Old Yearbook Scandals

[Guest Lobo]

Did anyone not have West Virginia in the "First Virginia to Implode"  wagering pool?  We would have also accepted Virginia, Brazil---a region always undergoing great political turmoil.  I

[A-Tex Devil 2465]

It’s weird. I learned way back in the early eighties that blackface was bad when Sam tricked Joey into going blackface to get back at Nell in Gimme a Break.  I was 9 and it made sense to me. 

If you want to predict what the contemporary to going blackface would be that will be getting folks in trouble in 30 years, that will get everyone worked up, I’d suggest it is going blackface.  Folks (other than Joey Lawrence’s character, who was also 9 or 10) knew what it meant then. It hasn’t changed.  It wasn’t “different times” other than patent racism was a little more accepted.  Anyway. Non-sequitor concluded. 

[Pancho 45226]

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Virginia, what is you doing??

[retread 2951]

 

[David Dennison 18997]

Prediction: no matter what happens, that Republican will not be governor.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20545]

17 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Worst black history month ever.

 

Yup. Virginia is doing black history month all wrong.

[Horn Dog 9994]

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07F5S2NB7?tag=dealnewscom&m=AZFI9NAGMF0YG

Oh Amazon.....

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Prediction: no matter what happens, that Republican will not be governor.

What republican ?  Speaker Cox ?  If Herring and Northam step down, and Fairfax gets nailed  (he won't in my opinion) yeah he would be. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

What republican ?  Speaker Cox ?  If Herring and Northam step down, and Fairfax gets nailed  (he won't in my opinion) yeah he would be. 

Not if the Dems pull a Gerald Ford with, say, Tom Perriello. 

[David Dennison 18997]

7 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

What republican ?  Speaker Cox ?  If Herring and Northam step down, and Fairfax gets nailed  (he won't in my opinion) yeah he would be. 

I'm saying all three of those things will not happen. If they do, they will be done in a way to ensure that a Democrat will be governor.

Edited February 7, 2019 by David Dennison

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

Not if the Dems pull a Gerald Ford with, say, Tom Perriello. 

Not sure they can.  The chain is pretty well established I believe. Plus the republicans hold a majority in the house of delegates they wouldn't be able to get that thru.

[David Dennison 18997]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

Not sure they can.  The chain is pretty well established I believe. Plus the republicans hold a majority in the house of delegates they wouldn't be able to get that thru.

Then one of them stays no matter what. I'm beginning to think all three might stay. Who can force them to leave?

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I'm saying all three of those things will not happen. If they do, they will be done in a way to ensure that a Democrat will be governor.

I doubt Fairfax loses his position, so no probably not, as I already stated.  Explain how a gov. or AG stepping down can replace himself with his own successor.  They're elected positions not appointed (like a VP).

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Then one of them stays no matter what. I'm beginning to think all three might stay. Who can force them to leave?

They probably will, hypocricy knows no party affiliation.

[David Dennison 18997]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

I doubt Fairfax loses his position, so no probably not, as I already stated.  Explain how a gov. or AG stepping down can replace himself with his own successor.  They're elected positions not appointed (like a VP).

How does Virginia select a lieutenant governor if Northam steps down and Fairfax becomes governor?

[Mojo Hand 4580]

10 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Not sure they can.  The chain is pretty well established I believe. Plus the republicans hold a majority in the house of delegates they wouldn't be able to get that thru.

The chain is established, but is affected by the timing and order of resignations.   If either of Northam or Fairfax resigns, but not both, whichever one of them is governor gets to appoint a new Lt. Gov.  And that person would replace the governor should that person then resign.   That actually strikes me as the best option, because it would trigger a new election for Lt. Gov. in 2019:

Quote

 

The succession process for the lieutenant governorship gets complicated. If Fairfax either becomes governor or resigns, he will vacate his current office and the state Senate president pro tem, Republican Steve Newman, would be empowered to “discharge the duties” of the lieutenant governorship, said John Dinan, a Wake Forest professor and expert on state constitutions.

