbour has had nothing to do with this outfit, ever. This is more creating things out of mid-air just like they do with Sarah Palin. I am going to forward Balko’s insinuation on to the Gov. office and see what they have to say. Hopefully he’ll file a law suit against Balko!

    What part of Radley’s post would open himself to litigation? Too many facts? Questioning Barbour’s claim that he didn’t know that the CCC has racist leanings?

  14. #14 |  Nick T | 

    Mark, can you explain the relevance of that last post? I’m trying to divine it but getting nowehre.

    Is it that we’re supposed to be in a constant state of outrage over Robert Byrd lest we be hypocritical or is to prove that being a former/current racist is in no way a political obstacle (because, ya know, winning reelection a million times in WV is the same as running for President of the whole country)?

  15. #15 |  Michael Pack | 

    In a perfect world Walter Williams would be President and Andrew Napolitano would be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

  16. #16 |  Mark Seven | 

    First of all, I think one could argue that being President Pro-tem of the Senate, although largely cerimonial, is a national office. It is mentioned in the Constitution and many statutes.
    Second, all this talk about national office and Barbour explaining himself is designed to smear the man. If he is a racist, or a member of the CCC, he should not be governer of Mississippi, much less president. Problem is, he is not a racist, and as I mention above he is somewhat popular with blacks.

  17. #17 |  Nick T | 

    Mark, you’re not really making sense, and/or you’re completely unfamiliar with media coverage of politics.

    It is not smearing to discuss someone’s chances at political success. While discussing this topic it is not smearing to discuss things that might be problematic in the eyes of the voters without necessarily saying those things are accurate or even getting into whether they are. Some analysts might wonder whether Sarah Palin is seen as smart enough to be president *by the voters*. This is very different than saying “I believe Sarah Palin is dumb.”

    Whether Pres. Pro-temp of the Senate can be considered a “National Office” is irrelevant since he is only elected by his fellow senators and was likely chosen because of seniority. The point is *Can Barbour win enough votes across the country to win the Presidency?* Please try and say something that has to do with that topic.

  18. #18 |  ktc2 | 


    Palin / Barbour 2012!!

    Oh your god, the Rs are going to get their ass handed to them if they can’t do better than that.

  19. #19 |  Michael Pack | 

    Mean while,Obama is appointing another czar,he’s grabbing more and more power in the economy and you people are debating Haley Barber chances at national office?What a crowd.

  20. #20 |  Mark Seven | 

    Well I think if unemployment rises higher, the ecomomy continues to tank, Obama continues to spend like a drunken sailor, and Michael Jackson is honored by congress then whoever the Republicans nominate in 2012 will win with votes from every class, and race.

  21. #21 |  Chance | 

    Even if we assume he isn’t racist, he’s still a dumbass for hanging out at racist BBQ fundraisers while having ambitions of national office.

  22. #22 |  John Jenkins | 

    @Mark: President pro tempore of the Senate is not a national office.

    There are only two national offices: President and Vice President, because those two are elected by electors from all of the states.

    The President pro tempore of the Senate is customarily the senior Senator of the majority party and is elected by the electors of a single state (note that the President pro tempore need not be a sitting Senator, but always has been).

    No one is smearing Gov. Barbour except you because you’re the only one implying that his affiliation with this group implies that he is a racist. I would argue that it makes him a political opportunist like every other politician, but that this particular affiliation makes him look unappealing to a vast swath of voters and renders him unable to win national office because of that lack of appeal.

  23. #23 |  Alex | 

    About the watermelons: So the connection is that the Boston Globe ran an editorail that quoted a NYT article from the 1980’s that nobody has bothered to reprint on the internet. As I see it, there’s three glaring logical problems with the story:

    1)Why would he scold an aid for racist remarks with an even more racist remark?

    2)Despite spending most of my life in the South, I’ve heard the watermelon thing many more times north of the Mason-Dixon Line. White people in the South eat a lot of watermelons; it just doesn’t make much sense as a racial joke.

    3)How is it that the NYT covering a MS Senate race was the only paper to report this?

    Of course, the CCC stuff is still bad politically, if not morally.

  24. #24 |  John Jenkins | 

    Well Mark, in this country, when we are unhappy with the current administration, the solution is that we elect a new one. Gov. Barbour has aspirations to be the head of that new administration, so you see our discussing his qualifications and likelihood of success is directly related to dissatisfaction with the current administration. In the future, perhaps we could make you happier if we were to preface all of our posts with:

    “ZOMG, Obama sucks, what are we going to do? Woe is us!”

    Then we can get on with productive discussions rather than tales of woe and bad tidings.

