by Justin Webb concerns the history of that curious American institution, the filibuster. Mention is made of Jimmy Stewart’s moving performance in Mr Smith goes to Washington. Mr Webb records with an indulgent smile the 87-year old Senator Robert Byrd (Democratic – West Virginia) reminiscing on the art of the filibuster: “And so when I filibustered 14 hours and 13 minutes in 1964 I never got off the germaneness of the subject.”
Some journalists might, at this point, have thought to include a little period detail as to what “the subject” was, or why the Senator says that southerners in particular had mastered filibuster technique. What measure did the Republican party propose* in 1964 that was so bad in Senator Byrd’s eyes that he was willing to make this heroic effort to stop it? Justin Webb’s article does not say.
The Rottweiler Puppy will tell you the answer. I imagine most of the readers of Biased BBC know already. I wonder how many casual readers of the BBC website do?
Even the briefest of articles about the debate over the use of the filibuster in American politics is incomplete without some mention of what the filibuster was most notoriously used for in the last few decades.
(Hat tip – DumbJon)
*[CORRECTION: I was not correct to refer in my original post to the 1964 Act as a measure proposed by the Republicans. Commenter “Sachem77” points out the Act was initiated by the Democrats, and then pushed through by a coalition of Northern Democrats and Republicans against the opposition of Southern Democrats. More history here.]
“At the moment public opinion is probably on Mr Byrd’s side but opponents of the filibuster are still gathering support and if a clash comes the evangelicals will be on hand to help change parliamentary procedure.”
1. In Justin Webb’s world, nothing happens anwhere in the US, concerning anything or anyone, without those damned Christians affecting the outcome.
2. I must have missed the news that Congress has gone and been replaced by a ‘parliament’.
I bet if yo asked Justin Webb who were the Repub Senators who have been lukewarm about a vote to close the filibuster he would not know.
Why not ? Because he is dilettante, a damn amateur. He just cribs his line from Dem newspapers like the Washington Post. Trotting out trite generalities, no news, no proper analysis.
Anyone in Britain who needs reasonable coverage of US politics should avoid the BBC like the plague. http://www.realclearpolitics.com gives a daily guide to the main articles from all over the US press and journals. Or scan the Economist online.
Nice post, Natalie. It is amazing that Byrd has the brass balls to refer to his filibuster. Hde must be awfully confident no one in the main stream media will bring up his Klan role and segregationist past.
Pete:
Here in the States, we do use the term “parliamentary procedure”, and the chattering classes refer to ex-KKK member Byrd as the “parliamentarian of the Senate”, meaning that he’s supposedly the expert on procedural matters.
The European and Australian LLL media loves Byrd because he was anti-Iraq war, and he made a big speech in Congress denouncing the war which they all covered prominently.
They did not mention his kleagle past either. One Australian LLL journo fawned all over him as “The Father of the House” because of his age. But no mention of his KKK membership and sympathies.
(We don’t have any such position as “Father of the House”, plus Byrd’s a Senator, not a member of the House.)
PS – I doubt if many Americans under the age of 50 would recognize the subject of Byrd’s filibuster in 1964. Our educational system has been so dumbed down by the “progressives” I doubt if you could find many people who would even know who the president was in that year.
Right on, Natalie.
Not only is former KKK Grand Master, now Senator, Byrd proud of his record-setting filibuster, I have never seen a flicker of remorse from him on the question of KKK involvement. I recall that years after he left its public ranks, he wrote a letter to his klan brothers commending the organization and the continued need for it.
Justin Webb can’t resist mockery of evangelical Christian opinion when it suits his purposes. Apparently, they have no right to an opinion in the view of the Beeb.
Record-setting filibuster?
I thought Strom Thurmond went 24 hours.
I’m all for keeping it if they actually have to stand up and talk. But then the Kyotonazis would be screaming about all that hot air released and it would be adding to global warming.
Also via Dumbjon:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1114741318425
“UN peacekeepers sexually abused and exploited local women and girls in Liberia and more accusations are expected, a UN spokesman said Friday.”
