Old Yearbook Scandals

[hobbes2702 12771]

14 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Ooooooh he should be hanged !!!  Being a member of that group , does that make you racist, and unfit for public service ?

It means you think treason should be celebrated. You know that does seem to fit for Mitch.

[jdhorn92 1535]

20 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

There is one thing missing from all this outrage.  Why is VMI not taking any?  What dumbfuck yearbook editor looks at that photo and thinks "there's nothing in that picture that makes my school look bad"?  How bad of a photo did one have to take at VMI in the 1980s before their yearbook editors decided "nope, we better pass on that one"?

That was not a VMI yearbook, which is why it states VMI is the Alma Mater.  This photo was from his Med School year book.  Same question still applies, though not @ VMI.

[EastTexan 662]

On February 1, 2019 at 7:28 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It depends on the truth surrounding the photo.  Like if an investigative journalist went and interviewed old classmates, what would they find? 

 

Not a journalist, but Feinstein and her crew could make up, err, find some bs on the gov.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

It means you think treason should be celebrated. You know that does seem to fit for Mitch.

Jesus Christ, no it does not you ignorant imbecile. Your post is the typical 21c thought process by people who think 19th people had the same concepts of their homes, family, religion, racism, country, loyalty, and America as they do today.

PRO TIP : they didn't.

[hobbes2702 12771]

Oh so you mean they were racist and were willing to die to own people? Or you mean treason was more socially acceptable back then? 

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

11 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Jesus Christ, no it does not you ignorant imbecile. Your post is the typical 21c thought process by people who think 19th people had the same concepts of their homes, family, religion, racism, country, loyalty, and America as they do today.

PRO TIP : they didn't.

Confederates were considered traitors, both then and now. They knew they were traitors to the USA and wanted to be. They hoped to never be part of the USA again.  They just got their asses handed to them. 

The real bullshit is the attempted mid 20th century whitewashing of the meaning of the Confederacy.  They fucking seceded from the USA, taking land with them, swore their allegiance to a new country, and took up arms against the United States. Hard to be more traiterous than that. Far more traiterous than getting on the radio for the Japanese empire, selling nuke secrets to China, or putting Israel's interests before the USA's. 

Edited February 3, 2019 by FondrenRoad

[FondrenRoad 4378]

10 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Oh so you mean they were racist and were willing to die to own people? Or you mean treason was more socially acceptable back then? 

 

Different times, bro. They didn't consider themselves racist. They just thought it was cool to consider a race inferior and to own that race as slaves. Yeah, thats not racist at all. 

[shakahorn 1623]

1 hour ago, Pancho Negro said:

In my 1.5 years at Tech, you knew pretty quickly to stay clear of the KAs

but a KA was in a class of mine and we were in a group project together.  He was actually a nice dude.  

Well yeah, it's like the old joke I first heard about mormons but later about baptists.

Why is it a good idea to take two mormons fishing?

Because if you only take one, he'll drink all your beer.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Seems like it might be Northam's friend in the blackface:

https://twitter.com/badluck_jones/status/1091958460919406597/photo/1

If so, Northam fucked up by admitting it was him and then admitting to the MJ blackface.  He still needs to go. 

Edited February 3, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

57 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Confederates were considered traitors, both then and now. They knew they were traitors to the USA and wanted to be. They hoped to never be part of the USA again.  They just got their asses handed to them. 

The real bullshit is the attempted mid 20th century whitewashing of the meaning of the Confederacy.  They fucking seceded from the USA, taking land with them, swore their allegiance to a new country, and took up arms against the United States. Hard to be more traiterous than that. Far more traiterous than getting on the radio for the Japanese empire, selling nuke secrets to China, or putting Israel's interests before the USA's. 

Jesus the uncoordinated idiocy for you never fails to entertain, and scare at the same time.

[hobbes2702 12771]

So they weren’t traitors?