That arrangement would likely be short-lived, because the governor has “constitutional authority to fill the vacancy in the office of lieutenant governor,” said A.E. Dick Howard, a law professor at the University of Virginia who led the drafting of Virginia’s current state constitution in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

However, the appointment would only last for a few months, Howard and Dinan said.

Under Virginia law, an election to fill the remainder of Fairfax’s original term as lieutenant governor would be held this November, when every state legislative seat in Virginia will also be up in the regular 2019 elections. Then, there would be a regularly scheduled election for a full four-year lieutenant governor term in 2021.

https://www-politico-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/02/06/virginia-governor-northam-fairfax-herring-1152310

Link problem:  https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/06/virginia-governor-northam-fairfax-herring-1152310

Edited February 7, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

How does Virginia select a lieutenant governor if Northam steps down and Fairfax becomes governor?

Don't know, it's I don't believe it's ever come up in my life time.  They're all 3 elected positions however, not appointments.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

The chain is established, but is affected by the timing and order of resignations.   If either of Northam or Fairfax resigns, but not both, whichever one of them is governor gets to appoint a new Lt. Gov.  And that person would replace the governor should that person then resign.   That actually strikes me as the best option, because it would trigger a new election for Lt. Gov. in 2019:

Link problem:  https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/06/virginia-governor-northam-fairfax-herring-1152310

Sounds fair.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Of course, that would mean one of the assholes would have to stay as governor for the rest of the year and promise to resign after the new Lt. Gov is inaugurated.   Not an ideal situation to say the least! 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Actually, check that.   I suppose a new Lt. can be appointed and then immediately ascend to Governor.  And then another Lt. would have to be appointed, and then there would be a new election for that Lt. in 2019, but the new governor would not be subjected to a new election.  Not ideal either. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[hayden_horn 11365]

or, you know, just wait a couple of news cycles. everything is kicked into overdrive. trump will do or say something outrageous or something will happen and people will move on from this story.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

Actually, check that.   I suppose a new Lt. can be appointed and then immediately ascend.  And then another Lt. would have to be appointed, and then there would be a new election for that Lt. in 2019, but the new governor would not be subjected to a new election.  Not ideal either. 

It's an embarrassing shit show all around for the state, regardless of your party affiliation. The son in law works on Capitol Hill. The shit going on around there now is electric he says. 

[lemonlime 5503]

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

 

Somewhere you have to have a cut off for this stuff to affect people.  It's definitely before 1970, but not sure how much before that.  

[HenryJames 66231]

I’m starting to think every black person in Virginia is just a white person in black face.

[David Dennison 18997]

14 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Somewhere you have to have a cut off for this stuff to affect people.  It's definitely before 1970, but not sure how much before that.  

Wait til the press gets a hold of Old South pics. Elected KAs are probably scrambling.

[Asithappens 974]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's an embarrassing shit show all around for the state, regardless of your party affiliation. The son in law works on Capitol Hill. The shit going on around there now is electric he says. 

220 or 221?

[David Dennison 18997]

Just now, Asithappens said:

220 or 221?

Whatever it takes.

[Foosters 17906]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Wait til the press gets a hold of Old South pics. Elected KAs are probably scrambling.

Shit, my brother was in a fraternity not named KA at Texas in the early 2000s. They made some pledges go blackface for parties.

 

[Asithappens 974]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Whatever it takes.

The only correct answer to that question.

You, sir, are a man of the world.

[Asithappens 974]

1 minute ago, Foosters said:

Shit, my brother was in a fraternity not named KA at Texas in the early 2000s. They made some pledges go blackface for parties.

 

Lol, and that's not the worst thing that frat did.

(I know. My son was in it   )

But, and again probably will get negged into Bolivian, let the blackface shit go. There are far worse, imo, things out there. Not that I condone blackface, or am unaware that it (most of the time) belies some greater underlying racial statement, but let it go. 