Couldn’t find anything about this on the BBC’s site.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4504713.stm
BBC prefers to criticise UN Envoy (big american who smokes big cigars)
PS – I doubt if many Americans under the age of 50 would recognize the subject of Byrd’s filibuster in 1964. Our educational system has been so dumbed down by the “progressives” I doubt if you could find many people who would even know who the president was in that year.
***
Johnson right? I was three years old in 1964.
Yep Roxana you are right — I was four in ’64 BTW. But we are sadly in the minority amongst our compatriots, I hate to tell you.
When my son was in 4th grade I took a look at his history text book. It proclaimed that Johnson refused to seek the Democratic nomination in 1966.
There was no presidential election in 1966. It was 1968 as I well remember, having lived through it.
The same textbook repeatedly mispelled “Leonardo Da Vinci” as “Leonardro Da Vinci.”
This was many years ago. It’s probably worse nowadays. They probably don’t even mention Leonardo at all — a politically incorrect Dead White Male after all.
All thanks to the “progressives.”
I hope we’re all going to log a complaint with the Corporation on this one.
I got my ‘Disgusted of Tonbridge Wells’ eMail away earlier but I think I’ll print out and send the hard copy Tuesday.
Seems like we can regard this as as a BBC reporter implicitly condoning out & out racism.
How are they going to respond? ‘We apologise that our reporter and editorial staff don’t know how to do basic research…’
The more letters that hit the mat in Wood Lane the more embarassing it gets. Copy to your favourite newspaper. Stir the shit. Black rights organisations can be very thin skinned about stuff like this.
Rathergate the bastard he’s earned it.
Imagine if those UN peacekeepers in Liberia had been American.
Major outrage and blanket coverage.
It’s constantly insinuated that torture is endemic in the US Army, yet the far more numerous cases of UN misbehaviour are not deemed newsworthy…we wouldn’t want to tarnish
OT
Susan,
You’re in California, right? On Fox News a while back, I saw something about a particular school called “Free School” in California. Did you ever hear of this? They were talking about how far behind grade level the children were because their teacher was a liberal hippy who let the children choose what they wanted to do all day. For example, he would ask them, “Do you want to do math or do you want to go outside?” Doh! We all know what the children would choose. And he wouldn’t give the kids tests because he thought tests were like a competition and believed if one child scored better than the other, it would hurt the other child’s feelings. So according to this teacher, competition is bad. If all schools resort to this sort of teaching, we’re all screwed.
Denise, I haven’t heard of that particular “school” but it doesn’t surprise me. California went from the highest educational results in the nation to the lowest over the past 30 years, the result of insane policies like eliminating tried-and-true phonics for teaching reading and language, New New Math, bilingual education for Hispanics, ultra-PeeCee history and social studies textbooks, and other nonsense.
Most of these “progressive” ideas have now been shown up for the complete garbage they are, but how to undo 30-35 years of this cr*p? Many teachers and administrators are still wedded to it and parents have to fight tooth and nail to keep it out of our schools.
The CA teachers’ union is incredibly powerful and is currently funding a big TV smear campaign against Schwartzenegger. His “crime”? Proposing that teachers be judged on their performance (like any other worker bee in the world!) and given incentive pay based on that performance.
Denise – With respect, I cannot believe your naive shock. This is the system British state schools have been operating under since Blair got into power eight years ago. And no exams, because some might fail. And no prizes on sports days, because most children won’t win prizes and will be bruised for life.
If this is only just coming to CA, you’re lucky because you have time to stop it. After eight years of Blair, it is so deeply embedded in state schools that parents are mortgaging themselves to the hilt to afford private education for their children.
There are children leaving British schools now who have never been taught to read or write, but militantly understand their rights, and know how to “feel”.
Ted
I didn’t think we had “chattering classes” here in the States. Who are you referring to?
Verity,
I’m in Georgia and I’m not sure exactly how it is now in the schools here because I don’t yet have any children. I’m sure there have been some changes within the last 12 years since I graduated. But from what I gather in my community, at least the local schools in my area aren’t like that yet, thank God. A lot of the wonderful teachers I had are still teaching at the schools I went to. I hope it never gets that bad here. Once I have children, I’ll try to be involved in their school to make sure it doesn’t.