  25. #25 |  flukebucket | 

    Haley does what Haley needs to do in order to get elected in Mississippi.

    But what he needs to do to win in Mississippi would prove to be his undoing in a national election.

    That is not a smear. That is just a fact.

    To paraphrase the soon-to-be-ex-governor of Alaska, “He pals around with racists!”

    I don’t know if he will play golf with Jews or not.

  26. #26 |  Mike Leatherwood | 

    Wow. Where was this thread when I was having to identify logic fallacies when I was in college?

  27. #27 |  Johnny Clamboat | 

    @#19 – I think Radley has covered those things extensively. This isn’t a Johnny One-Note blog.

  28. #28 |  Kidhandsome | 

    I think this is much ado about nothing. I have a connection to my grandfather (and even appear in a couple photos with him) and he was a racist bastard (and a drunk). I gather that disqualifies me from ever holding office (assuming I could get elected with my classically liberal views) Granted, it’s not the same thing (note that I know there is a difference), but it really should be about whether he actually discriminates, and not whether there is some “connection” between Barbour and the CCC.

    I do believe that there is some small level of accusation and insinuation from the side that continuously “points out” that there is a connection and demands an answer that has already been provided (according to commenters here, Barbour has condemned the groups racist views). If you have a problem with the answer that was provided, then comment on that. Don’t just keep pointing a finger at a picture on a website as if that alone means something. I think claiming that you are only saying that he’ll have to deal with it again in a major election is more than a tad disingenuous; I simply don’t believe that’s what you mean.

    Note, I have read Radley’s issues with the photo and the significance therein, and I respect his views on this particular issue. I do frequently disagree with his views on race relations. Having said the last, I will qualify thatt by saying that my disagreements with his posts tend to be by a matter of degrees and semantics. I do not disagree with his abhorrence of racism and its vast negative impact historically and currently.

  29. #29 |  scott in phx az | 

    I think Barbour needs to explain his ties to an “allegedly” white supremicist group just as much as Obama was made to explain his ties to a black “rascist” church.

    btw, the firewall at my office blocks the Council of Conservative Citizens, but not Trinity Church.

    So I guess its alright for me to read about a church whose pastor claimed that the US created the AIDS virus to destroy the black community and that printed anti-semitic palestinian literature in its newsletter.

    But nobody demanded they explain that much less Obama’s ties to such hate speech.

  30. #30 |  Spleen | 

    Some commenters to today’s morning links post are insisting that Haley Barbour has no connection to the white supremacist, neo-confederate Council of Conservative Citizens.

    To be fair, there was only one commenter “insisting” there was no connection. The other two posters merely referenced a conflicting statement in the article you yourself linked to.

  31. #31 |  Mark Seven | 

    Is Sec. of State a national office? I think so. Robert Byrd is a member of the KKK. The KKK is bad. Robert Byrd holds a constitutional office 3rd in line to be president. Haley Barbour went to a fundraiser that he found out later was attended by gourps with segregationist views. It is my understanding that this BBQ was not a cut and dry CCC event, and Gov Barbour has said he disagrees with this group and the same problem has not happened since. My whole point is that this site is dedicated to the election of democrats, and that can be acheived by sliming a Republican. Sarah Palin is going through the same thing.

  32. #32 |  Nick T | 


    What are Radley’s views of Sarah Palin? Did he always feel that way? What was his reaction when she was first selected? Did he have good or bad things to say about her before she was picked by McCain? What has Radley said about the Al Franken story?

    If: “not good”; “no”; “generally positive”; “good things”, and “nothing,” then how does that reconcile with what you just said?

  33. #33 |  Mark Seven | 

    Sarah Palin is the closest thing this country has had to a true libertarian on a national ticket since Barry Goldwater. When she was announced by McCain, Balko jumped on the liberal hate wagon and has made fun of her to curry favor with the folks over at The Atlantic and other liberals. It was at that time that I knew this site was a fake in the mold of Andrew Sullivan’s site.

  34. #34 |  Nick T | 

    WRONG! Sorry.

    I’m sure you think Palin said “thanks but no thanks” and is very mavericky. Good luck with that.

  35. #35 |  Spleen | 

    What are Radley’s views of Sarah Palin? Did he always feel that way? What was his reaction when she was first selected? Did he have good or bad things to say about her before she was picked by McCain? What has Radley said about the Al Franken story?

    Hmm…maybe if we try logic and reason, the trolls will come around? Why hasn’t anyone thought of that before!