We want morally perfect politicians. And with the intertubes it's all too easy to find anything that can be used against anybody. Kind of like the Miranda warning: anything we find can and WILL be used AGAINST you. 

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

It’s not all too easy to find things to use against everyone.

Could people find a picture of you in black face or a KKK robe or posing with a “lynching” victim?

I know they can’t find anything like that associated with me because I didn’t participate in such gross racist stuff. And I’m in my mid 40s and went to college at Alabama.

You can’t even find me in the background of a picture with other people doing such. As I said on this thread, I never saw these kinds of costumes at any party I attended.

Now maybe you fellas did some sick shit when us ladies weren’t in attendance.....

But GTFO with the “They can find something like this on all of us!” because that’s absurd.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Bama Chick said:

It’s not all too easy to find things to use against everyone.

Could people find a picture of you in black face or a KKK robe or posing with a “lynching” victim?

I know they can’t find anything like that associated with me because I didn’t participate in such gross racist stuff. And I’m in my mid 40s and went to college at Alabama.

You can’t even find me in the background of a picture with other people doing such. As I said on this thread, I never saw these kinds of costumes at any party I attended.

Now maybe you fellas did some sick shit when us ladies weren’t in attendance.....

But GTFO with the “They can find something like this on all of us!” because that’s absurd.

(surly) Wanna see some pics of yer mom ?  (obligatory)

[UncleCharlie 334]

This just in.....Virginia and Virginia Tech have been accepted to the SEC as the 15th and 16th members to round out the conference.

They are in process of seceding from the ACC as of the timing of this story.

[David Dennison 18997]

Pimps and Hos parties up next.

[Asithappens 974]

5 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

It’s not all too easy to find things to use against everyone.

Could people find a picture of you in black face or a KKK robe or posing with a “lynching” victim?

It's all too easy.

But you miss my point. I'm not talking about those who have never done anything that can be recorded. I'm talking about those who have done something but don't deserve to be tarred and feathered (a false positive, if you will). It's easy to find that. And will become easier, imo.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Give me an example of “something” that doesn’t deserve consequences.

 

We’re talking specifics in the cases of these Virginia politicians and you’re wringing your hands over some hypothetical slippery slope.

 

 

 

[Celery Man 21022]

something that I did or my children do

[BillyBadAss 189]

Suppose a white guy dresses as Michael Jordan for a costume party. 
I think most would agree it would be fine to wear a 23 Bulls jersey and Air Jordans. 

What if he covers his hair with a plastic thing to make himself appear bald and more like Mike? 
Still ok? 

Now suppose he uses dark makeup. 
The intent is not to make fun of Jordan or denigrate his skin complexion or race. The intent is just to make the costume look closer to the real thing. 
Is that ok?  

Does intent play into it at all, or is it never ok?  

NOTE: I understand that the picture in question is different. The KKK costume and blackface costume together communicate an intent different from what I describe above. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by BillyBadAss

[JimmyHoffa 1188]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

It’s not all too easy to find things to use against everyone.

Could people find a picture of you in black face or a KKK robe or posing with a “lynching” victim?

I know they can’t find anything like that associated with me because I didn’t participate in such gross racist stuff. And I’m in my mid 40s and went to college at Alabama.

You can’t even find me in the background of a picture with other people doing such. As I said on this thread, I never saw these kinds of costumes at any party I attended.

Now maybe you fellas did some sick shit when us ladies weren’t in attendance.....

But GTFO with the “They can find something like this on all of us!” because that’s absurd.

 

This. Don't get me wrong I think going back 50+ years is a little over the top but how about just don't be stupid. I am in my mid 40's as well and never saw or was around something so stupid in college or HS. It just didn't happen.

 

On a side note does anybody need a $900 Gucci blackface sweater?

