George Will and the Lester Maddox Question

Lewrockwell.com ^ | November 14, 2002 | Myles Kantor

[Hanging Chad]

"...under the US constitution, that is simply not true..."

Since when did a statement "not being true" bother a liberal democrat?

THAT is the problem. People with ethics and character try to be factual. The sheep are easily misled. The sheep find the truth to be boring.

[Hanging Chad]

Do you want "Equal Rights or "Special Rights", which is it?

[Riverman94610]

I remember in 1972 when Maddox had his souvenir stand down in Underground Atlanta.I saw several blacks inside his store and it didn't seem like he was particulary agonized about that fact.
Passing out ax handles for yahoos to beat up black people with like he did back in 1964 was an affront to human decency and gave the Communists much grist for their propaganda mills.
Riverman

[manfromlamancha]

Violation of the Interstate Commerce Act. Maddox was wrong.

[manfromlamancha]

Violation of Interstate Commerce. Maddox was wrong.

[manfromlamancha]

That is one piece of judicial activism I happen to like. (However, Private Property is very important)

[gatex]

"The Northern cities were just as guilty, in a different way.)"

I took delight in helping integrate a New Jersey apartment complex where I lived that refused to rent to several black employees who were being transferred from Atlanta -- the apartment said they had no vacancies. As I jogged at night, I made a list of aparments that had been vacant for some time (I was already living there).

The company manager called with the list of aparatments and said he wanted them -- and he got them.

With the same transfer from Atlanta, a Caucasion woman married to a Chinese chemist had difficulty finding a house in New Jersey --- the people who were so smug about calling Southerners prejudiced turned out to be very prejudiced and bigoted themselves.

[gatex]

"A restaurant in Atlanta is not engaged in interestate commerce. The interpretation of the interstate commerce clause which you use could be used to justify anything at all."

As I recall, this was a big factor in the Maddox case. The feds found cars in the parking lot with out of state license and said that Maddox was engaging in interstate commerce.

Justice Ginsburg said on C-Span that "with interstate commerce, anything goes."

[Huck]

Wait a minute -- you're blaming Faubus, Bilbo, Talmadge, Thurmond, et al., for the acts of Earl Warren and Hubert Humphrey?? And next I suppose you'll blame Ronald Reagan for Hillarycare! Pretzel logic

Blame? No, I wouldn't go that far. But I am saying that the segregationists in the South created conditions ripe for political exploitation by the left. If you go back to, say, the Scottsboro boys, you see the process in action.

As for Hillarycare, I don't have any idea what Ronald Reagan has to do with it. But here is an analogy that may make things clearer: If it weren't for Jimmy Carter's disasterous policy failures in the late 70s, there probably would not have been a Reagan revolution. Now, is that blaming Reagan on Carter? I don't think so. It is acknowledging, however, that Jimmy Carter's policies created the conditions which allowed Reagan to be politically successful.

Back to blacks, the Warren Court, and Lester Maddox: IMO, black voters typically side with the Feds over the states for very practical reasons: the states have not been a very reliable source of protection for them, the Feds (under leftist control, have. Had the states, particularly in the South, done a better job, we might have more state control today. Conditions and consequences.

[Huck]

the people who were so smug about calling Southerners prejudiced turned out to be very prejudiced and bigoted themselves.

Sad but true.

[Marysecretary]

Hmm, probably equal?

[Hanging Chad]

You say:
"...Passing out ax handles for yahoos to beat up black people with like he did back in 1964..."

It is hard for me to understand what you mean with this sentence.
Do you mean to say:
"...passing out ax handles like he (Lester Maddox) did in 1964..."?
Or do you mean to say:
"...Beating up black people like he (Lester Maddox) did in 1964..."?

By the way, both of these statements would be incorrect.
Lester Maddox never "beat-up" blacks with an axe handle.
Lester Maddox did capitalize on the whole "axe-handle" thing and made quite a few quick bucks from the tourist crowd. Lester Maddox was an entrepeneur and a showman.

Next, you'll be trying to tell me that the people of Georgia elected Lester Maddox as their Governor (which is also not true).

Why don't you try talking about something that you know something about - if that is not the "null" set.

[Marysecretary]

For years people in wheelchairs couldn't cross the streets because of the curbs. They finally did something about that. There are now handicapped bathrooms in most stores, etc. Those were barriers to people before the laws that said they had to put in ramps, bathrooms, etc. No, they weren't barriers specifically built to keep handicapped people out but they weren't able to get in either. Now it's easier for them.

[AppyPappy]

Irrelevant. Jim Crow was a barrier erected to keep out blacks. Curbs were not designed specifically to hinder handicapped people.

[Marysecretary]

I understand that. I was answering someone's question regarding rules that restaurants and businesses have to comply with regarding handicapped persons. Has nothing to do with the Jim Crow situation in the South.