It’s sad that a society would not appreciate individuals as unique but rather treat everyone as if they are all clones of each other, acting like zombies. That’s what I think it will eventually boil down to. It’s what the commies want. They want everyone to be the same, have nothing and be stupid so that they’ll be easy to control.
I think Byrd’s best money quote comes from a 1947, when he was already a State Senator:
From a 1947 Robert Byrd letter: “[I will] never submit to fight beneath that banner (the American flag) with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”
Needless to say, the US Army became fully integrated, but Byrd did not die even once.
I doubt if any present-day Western politician has ever made a more offensive remark.
As for Byrd, I think it’s odd how the Democrats are always accusing Republicans of what they are themselves guilty of. Here are some examples:
1. Republicans are rich- but look at all the rich Democrats in Hollywood who fund the Democratic party!
2. Republicans are racist- Byrd, a Democrat, ex KKK member who filibustered against civil rights, enough said.
3. Republicans hold people back-Democrats would rather people stay on welfare than to have people try and better themselves.
The BBC are good at “bias by omission”.
Take this weekends march in London by Muslims allegedly protesting the anti terror laws and the war in Iraq. The BBC report that the march was was organized by Dr Imran Waheed. What they don’t tell you is that he is the leader of Hizb ut-Tahrir in the UK. Tahrir is a Muslim terrorist group banned in many countries. Hizb ut Tahrir is the precursor of Al Muhajiroun and in 1996 Sheik Omar Bakri Mohammed split with HT to form AM.
Tahrir’s goal is to turn Britain into an Islamic state.
Now you know why the BBC left that bit out.
More here:
http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/05/britain-muslims-on-march.html
and here:
http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/05/britain-muslim-march-update.html
The BBC this week:-
Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq
Iraq Iraq etc etc etc
I’m beginning to think they have another agenda, apart from reporting the news. Am I being naive?
It is now 8.50 am and the Today programme is still going on and on-
Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq etc.
Will it end? Not before Thursday, that’s for sure.
Eamonn
All day today they have been leading on Iraq – including the ridiculos story about the Italian journalist and the car going down the dangerous road to Baghdad airport. They have failed to mention the CBS report tht satellite tracking shows that the car was travelling at over 60mph, not the 30mph claimed by the journalist. They have failed to underscore the fact that the Italians did not warn the Americans that the car would be coming through. And they omit any further mention of the journalist’s claims that some 300 to 400 bullets hit the car – when only 7 or so did.
They fail to point out that the journalist is a communist who HATES the Americans and is clearly a liar.
In any event – with a general election three days away, who the hell cares ? Why should this non-story be second item on the news ? Just the BBC grinding out its Iraq agenda. And Michael Howard should have slapped John Humphrys down far harder this morning for not addressing the real issues.
“And Michael Howard should have slapped John Humphrys down far harder this morning for not addressing the real issues.”
Yes.
However, ironically, Iraq was the one issue not really covered by Humphreys when interviewing Kennedy yesterday. Humphreys stuck to other issues, but even so Kennedy was floundering. However all is well now that the Lib Dems have Greg Dyke on board.
OT Iraq Iraq Iraq Iraq etc etc
Lead story on BBCNews Online:
Blair faces Iraq families’ anger
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4507485.stm
This interests me though:
“Relatives of other British troops killed in Iraq will serve notice to Downing Street on Tuesday of their plans to take the government to court.
The court action, which is being backed by the Stop The War Coalition, will outline the group’s legal case against the war under the European Convention of Human Rights.
A coalition spokesman said there were also plans for a private prosecution against the prime minister.”
The constant “was it/wasn’t it legal/illegal” on the BBC is getting a bit repetitive now. ANy lawyers out there can shed some light on this?
In most countries I guess you have some sort of police who will investigate and file a report. A seperate prosecuting authority will review the evidence in the report and decide whether or not to prosecute.
In ‘International’ law….who has responsibility for investigating and/or prosecuting? If the answer is “no-one” then what is the point of banging on about it? Who decides what international law is?
Miam
Miam
The President/Commander in Chief may sanction war. Congress may sanction war. The Prime Minister (who has Royal Prerogative in these matters), government and Parliament may sanction war. However, according to the tranzi/international law crowd, such such a war would be illegal unless Zimbabwe, Togo and whoever’s in charge of Burkina Faso this week sanction war.