 

This one however I find a little weak that people are freaking out about an all white shoe being part of Adidas "Celebrating Black Culture". 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/business/gucci-blackface-adidas-apologize.html

[David Dennison 18997]

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

22 minutes ago, BillyBadAss said:

Suppose a white guy dresses as Michael Jordan for a costume party. 
I think most would agree it would be fine to wear a 23 Bulls jersey and Air Jordans. 

What if he covers his hair with a plastic thing to make himself appear bald and more like Mike? 
Still ok? 

Now suppose he uses dark makeup. 
The intent is not to make fun of Jordan or denigrate his skin complexion or race. The intent is just to make the costume look closer to the real thing. 
Is that ok?  

Does intent play into it at all, or is it never ok?  

NOTE: I understand that the picture in question is different. The KKK costume and blackface costume together communicate an intent different from what I describe above. 

No, it's not OK at the point that you apply the dark makeup because of the history of the use of blackface.   Your desire for costume accuracy should yield to your desire to respect those for whom blackface carries painful connotations.  It's an extremely small inconvenience for you that spares others a significant amount of hurt and offense.  Unless you don't respect them, which represents the same problem. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

2 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

3 hours ago, lemonlime said:

 

But GTFO with the “They can find something like this on all of us!” because that’s absurd.

I think the above example shows they CAN find something on any of us. I have no idea who Tommy Norment but to equate his "crime" to the others because he was an editor for a yearbook in 1968 that posted some pretty shitty pictures seems like a stretch. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

38 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

No, it's not OK at the point that you apply the dark makeup because of the history of the use of blackface.  

100%. If people don't understand this, they had better get their shit together quickly. 

It reminds me of the "ALL lives matter" movement. Yeah. We get it. All lives matter. But you're thumbing your nose at the BLM movement to prove your point.

[Catdaddyhorn 3448]

1 hour ago, BillyBadAss said:

Suppose a white guy dresses as Michael Jordan for a costume party. 
I think most would agree it would be fine to wear a 23 Bulls jersey and Air Jordans. 

What if he covers his hair with a plastic thing to make himself appear bald and more like Mike? 
Still ok? 

Now suppose he uses dark makeup. 
The intent is not to make fun of Jordan or denigrate his skin complexion or race. The intent is just to make the costume look closer to the real thing. 
Is that ok?  

Does intent play into it at all, or is it never ok?  

NOTE: I understand that the picture in question is different. The KKK costume and blackface costume together communicate an intent different from what I describe above. 

Are white people just incapable of dressing up like a person of color without attempting to wear that color or their facial features like some sort of fucking costume? On the whole,  people of color have been dressing up like superman,  Clark Kent, Santa Clause or any number of white people without feeling the need to change their whole skin tone and facial features to accomplish said task. I don't know why this is so hard for people to get.  Part of me believes it's partly because a lot of white people grow up consuming media (books,  TV shows, movies,  and stories in general) where they rarely identify or are forced to put themselves in the shoes of a character who is not of their own race.  It's almost like dressing up as black or Hispanic person necessitates some sort of extraordinary leap in imagery to fulfill the goal.  

[Jhawk 1075]

On 2/6/2019 at 1:12 PM, Foosters said:

The country that demands moral perfection elected Donald Trump as president.

This shit started a long time ago and it wasn't the people who demanded it.  It was the politicians who did in an effort to get the people to get pissed off about it.  Bush 1 started with the lies about taxes.  How can you lie??  He's out to a very suave Clinton.  Repubs are pissed and go after Clinton.  Sure his dealings were shady but no one cared about perjury or whitewater because the repubs were too busy saying "HOW COULD YOU CHEAT ON YOUR WIFE????"  Ohhhhhh the moral outrage while John McCain is banging his sidepiece.  They did some damage but not enough to win an election.  A key lesson for Dems.

