"Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Robert Byrd is 85 years old. He has served in the Senate for 45 years, since 1958. He served as the ranking Senate Democrat (majority or minority leader) for 11 years -- 1977-88. In 2000, voters elected Byrd to an eigth consecutive term in the Senate, making him the only person in the history of the Republic to achieve that milestone.

This is how his life started:

Born in 1917 in North Wilkesboro, North Carolina, Robert Byrd was left a virtual orphan by the death of his mother when he was only one year old. Brought to West Virginia by his aunt and uncle to be reared as their own, the future Senator grew up in various communities in the bituminous coalfields, mastering life's early lessons and learning its duties as a miner's son, and graduating as valedictorian of his high school class in the depths of the Great Depression in the 1930s.

Here is the dirt on his seamy personal life:

He is married to the former Erma Ora James, his high school sweetheart and a coal miner's daughter.

I am not a Democrat. I am sure that if were to examine all of Byrd's history in the Senate, I would find dozens of cases in which I disagreed with his position. But that he has served his state and this nation with the utmost distinction is beyond debate. This man has served in the highest legislative body in the land, not for an era, but for an age: from Eisenhower to Kennedy, Johnson to Nixon, Ford to Carter, Reagan to Bush, Clinton to the present day.

Robert Byrd was also the only senior member of Congress to oppose, vocally and continuously, this administration's reckless pursuit of war.

Here is one example:

To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences. On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.

Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.

We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events....

And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the recent history of the world.

This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list.

And now we see Byrd reap the whirlwind for standing up to Bush.

Bill Frist, Bush's hand-picked choice as Senate Majority Leader, and a member of the Senate since 1994, believes that May 2003 is the perfect time to attack Byrd for his dusty KKK past:

Wednesday, May 7, 2003 8:13 p.m. EDT

Frist: Byrd's KKK Past a Legitimate Issue

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., broke a cardinal rule of modern Washington politics Wednesday afternoon when he dared to point out that Sen. Robert Byrd's 1940s membership in the Ku Klux Klan might be a relevant issue.

Asked whether Byrd's night-riding, hood-wearing days were an appropriate target of criticism in light of last year's Trent Lott fiasco, Frist told nationally syndicated radio host Sean Hannity, "It's fair, it's fair."

"We always have to be careful in politics to draw too straight a line from the past. But I think the facts are the facts and they say something about the person. And therefore, I think, of course it's fair [to bring it up.]," the Senate's top Republican said.

Frist suggested that Byrd's criticism on Tuesday of President Bush's decision to visit the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln last week was tainted by his former membership in the anti-black hate group.

"Clearly a person is their past combined with the reflection of statements that are being made at any point in time," he told Hannity.

In no way am I defending the KKK or Byrd's association with it. What I am showing is that these men, these monstrous killers in the White House, will stop at nothing to eliminate and intimidate their opposition.

They will kill us all -- all who oppose their will -- one by one. They will sift through the garbage of our lives, until they find something, anything, with which to ruin us.

And then you will know the true vengeance of these men, when there is no one left to resist them.

"Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

[Johnny Punani2]

Run chicken little run!!!!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[fansince62]

56.....my reaction also...you beat me to it!!!....:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

byrd..."he fiddled while Rome burned"....or was it "Iraq burned"....can never get the two straight.....a clown whose time has come and gone......speaking of term limits!!!!!

[Riggo-toni]

Um, dude,

I agree it's pretty pointless to bring this up now, but you're acting like W invented this kind of tactic.:doh: Remember Bork? Zoe?Lott? The Dems have been playing the race card to smear several W. Bush judicial nominations.

What about the fact that Byrd, the most profligate, wasteful, porkbarrel spender in the history of congress had the nerve to complain about Bush's carrier landing as being too much taxpayer expense!! Man, talk about hypocritical.:gus:

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by 56Arrington56

Run chicken little run!!!!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

According to Art and confirmed by Air Sarge, we just slaughtered up to a quarter million people.