  36. #36 |  Kidhandsome | 

    #33 – Palin had a reputation as relatively libertarian compared to most republicans, but it turned out that she A) wasn’t actually very libertarian; and B) completely sold out any libertarian ideals she did have. I guarantee that if she’d had a backbone and cared even a little bit about civil liberties and contracting the government (even just paying lip-service to that notion) she wouldn’t have been blasted as much as she was by libertarians.

    I’m not suggesting that she didn’t endure unfair attacks, but as for the political criticism she got from libertarians, she deserved it. She was either a fraud (as a libertarian) or a sell-out (giving up libertarian ideals she was thought to have). I will admit that when she was first added to the ticket, my little bit of knowledge of her career led me to have high hopes for her. Ultimately, after hearing her political views (if they were even hers), I realized that she was a terrible, awful, bad VP candidate.

  37. #37 |  John Jenkins | 

    Secretary of State is not an elected office at all. Your argument is absurd. But, I will tell you that Gov. Barbour will never be SecState either, if that makes you feel better.

    Nonetheless, I concede the field. If you won’t be persuaded that being linked to a white supremacist group, whatever one’s explanation for it, and however much one later denounces the group, is not a barrier to elected national office, then I seriously doubt any words of mine will topple the mountain of unreason it takes you to reach that conclusion.

  38. #38 |  Les | 

    Mark, this really isn’t the place for knee-jerk partisan loyalists. Sarah Palin is a proven liar and opportunist the same way Obama is. Palin is for limited government as much as Obama is for transparency. They both say they are for these things, and knee-jerk loyalists ignore the actions which prove they are not. Anyone defending either of them is much more interested in team loyalty than objective truth.

  39. #39 |  Mark Seven | 

    I’ve been banned.

  40. #40 |  MDGuy | 

    #31 | Mark Seven | July 8th, 2009 at 3:22 pm

    My whole point is that this site is dedicated to the election of democrats

    When did you start reading this site? Today? Have you read any of it beyond the Haley Barbour posts?

  41. #41 |  Mark Seven | 

    I never said Sec of State was an elected office you moron. It is a national office, and I think the same can be said for the President Pro-tem of the Senate (currently held by a member of the KKK). There can be no doubt that PresProTem of the Senate is a constitutional office, and the constitution is a national document.

  42. #42 |  Nick T | 

    “I’ve been banned.”

    Whoa straight out of Sarah palin’s playbook: crying victim. Now all we need is for you to incorrectly reference the 1st Amendment. That would rule. Do it, do it!

  43. #43 |  Nick T | 

    Mark, we know you never said it was an elected office. That’s why YOU are the moron. If it’s not an elected office then it is not relevant since we’re discussing Barbour’s chances at being elected. Get it?

    See, what you did was deploy that classic bad argument technique known as “disagree with the last thing the other guy said, regardless of whether it’s helpful to my point.” I mean, seriously, why are we even talking about Pres Pro Temp of the senate?

  44. #44 |  Mark Seven | 

    I’ve been reading this site for 18 months. I stumbled on it after having the shit kicked out of me while in handcuffs during a seizure. I think that Balko is right on in pointing out how our police around the country are abusing power and how our criminal justice system convicts innocent people all the time. However the problem is not a problem of Republicans vs. Democrats, it is a problem of federal, state, and local buearacrats administering us instead of governing us. It 10 to 12 years of Republicans being in the majority in the house of reps to currupt them into big government shitheads, or at least enough of them to form a coalition of turds!

  45. #45 |  claude | 

    ” My whole point is that this site is dedicated to the election of democrats”

    I have really got to stop drinking a can of soda as i read this stuff. Man, the mess i have made of the keyboard. My ribs also hurt from laughter.

  46. #46 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #15 | Michael Pack — “In a perfect world Walter Williams would be President and Andrew Napolitano would be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.”

    My oh my, what a limited imagination you have Michael. In a perfect world, there would be no President and Supreme Court.

  47. #47 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #18 | ktc2 — ROFL. Palin / Barbour 2012!! Oh your god, the Rs are going to get their ass handed to them if they can’t do better than that.

    There are so many bon mots in that short post, I don’t know where to start giving credit.

    I’ll add one more. Our host was pumping Sanford until, oh, a couple of weeks ago. Now that’s a ROFLMAO if I ever saw one.

  48. #48 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #24 | John Jenkins — “Well Mark, in this country, when we are unhappy with the current administration, the solution is that we elect a new one.”

    Pardon me for butting in, but that’s some solution.

    What was the problem again?

  49. #49 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #38 | Les — “Mark, this really isn’t the place for knee-jerk partisan loyalists. Sarah Palin is a proven liar and opportunist the same way Obama is.”