Bush 2 comes along and the dems pull out the deception of his service but lose because Gore is a fucking mess.  After 4 years of war though and an undesired invasion of Iraq to cure his daddy's mistakes they have what they need.  "HOW CAN YOU KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE FOR OIL???" Not a chance in hell repubs were going to win 2008.  But with that, Barry comes along and it is just fucking open season.  Say what you want about the merits of his birth, his religion, or his politics, the repubs were all in and he and his team was all in as well.  That was a historic election in many ways.  One because we elected our first minority president.  But also because EVERYTHING became fair game in politics.  Minorities defended political stances claiming racism was why people didn't believe them or give them the benefit of the doubt (which is very true in some cases), white men screamed that they were being marginalized, women have no fucking clue what to do but they know they will be sent back to servitude if they don't get exactly their way, and the only group that was above ALL of the noise was the politicians. 

Ever notice that?  When Barry said race is playing a part in his presidency he never called a senator or congressman racist.  He said it was the citizens.  When Hillary didn't get elected she never talked about not having the support of men in the senate or congress, she said that all males are misogynist.  When Kerry was questioned on his Vietnam stance and military alignment he didn't attack anyone but the citizens on that.  It is weird how the politicians, the only people with a microphone in their face 24/7, were able to make all of us the worst people in the world but we never hear a peep about David Duke who was a congressman and a close ally of the clintons.  We never hear about current elected officials and their days of blackface.  We only hear about people who threaten these politico's jobs.  Those people are the enemy, not my fellow politician and I'm certainly no enemy of the people.

So who is it that has been demanding moral perfection?  I still say fuck and sometimes even "cunt" at the office.  I call my homosexual friend "fags" sometimes when we're joking around.  I have tossed around the word retard more recently than 1990.  Fuck I sent a dick pic to a chick across the country just last night.  Citizens have called for fairness, not moral perfection.  The LGBTQ community wants to be recognized and have equal rights under the law.  That's awesome.  The AA population would like to stop being subjugated by the militarized police.  A Very fair ask.  The feminists want to be able to make a wage like a man does.  No problem with that.  As a conservative I see nothing wrong with these asks and I also see none of these groups saying "You have to live your life by the 10 commandments but you better never step foot in a church.  You also better never curse or make an advance on a woman, and you damn sure better have an equal amount of black friends as you do white ones.  Oh yeah, you better start kissing dudes too because I don't see a strong history of you supporting gay rights."  Not one of these groups has said this is how it has to be and the citizens that do are ALWAYS in the minority.

The politicians have created this culture and now they are pissy that some of them are having to live by the rhetoric they spread across the country.  The did this to themselves. 0.0001% of this country WANTS moral perfection.  Those people just happen to be radicals and politicians.  I'm glad they're getting fucked and if Teflon Don went down because of his comments it would have been well warranted.  But the truth is, no one gives a shit but the holier than thou politicians.  It is their only weapon because they have realized that the country is pretty much on cruise control at this point and they can't come up with a policy that actually helps EVERYONE.

Fuck em all.  Sleep in the fucking bed you made.

[Foosters 17906]

3 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

This shit started a long time ago and it wasn't the people who demanded it.  It was the politicians who did in an effort to get the people to get pissed off about it.  Bush 1 started with the lies about taxes.  How can you lie??  He's out to a very suave Clinton.  Repubs are pissed and go after Clinton.  Sure his dealings were shady but no one cared about perjury or whitewater because the repubs were too busy saying "HOW COULD YOU CHEAT ON YOUR WIFE????"  Ohhhhhh the moral outrage while John McCain is banging his sidepiece.  They did some damage but not enough to win an election.  A key lesson for Dems.