If true, that's more than the combined U.S. deaths in World War I, the Korean War, and Vietnam.

Somehow, that's funny to you.

[Johnny Punani2]

Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan

According to Art and confirmed by Air Sarge, we just slaughtered up to a quarter million people.

If true, that's more than the combined U.S. deaths in World War I, the Korean War, and Vietnam.

Somehow, that's funny to you.

Chicken Little,

Don't try and put words in my mouth by implying that what I said was in referance to Iraqi casualites.

Also, I case you never heard of this what frisk is doing is called politics. If you think the Dems wouldn't attack the Rep Party if one of it's members was prior KKK you are even more retarded that I thought. Byrd is still a racist whether you or the democratic party wants to believe it . I guess you forgot the nice little interview he gave a couple of years back where he used the phrase "White N-word" about 50 times and looked like the poster boy for bigots.

Your whole thesis of Frisk attacking Byrd as some sort of diabolical Bush administration plot of world control is about the biggest hunk of sh*t I've ever seen. Who do you think you are Oliver Stone?

[fansince62]

ASF....quit playing your nuanced word games.......whatever the numbers are........slaughtered a quarter million people is not the same as slaughtered a quarter million armed combatants.....

btw...how about doing some private math of your own: how many troops in an Iraqi division? how many divisions were decimated? what are reported civilian casualties?

generally, in war, the injury factor exceeds the kill factor by orders of magnitude.........why not in this instance?...we aren't hearing stories of half a mil to a million injuries........

what is the "appropriate" number to have killed? what's the unacceptable threshhold? you have an American for Iraqi first derivative in mind?

[Art]

ASF,

I believe it is remarkably telling that Robert Byrd joins you in staunch opposition to President Bush. One man being a Klan member and another actually citing LaRouche for support. If this is the depth of support for one's position it must be said, Bush is sitting awfully pretty right at this moment.

It also strikes me as somewhat odd, ASF, that you are so upset by the masterful, precision killing we accomplished against the Iraqi Army. Isn't that the point? I mean, we're not engaging in a massive paint ball tourney with Iraq. We're trying to scare their soldiers into fleeing. That worked outstandingly well.

Soldiers south of Baghdad melted away and didn't fight as we raced to the capital. Only the most hard core remained, and they were destroyed, wonderfully, by our troops. Yes, it was amusing watching Iraqi tanks sitting under bridges and being blown apart, killing all within. Amusing they thought they could hide from our fury and terrible power.

Personally, I'm THRILLED so many of their troops died. It means there are very few left to actually cause problems later. I'm not sure where you've gone mental exactly on the whole issue, but, clearly, your rest away from here did not help you in terms of providing any thing of value.

Alas, I'm sure you will not hear this coming from a murderous SUV driver who believes when I transmit my child porn and terrorist plans over governmentally held lines that I reasonably can't assert the government is invading my privacy. However, if reason does reach you again, let me just say, settle down.

[redman]

I just love how Senator Byrd, whose never met a pork barrel program for his state he couldn't pass, is all up in arms for Bush using government resources for his own political gain by landing on an aircraft carrier.

"I'm shocked, shocked to find gambling in this establishment!"

"Your winnings, sir."

"Thank you."

[Sarge]

Byrd paved the entire state of West Virginia with governnent...er..taxpayer money. He moved half the government out there too. He even wanted to move the Coast Guard HQ to WV. Bur he's gonna b!tch about a flight to a carrier. Dementia has indeed set in with him. And I guess turn about is fair play, or have we forgotten about Bennett so quickly? A private citizen no less, that was held up to media scutiny. Why can't something in a poitician's passt be brought under the same light?

[Glenn X]

Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan

According to Art and confirmed by Air Sarge, we just slaughtered up to a quarter million people.

If true, that's more than the combined U.S. deaths in World War I, the Korean War, and Vietnam.

Somehow, that's funny to you.