[TwiceHorn 31117]

Saw this in The Atlantic:  https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/02/northam-kkk-resign/581926/

It addresses the things that I find "problematic" with the whole thing and concludes that he should resign:

Quote

Every day for years, Americans have been bombarded with calls to be outraged about matters large, small, and absurd. Given our culture’s inability to reserve stigma for when it is most appropriate, fatigue is inevitable. But every so often, something actually warrants public opprobrium.

 * * *

The affair may stoke the pernicious impulse to dig into people’s distant past. Often, these public airings of old offenses harm innocent people and don’t help anyone at all.

* * * *

Thought it was a good piece, but I find myself unpersuaded by this "breach of trust" notion.  You don't breach trust in a current relationship by something you did 35 years ago, unless maybe you actively concealed it.  I suppose he should probably resign, but the breach of trust rhetoric just doesn't convince me.

Also, as mentioned, I graduated high school 35 years ago.  I went and looked back at my old yearbooks.  I don't remember a single goddamn photo with me in it.  I remember being on the baseball team, the Key Club, and Records and Tapes and other shit, but I remember the exact circumstances of not a single one of the photos.  If it wasn't my own face looking back at me, I wouldn't know.

I have a feeling a lot of people opining on this topic are not even 35 years old.  Is he lying?  Maybe so, probably so.  But it is not implausible that he has no memory of being in that photo.  Not at all if you're honest with yourself about your memory.

Edited February 3, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[NBMisha 224]

Well, being from the south and all, we're supposed to revere our forefathers, whatever bad and good they did.   Same as in... well, never mind that.   They rebelled, got their teeth kicked in, then got away with another century plus of their racist bullshit.  It isn't idiocy to call their acts treacherous. Sure, they didn't think so.  Most criminals don't think they are criminals.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

[TwiceHorn 31117]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

Confederates were considered traitors, both then and now. They knew they were traitors to the USA and wanted to be. They hoped to never be part of the USA again.  They just got their asses handed to them. 

The real bullshit is the attempted mid 20th century whitewashing of the meaning of the Confederacy.  They fucking seceded from the USA, taking land with them, swore their allegiance to a new country, and took up arms against the United States. Hard to be more traiterous than that. Far more traiterous than getting on the radio for the Japanese empire, selling nuke secrets to China, or putting Israel's interests before the USA's. 

Just for the record, the whitewashing of the Confederacy didn't start in the mid 20th century.  It started before the turn of the century, when prominent confederate veterans began to die and the US was mostly populated with those without contemporary knowledge of the Civil War and its causes. And I have found that to be important context to understanding the idolization of confederate generals and other features of the whitewashing.

[Slade 263]

I find it interesting that the same folks that wax poetic about the Confederacy (some to the point of having Civil War re-enactments) and getting angry whenever a Confederate monument is taken down are always quick to tell black people to get over slavery. 

[tantric superman 4667]

Speaking of this, just saw "Do You Wonder Who Fired the Gun".  What a ragey rant of a film.

Bunch of southern white dummies didn't keep their heads or figure out what their good book said.

[hobbes2702 12771]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Saw this in The Atlantic:  https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/02/northam-kkk-resign/581926/

It addresses the things that I find "problematic" with the whole thing and concludes that he should resign:

Thought it was a good piece, but I find myself unpersuaded by this "breach of trust" notion.  You don't breach trust in a current relationship by something you did 35 years ago, unless maybe you actively concealed it.  I suppose he should probably resign, but the breach of trust rhetoric just doesn't convince me.

Also, as mentioned, I graduated high school 35 years ago.  I went and looked back at my old yearbooks.  I don't remember a single goddamn photo with me in it.  I remember being on the baseball team, the Key Club, and Records and Tapes and other shit, but I remember the exact circumstances of not a single one of the photos.  If it wasn't my own face looking back at me, I wouldn't know.

I have a feeling a lot of people opining on this topic are not even 35 years old.  Is he lying?  Maybe so, probably so.  But it is not implausible that he has no memory of being in that photo.  Not at all if you're honest with yourself about your memory.