Bush 2 comes along and the dems pull out the deception of his service but lose because Gore is a fucking mess.  After 4 years of war though and an undesired invasion of Iraq to cure his daddy's mistakes they have what they need.  "HOW CAN YOU KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE FOR OIL???" Not a chance in hell repubs were going to win 2008.  But with that, Barry comes along and it is just fucking open season.  Say what you want about the merits of his birth, his religion, or his politics, the repubs were all in and he and his team was all in as well.  That was a historic election in many ways.  One because we elected our first minority president.  But also because EVERYTHING became fair game in politics.  Minorities defended political stances claiming racism was why people didn't believe them or give them the benefit of the doubt (which is very true in some cases), white men screamed that they were being marginalized, women have no fucking clue what to do but they know they will be sent back to servitude if they don't get exactly their way, and the only group that was above ALL of the noise was the politicians. 

Ever notice that?  When Barry said race is playing a part in his presidency he never called a senator or congressman racist.  He said it was the citizens.  When Hillary didn't get elected she never talked about not having the support of men in the senate or congress, she said that all males are misogynist.  When Kerry was questioned on his Vietnam stance and military alignment he didn't attack anyone but the citizens on that.  It is weird how the politicians, the only people with a microphone in their face 24/7, were able to make all of us the worst people in the world but we never hear a peep about David Duke who was a congressman and a close ally of the clintons.  We never hear about current elected officials and their days of blackface.  We only hear about people who threaten these politico's jobs.  Those people are the enemy, not my fellow politician and I'm certainly no enemy of the people.

So who is it that has been demanding moral perfection?  I still say fuck and sometimes even "cunt" at the office.  I call my homosexual friend "fags" sometimes when we're joking around.  I have tossed around the word retard more recently than 1990.  Fuck I sent a dick pic to a chick across the country just last night.  Citizens have called for fairness, not moral perfection.  The LGBTQ community wants to be recognized and have equal rights under the law.  That's awesome.  The AA population would like to stop being subjugated by the militarized police.  A Very fair ask.  The feminists want to be able to make a wage like a man does.  No problem with that.  As a conservative I see nothing wrong with these asks and I also see none of these groups saying "You have to live your life by the 10 commandments but you better never step foot in a church.  You also better never curse or make an advance on a woman, and you damn sure better have an equal amount of black friends as you do white ones.  Oh yeah, you better start kissing dudes too because I don't see a strong history of you supporting gay rights."  Not one of these groups has said this is how it has to be and the citizens that do are ALWAYS in the minority.

The politicians have created this culture and now they are pissy that some of them are having to live by the rhetoric they spread across the country.  The did this to themselves. 0.0001% of this country WANTS moral perfection.  Those people just happen to be radicals and politicians.  I'm glad they're getting fucked and if Teflon Don went down because of his comments it would have been well warranted.  But the truth is, no one gives a shit but the holier than thou politicians.  It is their only weapon because they have realized that the country is pretty much on cruise control at this point and they can't come up with a policy that actually helps EVERYONE.

Fuck em all.  Sleep in the fucking bed you made.

The fact that you think only politicians get upset when people call gays "fags" and when women are sexually harassed is just fucking mind blowing.

[Jhawk 1075]

5 minutes ago, Foosters said:

The fact that you think only politicians get upset when people call gays "fags" and when women are sexually harassed is just fucking mind blowing.

Stop.  That's not what was said at all.  No one likes it.  But the vast majority of the population recognizes that that's just part of the fucking world.  No one should harass women and no one should use "fag" as a derogatory remark.

The point of the post is that not one person in this country expects perfection out of politicians.  Politicians have used "less than perfect" as a weapon against each other and now they are finding out that they can't live up to the standards that THEY put in place.  If you only picked out harassment and the word "fag" out of my post then you are part of the 0.0001% I mentioned.  If you're living perfection then why don't you post your name and city of birth and we'll dig for the dirt on you.

Edited February 7, 2019 by Jhawk

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

3 hours ago, UncleCharlie said:

This just in.....Virginia and Virginia Tech have been accepted to the SEC as the 15th and 16th members to round out the conference.

They are in process of seceding from the ACC as of the timing of this story.

Heard the UVA AD was next in the succession line to be governor.