Senate to Atone for Lynching Ban Delays

"The Senate seldom says it's sorry, although it is now ready to officially express its remorse over the failure to outlaw lynching in the United States. A resolution that the chamber was likely to take up Monday voices regret for the Senate's unwillingness for years to pass a law stopping a crime that cost the lives of over 4,700 people, mostly blacks, between 1882 and 1968....read on"

I never realized that it was legal in the first place. How sick is that? The fact that it was then allowed to last until 1968 is unimaginable. Read this exchange if you want to have your stomach turned from History Matters In the following testimony to a House subcommittee, four Southern Congressmen discussed their reasons for opposing what they deemed federal interference in state judicial responsibilities and defend segregation and the “peaceful relations now existing between white man and Negro” in the South. Congressman Charles E. Bennett (Florida) also offered his historical explanation for lynching. read the full transcript.

Try to figure out what group of people are being targeted now. Also, some from the right will try to equate these types of filibusters to what is going on in the judiciary. I doubt they can see how contemptable that comparison is.

I had conversations with people today that said, "Why didn't she say something the first time he did that?" I replied - if I cried sexual harassment every time a man said something that could even be REMOTELY Construed as a sexual comment - I would still be screaming. I know from Personal experience - most of the time - if it is only once or twice - you just kinda roll your eyes and hope it goes away- as a mater of fact... you are so taken off guard - you can't even respond - and then when it is your BOSS!! Ugh!! You are really between a rock and a hard place( no pun intended) -When I was 16 - my boss asked me to come to the back office - he closed the door and started to kiss me - I pulled away and told my mother - she said she didn't know what to do(1968). Because of my refusing his advances - I got fired - at least that is why I think I was fired - I was a good worker - Hey - just a month ago -some dufus in the middle of a business call asked me if he could come over and "rub my feet" - It is more rampant than people actually know!!

Je T'aime...Moi Non Plus from Jane Birkin et Serge Gainsbourg

From the YouTube description:

In 1968 Gainsbourg had written "Je t'aime, moi non plus", an explicitly erotic song which he had recorded with Brigitte Bardot. After the pair's relationship had ended, Bardot begged Gainsbourg not to release the recording as a single and Gainsbourg, the perfect gentleman, respected her wishes. However, in 1969 Jane recorded the notorious song as a duet with Gainsbourg and it appeared on the pair's joint album "Jane Birkin et Serge Gainsbourg".

When "Je t'aime moi non plus" was released as a single later that year it caused an absolute scandal. Indeed, Gainsbourg's erotic lyrics and Jane's passionate whispering totally outraged public opinion. The international press attacked the song's "lewd" message, radios banned it from their playlists and the Vatican went so far as to issue a statement condemning the immoral nature of the song. In short, "Je t'aime moi non plus" benefited from a huge amount of free publicity and rocketed straight to the top of the charts, selling around a million copies in the space of just a few months. Needless to say, Gainsbourg and Birkin became the most scandalous couple of the year and their relationship became the subject of intense media scrutiny.

The Opinion Mill's Sunday Bookchat: 1968 revisited — "What journalists have forgotten about covering political conventions! What wingnuts need to learn about Winston Churchill! What George F. Will needs to learn about book reviewing!"

Daily Howler: Remember a key rule of "liberal" journalism — praise McCain's honesty and honor, especially while reporting his dishonesty and dishonorable conduct.

Lance Mannion: A key concept of liberalism explained in seven sentences (well, really five, but you'll see).

Tom Dispatch: Changing the world, one camera shot at a time. Myanmar/Burma: Why the U.N. and the U.S. should invade Myanmar (but can't), why we shouldn't, and why such actions shouldn't be taken lightly.

The Neocons: Neither honesty, nor reason, nor shame, shall keep them from their self-appointed rounds of starting another unnecessary war.

Guest roundup by Batocchio. That's it for me for now! Next up is Media Bloodhound. Please send your tips and suggestions to mediabloodhound at yahoo dot com. Thanks!

