Jesse Helms died

[Alecto]

Among the folks who bring out my most not-so-nonviolent attributes, I don't suppose I have much else to say about him. Here's a link http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080704/..._us/obit_helms.

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by Alecto

Among the folks who bring out my most not-so-nonviolent attributes, I don't suppose I have much else to say about him. Here's a link http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080704/..._us/obit_helms.

So did Bozo the Clown.

Out of respect for Bozo the Clown, I shall not make the obvious comparison.

[Daniel]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/05/us...0helms.html?hp

Jesse Helms Dies at 86; Conservative Force in the Senate

By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: July 5, 2008
Jesse Helms, the former North Carolina senator with the courtly manner and mossy drawl who turned his hard-edged conservatism against civil rights, gay rights, foreign aid and modern art, died early Friday. He was 86.

Maybe it is because there is sad and beautiful American music on the classical radio station as I write on this 4th of July, but I can only find sadness in the story of Helms death.

There is a line in the film The Lord of the Rings where one character says that even the smallest person can make a difference.

Helm's bigotry seems small to me: smallness of heart, smallness of vision, smallness of life-giving warmth. His life seemed to be about what he stood against, not what he stood for.

He opposed civil rights for African Americans, Gay persons and many other Americans.

That someone who lived in such mind-numbingly ignorance could wield such power and harm so many....well...that says everything that I think needs to be said.

It's a sad day. Some may dance with joy that one of the chief obstacles gay liberation is dead, but I will not be joining them in their dance. Instead, I will be thinking of those who have been harmed by his actions and inaction, as well as observing that any of us can make a huge difference- the only thing stopping us is the certainty of our convictions. And Helms certainly had strong convictions.

Believe it or not, I think that is something to learn from.

I also read from the Times obit that Helms and his wife adopted a child who yearned for a home. What does that tell me? That he wasn't totally blind, his Christ-like or Buddha-nature could peek out from time to time.

As the Buddhist's would say- we all have it- that inner luminous nature. Even Helms.

Fancy that.

[Rick336]

Jesse Helms wanted America to be like Mayberry; the sleepy little town between Raleigh and Mt. Pilot.

For Jesse, Mayberry was the perfect American town where problems were no worse than a batch of bad pickles or the antics of a scatterbrain deputy.

But if one looks at a map of North Carolina they will never locate Mayberry. It only exists in the black and white re-runs created forty years ago by actors on a television back lot in California. Mayberry is a delusion in the minds of millions of Americans like Jesse Helms. To them it's the perfect dream because it excludes all the cultures and people who are different from them. There's no Jews, no African Americans, no Mexican Americans, no feminists, no gays, no one to upset the happy lives of white, straight, God-fearing Christian Americans going about their daily lives. There's no worry about diversity because everybody is the same.

But America will never be like Mayberry or Little House on the Prairie or even Will and Grace because those are only TV shows created for our entertainment and have little to do with reality.

Besides, what Jesse and his supporters never understood was that if America was like Mayberry, Jesse would be tossed out like a batch of bad pickles, because that old boy was the sourest pickle of them all.

Rick

[Emproph]

Originally Posted by Alecto

Among the folks who bring out my most not-so-nonviolent attributes, I don't suppose I have much else to say about him.

Originally Posted by Daniel

Believe it or not, I think that is something to learn from.

[...]

As the Buddhist's would say- we all have it- that inner luminous nature. Even Helms..

As much as I’d love to dance on his grave right now (or anyone else’s like his, for that matter), Pam Spaulding had some words worth noting. Not necessarily gracious toward him, but insightful of the situation - in a way that was satisfying for both perspective-parties.

Originally Posted by Pam Spaulding

Helms's death provides an opportunity, if the MSM chose to do so, to show how far this country (and of course NC) has come since his reign of legislative terror when it comes to race relations and gay rights.

Essentially, because he was so overtly biased, any MSM accolades in regard to his career are up for dispute.

ie; opportunity for interaction -- with the Main Stream Media (MSM), and with those who cite them.
--
So, since James Dobson is still a living fan of Jesse Helms...

Originally Posted by James Dobson

The man who has probably fought more for the things we believe in than anybody in Congress is Jesse Helms…

...I think we should also take this opportunity to recognize that our non-violent “fight” is truly with the media. (as cliché as I know that sounds)
--
And further, what Daniel said reminds me of the adage that all the old people have to die off in order for change to take place.