Bush once commented in a speech that the US will never seek a permission slip to defend itself. This one sentence gets to the heart of the matter. The international law crowd are also the anti-war crowd. It is the pro-EU, pro-UN crowd. They are the PC crowd. The high tax, high spend crowd. The multi-culti, let’s-all-hug-an-immigrant crowd. The purpose of invoking international law is simply to hinder the West’s (i.e. the Anglo west’s) ability to decide what is best for itself by forcing all military action to be subject to Kofi Annan and his pals.
We have all heard ‘international law’ invoked a million times in the last couple of years and we are still waiting for your questions to be answered. They haven’t been answered because they cannot.
Pete,
Brilliant.
“Most of these “progressive” ideas have now been shown up for the complete garbage they are, but how to undo 30-35 years of this cr*p? Many teachers and administrators are still wedded to it and parents have to fight tooth and nail to keep it out of our schools. ”
reminds me of a quote by Keith Waterhouse
“I once asked a schools inspector what was the one single thing he would do to improve education standards. His reply was unhesitating: Burn down all the teacher training colleges.”
On the topic, there is a fantastic chapter on education in ‘the welfare state we’re in’ by James Bartholomew. It’s one of the best books I’ve ever read. I highly recommend it.
OT
In the middle of the election, news.bbc.co.uk has a totally irrelevant story about whining Guantanamo prisoners from Pakistan on its front page. They don’t even claim to have been tortured. And they are from Pakistan, not from Britain. The story is datelined Peshawar.
And we are paying for this rubbish and political bias.
“And we are paying for this rubbish and political bias.”
No John it’s far far worse than that. We are jailed if we don’t pay for it.
Radio 5 Live interviews Paul Bigley. They ask him about the election.
The BBC: “Worth every penny”.
Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq…..
I don’t seem to recall the BBC’s concern about the Kosovo war being ‘all nice and legal like’. They also seemed remarkably uninterested in the subsequent events in Kosovo once the war was over.
Like a lot of other inconvenient places, it has simply fallen off the BBC’s map.
So Bob Hunter, founder of Greenpeace has shuffled off the the great yurt in the sky and (D)HYS has opened a thread. Each ranges from respectful to glowing, apart from three from the US which are critical (selectful editing, possibly) but one in particular is a corker. Over to Angela from Manchester:
“May you be recycled back into Mother Earth who spawned us all.”
Priceless.
Pete, great reply re international law. Cheers
Charles D: Byrd really is a nasty piece of work isn’t he?
One hopes he doesn’t have much steam left at 87, but then again, he could live as long as Strom Thurmond, more’s the pity.
Well you do live and learn. Melanie Phillips has a post up:
‘THE BBC JIHAD’
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001175.html
Someone posting comments on the BBC Messageboard (I didn’t know they had any) has been complaining and seen exactly how the BBC swings one way and another in order to justify its bias.
Pete_London – “That great yurt in the sky.” Oh, god, that was funny!
Whom do I lobby to if I want to change international law? Whom do I vote for? If anyone knocks on your door between now and Thursday, ask ’em that. If they can come up with anything remotely within their jurusdiction, vote for ’em.
OT – and a bit late to the fray
Denise W,
As a graduate of the Georgia system back when it was 49th, I would gladly pit my bog-standard high school education up against most comparable British qualifications.
Their educational rot started in the 70s, but appears to be accelerating, depending on whom you talk to, since about 1997 ;-). It’s one of the reasons we are considering returning to the States to live, eventually; we can’t afford private education for our daughter.
Regards,
I watched Ask Tony Blair last night on ITV (with one of the Dimblebys) and I got the feeling that those in the audience were completely saturated with the BBC’s view of Blair, UN, Iraq. Nobody has asked how a second UN resolution was to be obtained given that France had declared that it would veto said draft. Why the veto? Because France had been bribed to do so. Does this mean that henceforth British and US forces can only act with France’s (and Russia’s, and China’s) approval? For France, there are no such problems. If troops have to do some killing in Sierra Leone, then they are sent there (no journos) to do so without any UN involvement.