    Of course she is, Les. She’s a politician. As with all politicians, the lying starts with the first movement of the lips.

    Distinctions without difference.

  50. #50 |  Mark Seven | 

    Wow! This is the most action this mausoleum of a site has seen in a long time.

  51. #51 |  Cynical in CA | 

    Your ad nauseums — er, ad hominems aside, Mark, you ain’t seen nothin’ ’til there’s a puppycide post. Good for 100 comments every time.

    If it were ever discovered that Haley Barbour slaughters puppies, the server here would instantly shut down.

  52. #52 |  Tokin42 | 

    I’m curious, was Mark actually banned or was there a little confusion? Radleys pointed out that he’s disagreed with and even a little disturbed with a couple of my posts but I’ve never been threatened with a ban. That’s one of the things I like about this comment section, not everyone agrees. Crap, I disagree with Dave K. 30% of the time but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t enjoy having a beer, or three, with him. Same goes for Crawford, wherever he is. Lets face it, some of you are short-sighted assholes, but that’s what makes it interesting.

    Mark obviously feels a little strongly about Haley and other than calling the agitator a liberal shill I didn’t see anything that crossed the ban line.

  53. #53 |  JS | 

    Tokin “Lets face it, some of you are short-sighted assholes, but that’s what makes it interesting.”

    lol brilliant!

  54. #54 |  Judi | 


    Just felt compelled to throw that in the mix.


  55. #55 |  Hut | 

    Regarding being banned: I’ve had several comments that I’ve written never appear. And the comments, although probably contrary to the views on here, were never offensive or threatening. It seems clear that Radley selectively edits what can be included and what can’t. I’m not sure why my comments were deleted I was prevented from posting, only Radley can answer that.

    I will be surprised if this comment actually make it.

  56. #56 |  Les | 

    Hut, it’s very possible, in fact probable, that the reason has nothing to do with Radley. If he hasn’t blocked Eric Dondero’s comments, he’s sure not going to block yours.

  57. #57 |  Cynical in CA | 

    And with the mention of Dondero, Les wins the thread.

  58. #58 |  Jon H | 

    “Regarding being banned: I’ve had several comments that I’ve written never appear.”

    Could be caught in a spam filter. Over at the balloon juice blog, comments that use the word socialism or its variants get thrown into moderation, because of the part of the word that starts with c and ends with s, which happens to be the name of a pharmaceutical beloved of spammers.

    If something similar is the case here, then comments might not appear until Radley has the chance to go through the spam filter and rescue non-spam comments. That could take a while, as he has a life.

  59. #59 |  Wavemancali | 


    I don’t think Radley selectively edits like you’ve suggested. I think it much more likely that it’s an issue with server/client connection and the script used to post comments.

    I’ve tried to post things that have not shown up, I’ve copied them to a text file on my desktop and tried to post them a couple of hours later and voila they show up.

    No matter how much I try to assert it as fact, apparently not everyone is out to get me.

  60. #60 |  SusanK | 

    Can’t believe I added karma for being called a “short-sighted asshole.” Actually, I’m sure Tokin42 didn’t mean me. :)

  61. #61 |  Michael Chaney | 

    I don’t mind being wrong, but the link this morning and your comments were rather incongruous. Thanks for setting the record straight.

  62. #62 |  tarran | 

    I’ve had a comment disappear; a long time ago I wrote something that could be construed, if you squinted real hard, as a threat against Bush (it wasn’t, merely an observation that ithere were alot of people who wanted him dead).

    It was clearly removed, Radley never contacted me, and it didn’t bother me a whit since I figure it’s his property.

    But it does happen on occasion.

  63. #63 |  SJE | 

    When I submit things they post immediately. The times they don’t is because of some computer glitch or because I did something stupid. I think Radley has better things to do (like playing with Daisy!) than to edit/block my posts or anyone else, except the worst trolls.

  64. #64 |  claude | 

    I’ve posted a few comments that went into hyperspace and never showed up. Each one had contained a link. I think it had something to do with the address used. Reposting the comment and taking the “http” off of it worked. It had nothing to do with Radley. It’s not really my place to speak for the man, but I feel pretty comfortable in saying that Radley isnt going to not let your comment be posted simply because he may not like it. He has no problem with differing view points and freedom of speech. If he did have a problem with that, it would sorta defeat the purpose for a site like this to exist. Unless its the first time you’ve posted with that user name/email address, your comment posts automatically (is supposed to anyhow). Its only the first time you post with a different user name/email that your comments await moderation. I think some of you might be witnessing server issues, as some others have suggested. Just the other day i was unable to get the site to load for quite a while.