From 1968 -- Cream, Sunshine Of Your Love

The Sunday Talking Head line-up is ready for reading. Newt Gingrich will be on This Week, no doubt explaining why he's on the off-again cycle of his flirtation with a presidential run -- fickle little odious bastard, isn't he? Bill Clinton is making the rounds following the Clinton Global Initiative Summit in NYC. Otherwise, it's a roundup of the usual suspects -- with the exception of a Seymour Hersh interview set for CNN which ought to be intriguing and scary at the same time.

What's catching your eye in the news or on the blogs this morning?

Reax to his USA TODAY editorial.

Then there's Jonah Goldberg's Op-Ed in USA Today. He used the occasion not to try to come to grips with that war but denounce those -- mainly, he said, "liberal baby boomers" -- who on a "near-daily" basis link Iraq to Vietnam. He said they are simply filled with "nostalgia" for their glory days of antiwar hedonism.

Attempting to bolster this argument, Goldberg charged the boomers aren’t even in touch with the facts: namely, the Vietnam war wasn’t among the most unpopular in our history. His one piece of evidence: someone named Sol Tax of the University of Chicago who apparently claimed, in a 1968 study, that Vietnam ranked as only "the fourth or seventh least-popular war in American history." read on

This is priceless.

via The DC Media Girl

(Update)-"CBS video clip from September 25th, 1968 w/ Cronkite regarding the
Senate using the filibuster on President Johnson's nomination to replace
Earl Warren with Abe Fortas as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court by GOP
Sen. Robert Griffin (a move Bill Frist now describes as "unprecedented").

Download | play -WMP

(hat tip to Jeff)

via Air America: The Washington Post has more background on the 68' case.

October 2nd, 1968 Johnson withdraws Fortas nomination, the day after Senate refused to end
it's Fillibuster.

Download | play -WMP

I'll have more tomorrow. This proves that the filibuster has been around a long time and used by the GOP.
Update- From wikipedia: "In 1965, Lyndon Johnson persuaded Supreme Court Associate Justice Arthur Goldberg to resign his seat to become Ambassador to the United Nations. He then appointed his long time friend, Abe Fortas, to the court. Fortas was initially reluctant to give up his substantial salary, but he eventually accepted.

When Chief Justice Earl Warren announced his retirement in June 1968, Johnson nominated Fortas to replace Warren as Chief Justice."

DonkeyRising

Philip Klinkner, posting in the blog Polysigh, provides some very interesting National Election Study (NES) data on the terrorism issue and its influence on the 2004 election. Here are some of his key findings, but check out his full post for much more:

The NES includes a question, “What do you think has been the most important issue facing the United States over the last four years?” In 2004, terrorism and the war in Iraq clearly dominated voters minds. Approximately 42 percent of voters cited terrorism as the most important issue.....
For one issue to so dominate an election is rare. In fact, the last time that an issue was cited by this many respondents was in 1968 when 43 percent cited the Vietnam War.....

Moreover, President Bush dominated on the issue of terrorism. Among those who cited terrorism as the most important issue, 70 percent voted for Bush. That’s the highest percentage of supporting a candidate on the most important issue in any election since 1960 (when NES first began to ask the question).

Um...        The Island of Balta

BAD ATTITUDES
From Chomsky’s “Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship” (1968):

If it is plausible that ideology will in general serve as a mask for self-interest, then it is a natural presumption that intellectuals, in interpreting history or formulating policy, will tend to adopt an elitist position, condemning popular movements and mass participation in decision-making, and emphasizing rather the necessity for supervision by those who possess the knowledge and understanding that is required (so they claim) to manage society and control social change.

I’m belatedly drawn to add my voice to that of the Maestro, as well as some of the most intelligent observers of politics and diplomacy, in recognizing the passing of an American of great stature, George Kennan, who died on March 17.

“He was a giant. Many people have called him the most important foreign service officer of the past half-century,” said his son-in-law, Kevin Delany of Washington. “He was a very thoughtful man with an elegant writing style.”

His thoughtful character and many accomplishments interest me because they seem to embody some of the things Chomsky talks about, while contradicting others ...Read on