Who cares if anyone is 35 years old or not? What’s wrong is wrong. This isn’t fucking hard.

[Pancho 44206]

 

[TwiceHorn 31117]

2 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

What’s wrong is wrong. This isn’t fucking hard.

So "wrong" permanently disqualifies you from anything?  Despite 35 years of not doing anything further along the same line?  No redemption.  Glad you aren't involved in the justice system.

The 35 part deals with whether he should remember this or not.  A lot of people seem to think if it appeared in your yearbook it must be indelibly printed in your mind. Because apparently their last yearbook was five years ago.

Did you even read the post?

 

Edited February 4, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

indelibly printed

I see what you did there 

[DixonHur 11017]

5 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Confederates were considered traitors, both then and now.

Apparently not.  I'm pretty sure the penalty for treason is death, yet they lived then and now.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

15 minutes ago, Pancho Negro said:

 

He done.

[TwiceHorn 31117]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I see what you did there 

lol wut?  I didn't intend to do anything there.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

Okay, never mind, thought it was a Blassey Ford reference.

[lemonlime 5503]

14 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

So "wrong" permanently disqualifies you from anything?  Despite 35 years of not doing anything further along the same line?  No redemption.  Glad you aren't involved in the justice system.

The 35 part deals with whether he should remember this or not.  A lot of people seem to think if it appeared in your yearbook it must be indelibly printed in your mind. Because apparently their last yearbook was five years ago.

Did you even read the post?

 

But this isn't the justice system.  It's whether he should continue in a position of great power.  There are plenty of things that make someone not appropriate to be governor or president that aren't illegal and may well be forgivable.  

If he'd stayed a pediatrician no one would have dug this up, and he could continue living as a wealthy doctor with his racist past buried.  And he'd continue treating black children, who statistically in this country receive worse medical care than white children, and no one would be the wiser.

[hobbes2702 12771]

19 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

So "wrong" permanently disqualifies you from anything?  Despite 35 years of not doing anything further along the same line?  No redemption.  Glad you aren't involved in the justice system.

The 35 part deals with whether he should remember this or not.  A lot of people seem to think if it appeared in your yearbook it must be indelibly printed in your mind. Because apparently their last yearbook was five years ago.

Did you even read the post?

 

This isn’t some dude who sold some weed to someone. This also isn’t jail. He isn’t sitting in a cell. He’s sitting in the governors mansion. The idea that he’s facing some sort of great oppression or whatever point you’re trying to make is ridiculous. He is in a position of power and authority. Wearing klan robes or black face disqualifies you from serving in our government, or at least it should. We do not need people with this poor of judgement in government. Again why is this so hard? If this is your judgement at 25 then your judgement sucks and you should never serve. 

And he remembered wearing black face to dress as MJ so why not this? 

Edited February 4, 2019 by hobbes2702

[TwiceHorn 31117]

The point is, notions of redemption apply regardless of whether its something like this, or a more "criminal" event.  This guy did something idiotic and offensive 35 years ago and has been "clean" ever since, presumably (I am assuming the current dirt digger would have found other more current examples of racism or insensitivity).  That counts for a lot in my mind.  I have had and continue to have experiences with personal redemption that others perhaps haven't.  It's an important notion to me.

If it happened five days ago, or five years ago, that might give valid insight as to his current character (and I would agree that that is a breach of trust).  Thirty-five years ago, not so much.

Quote

If this is your judgement at 25 then your judgement sucks and you should never serve. 

This is a glib, facile idea that I will never agree with.

[TwiceHorn 31117]

14 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

And he'd continue treating black children, who statistically in this country receive worse medical care than white children, and no one would be the wiser.

Oh for fucks sake.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

Bottom line is this situation isn’t going to get better for Northam politically.  He might be unfairly bullied out of office but this is the business he has chosen.  

There is a truth around the circumstances of the yearbook photo that can be discovered through some aggressive investigative journalism but chances are very high it won’t be favorable for the governor.  