I’ve made that a Samizdata quote of the day, Alton.
Allan@Aberdeen. You seem to be getting a bit above yourself. I am arresting you in the name of the international law.
OT
James,
During the time I was in high school, I remember hearing on the news about how Georgia’s schools were given low ratings. I couldn’t understand why because my school was voted “School of Excellence”. But I didn’t know if they were comparing my school to others in the nation or if they meant it was just the best of the worst in the state. We had really good teachers and high acheiving students. I wasn’t fed a bunch of politically correct crap. I actually got a good education. And I know how to find places on a map! Not long ago, my husband was chatting on line with a guy from Ohio when a woman from California joined in. She said to the guy in Ohio, “So you’re in Ohio? That’s in Canada, right?” My husband nearly fell out of his chair!
Whoops, I spoke too soon! I misspelled achieving! Heh, heh.
OT and late, but blimmin’ heck:
[Kids choosing whatever lessons happen on the day] is the system British state schools have been operating under since Blair got into power eight years ago. And no exams, because some might fail. And no prizes on sports days, because most children won’t win prizes and will be bruised for life.
You’ve been smoking crack, right? Kids face compulsory, detailed exams based on the National Curriculum at 7, 11, 14, 16 and 18 (can’t remember whether these were introduced by the Tories or Labour). The NC effectively means *teachers* don’t even have the freedom to decide what kids learn, never mind kids being able to. And the ‘no-prizes sports days’ are largely an urban myth, albeit a popular one.
There are many things wrong with the British education system (mostly, the way that it utterly fails the bottom 25% of kids, who frequently don’t learn to read or write, fail their SATs, and leave at 16 to live on the dole). But entirely fictional criticisms aren’t going to help address that.
“I watched Ask Tony Blair last night on ITV (with one of the Dimblebys) and I got the feeling that those in the audience were completely saturated with the BBC’s view of Blair, UN, Iraq”
Yes I watched a debate on BBC2 recently with charles clarke and david davis. Most of the questioners went on about how we were living in a ‘climate of fear’ cultivated by the government.
The chair asked the London audience to “Raise your hand if you are afraid of terrorism.” NOBODY raised their hands. Never mind the power of nightmares, its the power of the liberal media opinion formers that I’m concerned about.
Mate, are you really scared of terrorism in the UK? Statistically you should be much more scared of crossing the road or wandering around your house. Sure we should have robust methods for dealing with suspected terrorists and the PC ‘leave the bearded chaps alone’ cretins should be roundly ignored, but scared??? Come on!!!
Cockney,
Even Andrew Marr, in an unguarded moment at the Telegraph, said he had been unofficially briefed as to 174 terrorist incidents being foiled in London alone in the previous 18 months.
I tell you what, I only ever use the Circle/District Line if I use the Tube at all, nowadays, due to ventilation and depth of the tunnels. I try to avoid the Central and Northern lines if I can.
I think the fear of terrorism is probably closer to the fear of unbridled yobbism. There is little risk management you can make to minimise being victim of it (other than locking oneself in one’s house). It is random and pointless and not much you can do to avoid it if it happens.
At least one can look both ways when crossing the road or treat electricity and other household hazards with common sense.
But nothing’s going to stop a terrorist with sarin on the Tube other than a reliable informant.
(Which leads me to believe that Muslim “community” is probably cooperating quite a bit with the police if 174 terrorist plots were stopped in London in the space of 18 months.)
That’s why one would be afraid of terrorist acts. One generally cannot mitigate against them. If the terrorist does get a chance to act and you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time, nothing can change the impact it would have.
I’ve said it before: I believed in the thesis that “The Power of Nightmare” threw out, that al-Quaeda is not really as organised and international as the NeoCons would have you believe, until I actually saw for myself the security footage of two young Middle Eastern looking guys videoing all of the entrances and exits to the building I was working in in Frankfurt. I was also informed that similar teams had been spotted doing the same thing at similar buildings that same week in New York and London.
Had they been successful in whatever they were planning, I would probably be dead by now. So, yeah, I’m afraid of terrorists.
Just some thoughts.
Regards,