  65. #65 |  claude | 

    In fact i think ill test that hyperlink problem. Bay image addresses were what used to disappear all the time on me so if this post shows up, that problem is no longer there.

  66. #66 |  Matt D | 

    I guess sometimes this needs to be spelled out:

    White people are the majority in this country and hold a larger still majority of its political and economic power. When white Americans were last racist in large numbers, we had slavery. We had a civil war. We had lynchings. We had segregation. We had decades of brutality and discrimination. We only emerged just recently from that era–people nearing retirement age today lived through the civil rights movement. The reason Obama gets a “pass” about his former minister is that most people recognizing him as a slightly crackpotty guy, and not a potential harbinger of atrocity.

  67. #67 |  Cornellian | 

    “I am going to forward Balko’s insinuation on to the Gov. office and see what they have to say. Hopefully he’ll file a law suit against Balko!”

    Hopefully Gov. Barbour will read the First Amendment before choosing to waste money on such a lawsuit!

  68. #68 |  JThompson | 

    A post might’ve just gotten lost in transit somehow. Hardware and software glitches are known to occur.

    From what I’ve seen, Balko’s got a pretty light hand on the moderation button. I’ve only ever had one post not posted. Glitches aside, it’s probably because I got a bit too worked up and I was being a complete asshat and said some things specifically to piss people off without really adding anything useful. Exactly what moderation should be used for, imo.

  69. #69 |  ParatrooperJJ | 

    I take it you are anti private schools?

  70. #70 |  flukebucket | 

    “The reason Obama gets a “pass” about his former minister is that most people recognizing him as a slightly crackpotty guy, and not a potential harbinger of atrocity.”

    Obama or Wright? ;-)

  71. #71 |  Dakota | 

    Yo, Mark Seven, its one thing to disagree with RB’s post, its quite another to just be down right nasty, and expose yourself as a flat earther. If you’re looking for a site that won’t call out Republican politicians you should probably click the little red x at the top left of your explorer window right now.

    Oh and as far as comment editing? Dude, highly doubt RB would edit them, or filter them. The agitiator hummed along for at least two years with no comments. I get the feeling that the minute the comments consume any signifigant time for RB they will be 86’ed again, as they should be. He has better things to do, like write.

  72. #72 |  Mark Seven | 

    It’s my understanding that Balko grew up in a union household and views Republicans as evil, which is fine, but don’t claim to be a libertarian! Also, a lot of the folks here come close to defending Robert Byrd, or at least downplaying his role in the KKK. That tells me a lot about the cross section of folks that read this site. And one last thing, so many commenters sound like they might squirt a tear because I was “mean”. Grow up! No wonder so many of you can’t find work and smoke pot in the basement all day, some guy you don’t know tells you you’re stupid and you break down. I imagine if your boss calls you in the office for being late for work you’d head straight to HR with tears in your eyes. God help this once great country!

  73. #73 |  Cynical in CA | 

    Please keep coming back Mark. You add a different perspective on the issues and are a wonderful study in human behavior.

  74. #74 |  Fluffy | 

    Mark, you’re just embarrassing yourself.

    “This site is dedicated to the election of Democrats.” There was no need for you to continue with your one-man idiocy clinic after that one, you had already taken home the gold there.

    Maybe it only appears to you that Radley hates Republicans because he focuses primarily on civil liberties concerns and the GOP does everything it can to shit all over civil liberties at every opportunity.

    Don’t worry, now that Obama has taken Bush’s spot in the “Let’s crap on the Constitution” porta-potty that is the White House these days, now Radley goes after him instead.

  75. #75 |  Radley Balko | 

    “Mark” is done.

    He’s been banned from this site under other names for trolling and for personal attacks on me (and, weirdly, my family). The last time I banned him, it was for posting graphic depictions of sex acts between me and Andrew Sullivan (he seems to be strangely obsessed with Sullivan and Sullivan’s sexuality).

    This, by the way…..”It’s my understanding that Balko grew up in a union household and views Republicans as evil…” is just straight fiction.

    No one in my family belongs to a union. I grew up in a conservative household, in one of the most conservative counties in one of the most conservative states in the country. I voted straight-ticket Republican for the first three elections in which I could vote.

    I’m sure he’ll pop up again. He usually posts a few normal comments under a new name so he gets first-time approval. Then he starts up with the same crap again.

  76. #76 |  thomasblair | 

    Jesus Fucking Christ, Mark Seven!

    ~Republican =/= Democrat

    Face reality.