[TwiceHorn 31117]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Bottom line is this situation isn’t going to get better for Northam politically.  He might be unfairly bullied out of office but this is the business he has chosen.  

There is a truth around the circumstances of the yearbook photo that can be discovered through some aggressive investigative journalism but chances are very high it won’t be favorable for the governor.  

I still cant quite figure for myself if it's unfair or bullying.  On NPR this morning, they had the chairman of the Va. Black Caucus saying he had to go.  But he also said he'd known Northam for many years and considered him a friend and a fine man.  The interviewer didn't push him very hard (as in, you don't think he's shown himself to not be the blackface guy?, or blackface permanently disqualifies no matter how woke he's become?) and he sounded pretty regretful and went off on some tangent about how the Caucus doesn't have friends or enemies, blah blah blah.  It's a tough deal.

[hobbes2702 12771]

Won’t someone think of the rich white people? Poor guys keep getting bullied 

[Bama Chick 28596]

I get people saying “Who remembers every single picture they were in 30 years ago?”.

I don’t.

But I tell you what I do remember.

In my sorority, we dressed up in costumes for socials. So I very much remember taking pictures when I was dressed up as a prison guard or a hooker or the Statue of Liberty or a hippie or a leopard or punk rocker or a nun or a grandma or Hillary Clinton.

My point is when you are in a costume - much less in blackface or in KKK robes - that’s pretty fucking memorable.

If I remember getting my pictures taken because I was dressed up as Hillary Clinton because it was out of the norm for me to be dressed that way, claiming you don’t remember if that was you in the picture of guys in blackface in KKK robes isn’t believable.

Unless of course you dressed that way so often that one such situation doesn’t stand out because it was commonplace.

[TwiceHorn 31117]

We can suppose back and forth all night about his waffling on the photo.  Suffice it to say I don't find it completely implausible that he would accept the identification as him and later say, wait a minute, that isn't me.

Definitely a bad look, though.  That yearbook is weird as hell for a professional graduate school.  Super cringey.

Haha shit, I just remembered that there was a law school yearbook at UT.  I think I have a couple of them lying around.  I literally completely forgot about the Peregrinus until just now.

[tantric superman 4667]

Jesus Christ, I'm just glad it was Latin I managed to get taken off the curriculum at my high school, and not Spanish.

[HornOnTheBayou 8875]

2 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

In my sorority, we dressed up in costumes for socials. So I very much remember taking pictures when I was dressed up as a prison guard or a hooker or the Statue of Liberty or a hippie or a leopard or punk rocker or a nun or a grandma or Hillary Clinton.
 

[Hank Kingsley 20610]

Serwer sums it up nicely. 

 

[RDCanecutter 26199]

14 hours ago, tantric superman said:

Jesus Christ, I'm just glad it was Latin I managed to get taken off the curriculum at my high school, and not Spanish.

Same language, different day.

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

On 2/1/2019 at 6:47 PM, TwiceHorn said:

It's insensitive, sure, and wildly so, but it's clearly some sort of costume party.  If someone goes to a costume party as Hitler, does that make them a Nazi sympathizer or anti-Semite?

You can draw the conclusion that he was something of an insensitive clod or troglodyte, but I don't think you can reasonably conclude that he's a racist from that photo.

I think the guy's record for the past 30 years should trump a youthful case of bad taste.

Now, it may be true that he should have oppo'ed himself.  But I dont remember all the stupid shit I may have done 30 years ago, some or a lot of which may have been inconsistent with my real values.

100%. I'm sick of the faux outrage. It's no wonder good people don't run for office.

[High Plains Drifter 10961]

I think I posted earlier in the thread that he should resign. I was assuming the photo was actually him

But is the photo actually him? There seems to be some doubt.

 

If it is him, he should apologize, resign, and fade into obscurity as a lobbyist immediately.

It its not him, should he resign?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

He said it was him.

Then he said it wasn’t him.