For what it's worth, I can see myself becoming more habituated, and routined, and often times bitter for the increasing need to acclimate to changes / make increasingly more decisions. So sometimes it’s possible for me to view Helms and Dobson (and ilk) in that same light.
--
MSM. That’s our real nemesis. They still consider the fans of Helms to be legitimate sources. Known intentional-liar Tony Perkins of the FRC is a regular on MSNBC and CNN for the conservative Christian perspective.

It needs to be made known that having a proven liar on your show is JUST as unacceptable as having a known racist on.

[Daniel]

As I was talking about this with my husband, who observered that, yeah, it was great that Helms adopted a child. But did he teach that child to be a bigot like him?

As is said in the musical, Into the Woods, Children will Listen.

God bless that child.




Pratrick- Thanks for Pam. Point well taken. The talking heads do seem to keep matters obscured, don't they? Again, please will listen, but the times it's not children, who don't question what they hear.

I think you are exactly right. The upshot of which is that we need more eloquent speakers on our behalf appearing on the shows you mention. Wonder if theyd be invited. Perhaps not. That's part of it too: keeping the real news out of the picture.

[keltic63]

i was not aware of this (speaking of how the media sometimes hides stories) but I find it funny and symbolic.....

[inca nitta]

Originally Posted by keltic63

i was not aware of this (speaking of how the media sometimes hides stories) but I find it funny and symbolic.....

So, you find it funny that these activists have vandalized the private property of Jesse Helms? So, I guess it means it's all right to commit vandalism, and even destruction of other people's properties, just because their politcal opinion is different from ours? Is that right?

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

So, you find it funny that these activists have vandalized the private property of Jesse Helms? So, I guess it means it's all right to commit vandalism, and even destruction of other people's properties, just because their politcal opinion is different from ours? Is that right?

What property was destroyed here? What was vandalized? They put a condom over the man's house.

Helms opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he clearly associated the presence of blacks and gays with immoral and criminal behaviors. He blocked the funding of Aids research, blamed the spread of Aids on gay people.

Here are some memorable quotes:

"The New York Times and Washington Post are both infested with homosexuals themselves. Just about every person down there is a homosexual or lesbian."
-- 1995

"The University of Negroes and Communists"
-- Reference to the University of North Carolina devised by Mr. Helms when he worked for Willis Smith's 1950 U.S. Senate campaign.

"Your tax dollars are being used to pay for grade-school classes that teach our children that CANNIBALISM, WIFE-SWAPPING and MURDER of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior."
-- Fund raising mailer, 1996

"All Latins are volatile people. Hence, I was not surprised at the volatile reaction."
-- After Mexicans protested his visit in 1986

"Homosexuals are weak, morally sick wretches."
-- 1995 radio broadcast

So yes, in the light of the many people that he offended, that he degraded, and that he allowed to die because of his refusal to legislate responsibly, I do indeed find this one particular act of protest to be "funny." It was creative, not destructive, and made a strong statement.

You can defend him if you want.

[nmwolfboy]

No, i for one don't find vandalism funny. However, i recall this particular TAG and i've never heard that Helms' home was damaged in any way. So i don't think this qualifies as vandalism.

What i find most interesting is that the lady in the vid who speaks out in anger is concerned about "obstructing the neighborhood." She says that Senator Helms hadn't gone into any of the activists' neighborhoods to obstruct it.

No, he just made it a passion to obstruct any legislation that benefitted AIDS research or treatment. Obstruction that had a direct impact on the very lives of his fellow living, breathing, Americans.

But then, he respected the traffic flow in their neighborhoods. i guess that excuses his mission to excoriate gay people, and the lives lost to AIDS as he tied up funding with filibusters?

Condoming his house was a media grabbing action of people who were tired of watching their friends die, who had already called and written and lobbied to no effect thanks to the cruel obstruction of bigots like Helms, and who believed that research and treatment were more important when people were dying than offending some people's sensibilities.

If Helm's property wasn't damaged, as i believe it wasn't, then to call it vandalism is inaccurate.

i remember laughing hysterically at the time of the condoming of his VA house. Yes, i thought it was funny then. Looking back, we did whatever we could think of to save ourselves and our friends. And despite our anger and grief, we usually were able make our points creatively, like is shown in the video.