Fool, get over yourself. You're the same guy who once chuckled at the death of a child because you found it be Coen Brothers-esque or something.

ASF, you're just like your newfound hero Senator Byrd: a hypocrite.

Seriously, ASF, there have been times when I've been willing to listen to (which is to say momentarily entertain) your rants, but then you always go and say something so patently stupid that it just makes me roll my eyes, sigh in disbelief, and click my browser closed.

To wit: the 9/11 situation.

I was at least willing to listen to what you had to say... till you got to the part about kinda believing the loons who allege that 9/11 was perpetrated by the CIA and Israel's Mossad, not Al Qaeda. ASF, don't you realize that when you fall in with supremely loony people who make supremely loony claims like this (and it's not just Amiri Baraka who spouts this nonsense, either; no, David Duke also blames "the dirty Jewish state and its well-placed Zionist co-conspirators in the U.S." for the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington), it only makes you look supremely loony by association?

[Cskin]

Is it even remotely possible that the Israelis would have something to do with the destruction on 9-11? Are we not in a position now, nearly two years later, to confront and subsequently destroy all of Israel's sworn enemies? Wouldn't that be their aim in plotting such a deception? Is it not unreasonable to assume that there is an underlying plot to take away our civil liberties under the guise of a national terrorist event and subsequent Homeland / Patriot legislation in the name of protecting us? I must say, if you're not at least worried about the news of increased invasions of privacy of everyday citizens and the technological advances which inable the federal govt. to keep tabs on you than you simply are suffering from HIS (Head in Sand) syndrome.

Has anyone heard of the Balfour Declaration.... in which the Jews of Germany plotted with Britain to get the US into the war and subsequently destroy their own homeland so as to secure their reward (The land of Israel) after the war when the spoils were being divided up?

Is there anyone out there still buying the "magic bullet" theory of Nov. 1963? Can we be so blind as to believe the Warren Commision wasn't compromised by some high level authority who never wanted the truth revealed? Can anyone explain why key evidence was destroyed, key witnesses killed, and other mystery figures of the Zapruder film were never found?

Come on.... anything is possible..... and it's not like our govt. as a spotless reputation when it comes to deceit and lies in order to facilitate a wanted cause.

[codeorama]

Originally posted by Cskin

Is it even remotely possible that the Israelis would have something to do with the destruction on 9-11? Are we not in a position now, nearly two years later, to confront and subsequently destroy all of Israel's sworn enemies?

That would be their motive. Some say Roosevelt knew that the Japaneese were going to bomb pearl harbor and he allowed it so that the population would support the war.

BTW, I don't believe this stuff, I just wanted to point out that if you want to talk conspiracy theories, Isreal's motive would be that now, we are eliminating all of their enemies. Kind of like if Hitler had attacked the US and made it look like Britian did it.

[Kilmer17]

Your tin-hat is in the mail.

[codeorama]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

Your tin-hat is in the mail.

Hey, I said I don't believe it.. and I honestly don't. But it's not hard to see why some would grasp this line of thinking.

[Sarge]

Is it not unreasonable to assume that there is an underlying plot to take away our civil liberties under the guise of a national terrorist event and subsequent Homeland / Patriot legislation in the name of protecting us?

OK, name a right or civil liberty that has been taken away from you personally, or from anyone you know for that matter, since 9/11. I've asked this question before, and no one amidst the shrill cry of, "My rights are being taken away by George Bush!" has been able to name one. Have a shot.

[Glenn X]

codeorama, I believe that tin-hat comment of Kilmer's was directed at Cskin.

And rightfully so.

[codeorama]

Originally posted by Glenn X

codeorama, I believe that tin-hat comment of Kilmer's was directed at Cskin.

And rightfully so.

Oh.. ok.. and sorry.

I will totally admit to being a conspiracy buff, but this is a bit much for me...

[stratoman]

cskin, are you hitting on the same crack pipe as ASF and Jackc??:puke:

[Glenn X]

:laugh:

[gbear]

Last week, I discovered a right that had been taken away from me.