[David Dennison 18503]

3 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

I think I posted earlier in the thread that he should resign. I was assuming the photo was actually him

But is the photo actually him? There seems to be some doubt.

 

If it is him, he should apologize, resign, and fade into obscurity as a lobbyist immediately.

It its not him, should he resign?

Yes, because he's politically impotent as a Democrat if he stays. He might as well switch parties.

[Celery Man 20846]

I understand not remembering photos from old yearbooks.  If it was a photo of him in a skating rink and he was having a hard time recalling ever being in a skating rink during that time but perhaps he was and definitely there was a time later on when he was in a skating rink and he was a little confused about maybe that photo being from then but that was a different time etc - makes sense.

I think it is completely reasonable for Americans in 2019 to want to have moved on from having leaders who see a picture of a guy in blackface standing with someone in a Klan outfit and not being able to definitively state if they are in the picture.  That is not you at a skating rink, that is a picture of two people in shocking and racist costumes that then and now would be meant to be shocking and racist.  If you can't remember that, you are not fit to lead.  If you can't remember that and also cannot be certain that it was not you, you are not fit to lead.  If you do remember that and need time to come up with the best way to lie about it, you are not fit to lead.  If it was you and you own up and explain with sincerity maybe there is a path to retaining your ability to lead.  "It was a different time" - fuck off.

[Dahobbs 17412]

17 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The point is, notions of redemption apply regardless of whether its something like this, or a more "criminal" event.  This guy did something idiotic and offensive 35 years ago and has been "clean" ever since, presumably (I am assuming the current dirt digger would have found other more current examples of racism or insensitivity).  That counts for a lot in my mind.  I have had and continue to have experiences with personal redemption that others perhaps haven't.  It's an important notion to me.

If it happened five days ago, or five years ago, that might give valid insight as to his current character (and I would agree that that is a breach of trust).  Thirty-five years ago, not so much.

This is a glib, facile idea that I will never agree with.

I agree with you to some extent. I don't think it is necessarily fair to demonize someone for a stupid action from their youth. And I don't think such actions necessarily constitute any substantial proof that one is bad, racist, or unqualified to govern. That being said, I think a look at an analogy from the legal system might help you: a judge must recuse himself from a case if there is the appearance of impropriety.  There doesn't need to be proof of actual bias or even evidence of harm. But the very appearance of impropriety that may cause anyone to question the fairness of the legal system is enough to demand recusal. I think that standard applies here. He very well may be a good man and good governor. But the appearance of impropriety here, especially in light of his contradictory statements regarding the photo, does raise the issue of whether he can fairly govern. I think in all likelihood he is a good man who did something stupid. Perhaps had he handled the photo differently at the outset I would feel differently. But, I have a very hard time believing that one could ever not remember dressing up in the white hood or wearing black-face. So, I think his handling of the photo suggests deception, reinforcing and amplifying the appearance of impropriety. And that, in my opinion, warrants resignation. 

edit: also, everything Celery Man said above. 

Edited February 4, 2019 by Dahobbs

[High Plains Drifter 10961]

17 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

He said it was him.

Then he said it wasn’t him.

Ah, that is new to me.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

23 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

It means you think treason should be celebrated. You know that does seem to fit for Mitch.

Wasn’t the American Revolution treason also?

[Celery Man 20846]

not against America

[Lagunamadre 1975]

27 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Wasn’t the American Revolution treason also?

Yes, against the British (we won). The Confederates committed treason against the United States (they lost), you know that country whose pledge of allegiance you want kids to recite in school every morning and whose anthem you want the blacks to stand for when played. That United States.   

[Chuckie Finster 22574]

30 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Wasn’t the American Revolution treason also?

LOL holy shit

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Shit,  Archie Bunker dressed up in black face back in the 70's, and I as a 12 -13 year old kid was astonished. How do you not get that it's wrong, and into the 80's for god sake.

And what school thought that was an appropriate image to post in a medical school year book ?