I was on my way to a business conference in MN. I got to my room, caught a good nights sleep and woke up the next morning ready to go. Evidently, I missed the memo when it comes to packing razors.

From my bag, the gillete razor had been pilfored. Now I understand not wanting me to have that in my carry on, but in my checked bags? I thought that was a little overboard. As a side note, it would be nice if they left a note or something if they take things from the bag. Atleast then I would have woken up early enough to go get another one. Seriously though, that's really minor.

Don't miss the point though Airsarge. Of the three gay couples I know on a friendly (as apposed to casual basis), not one of them has ever been busted for sodomy in any state. I guess under your arguement you use could tell them don't worry about it. The arguement could even have been used for the couple whose case is before the supreme court.

Once it's on the books, it can and probably will happen somewhere when an overenthusiastic attourny or a pissed off cop decided to enforce the law as written.

Now how much of a problem that really represents to society is a question I don't know how to answer. I've always suspected it is a very minor threat to society so long as most of us believe it can't or won't happen to us or anybody we know. Our system of laws is really only as good as our belief in it. If people start to believe things are unequal before the law or that silly laws will be enforced malicously, that's a recipe for revolt. In fact, our law system bends over backwards often to the point of sillyness to avoid that appearance. So long as stories of people getting away with crimes due to procedure or other sillyness are far more common than stories of bad enforcement (or good enforcement of bad laws), I doubt there will be any problem.

[Henry]

Has anyone heard of the Balfour Declaration.... in which the Jews of Germany plotted with Britain to get the US into the war and subsequently destroy their own homeland so as to secure their reward (The land of Israel) after the war when the spoils were being divided up?

With all due respect, Cskin. I know quite a few of Jews in question, and I can say without reservation that they never dropped a line to Winston during WWII.

A good idea would be for you to step back, and right quickly.

[Cskin]

With all due respect, Cskin. I know quite a few of Jews in question, and I can say without reservation that they never dropped a line to Winston during WWII.

I may have mispoken, or at the very least constructed my sentence incorrectly and poorly. I'm also not lopping all of the Jewish faith together in a big pile for judgement. I'm talking about a small minority of Jewish German citizens, a group with power and influence whom very cleverly realized how to come about a preferred end result.

For all others.... I specifically created the post as a list of questions to spark debate. I don't think there in the post are the words..."I believe"..... "My thoughts are"..... "it is my conviction"...... or "I'll go to my grave thinking"....... I do however, believe that the motives and intentions of our federal govt. should be pondered and explored with an open mind. I think you'll find that our forefathers had the foresight to understand that the govt. they envisioned had the potential to revert to a tyranny in an instant. The moment we start taking the govt. at face value and believing they are ALWAYS acting in our best interest, that will be the day we'll wake up without rights alltogether.

As for civil liberties being risked. I believe tapping my phone to ascertain without prior probable cause whether I am indeed a terrorist plotting to destroy the country is indeed endangering my civil liberties. And... should I have a blueprinted plan to put up a basketball goal up in my backyard and it is interpreted that it is in some way a terrorist plot and I'm subsequently taken in custody for an undetermined amount of time and labled a terrorist is endangering my civil liberties. Furthermore, I'm not fond of the federal govt. having the mechanism to see where I spend my hard earned money.... how much I have in my bank accounts.... where I shop...... where I vacation......and etc. In a simple phrase, it's none of their business and it is not a function assigned to them by the constitution.

[codeorama]

No one can really dispute that over the US's 200 years, our government has done some pretty shady things that the average person would not approve of. Anyone who thinks that the government is spueaky clean is just as out there as some of the recent threads.

[Sarge]

And... should I have a blueprinted plan to put up a basketball goal up in my backyard and it is interpreted that it is in some way a terrorist plot and I'm subsequently taken in custody for an undetermined amount of time and labled a terrorist is endangering my civil liberties.