Pax et bonum,
scott

[inca nitta]

Yes, Jesse Helms was being an insensitive and offensive bigot, but by law, what these people did was an act of vandalism. They could have made a video, hold up signs, set up press conferences expressing everything about Helms to the public, but them putting a condom over his house have given them a low credibility, in my opinion.

I'm also pretty much sure that hoodlums who spray paint swastikas over the homes of Jewish residents think it's funny. To them, swastika is just a sign.

Speaking of destruction of property, since Emproph mentioned James Dobson of Focus on the Family in this thread, I read that 10 years ago, somebody threw rocks into the windows of its campus in Colorado Springs, which broke them.

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Yes, Jesse Helms was being an insensitive and offensive bigot, but by law, what these people did was an act of vandalism. They could have made a video, hold up signs, set up press conferences expressing everything about Helms to the public, but them putting a condom over his house have given them a low credibility, in my opinion.

perhaps it did decrease their credibility, but it got someone's attention and in a comical, symbolic way. As nmwolfboy has pointed out, other tactics had been used before.

I'm also pretty much sure that hoodlums who spray paint swastikas over the homes of Jewish residents think it's funny. To them, swastika is just a sign.

spray painting a home is destructive and vandalism. a swastika is definitely a sign that is meant to intimidate. NOT EVEN THE SAME THING.

Speaking of destruction of property, since somebody mentioned Focus on the Family, I read that 10 years ago, somebody threw rocks into the windows of its campus in Colorado Springs, which broke them.

Red Herring



Once again, when I make a statement that is a strong opinion, I'm strung up for it.

[nmwolfboy]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Yes, Jesse Helms was being an insensitive and offensive bigot, but by law, what these people did was an act of vandalism.

Yet they weren't arrested by the police on the scene, nor were they ever charged with a crime. So for you to say that "by law, what these people did was an act of vandalism" is disingenuous. It's not a matter of law, it's your opinion.

Originally Posted by inca nitta

I'm also pretty much sure that hoodlums who spray paint swastikas over the homes of Jewish residents think it's funny. To them, swastika is just a sign.

And thank you for playing "Really Bad Analogy!" Although it is a semi-clever way for you to demonstrate Godwin's law without actually saying the word "Nazi."

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Speaking of destruction of property, since somebody mentioned Focus on the Family, I read that 10 years ago, somebody threw rocks into the windows of its campus in Colorado Springs, which broke them.

Perhaps people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. (Sorry, i couldn't resist!)

[inca nitta]

Keltic and Scott,

I hear your points, but I am the one who supports non-violence, and this is the reason why I didn't like what these guys did in the video. Personally, I find their actions to be violent, and I am surprised that they didn't get arrested on the spot. But, we don't know what happened to them afterwards.

Just because there is a written justice, it is not always being enforced accordingly, but that's not the real issue. My point is that we must bring about the message nonviolently, and always strive to be the best in doing this.

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Keltic and Scott,

I hear your points, but I am the one who supports non-violence, and this is the reason why I didn't like what these guys did in the video. Personally, I find their actions to be violent, and I am surprised that they didn't get arrested on the spot. But, we don't know what happened to them afterwards.

Just because there is a written justice, it is not always being enforced accordingly, but that's not the real issue. My point is that we must bring about the message nonviolently, and always strive to be the best in doing this.

Sometimes the message needs to be presented in multiple ways.

The video of the house condom is 17 years old. It was made pretty soon after Helms helped vote down a massive AIDS relief bill because he thought The Gays deserved to get sick. It was made when the epidemic was less than 10 years old, and people were just starting to get a handle on it. Helms made sure that homeless people with AIDS couldn't get the AZT they needed.

Does it really surprise you that some people found a non-violent (he wasn't even in town) way to make a statement? It surprises me. I'm almost surprised there wasn't more violence, given the times and the attitude toward us.

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Yes, Jesse Helms was being an insensitive and offensive bigot, but by law, what these people did was an act of vandalism. They could have made a video, hold up signs, set up press conferences expressing everything about Helms to the public, but them putting a condom over his house have given them a low credibility, in my opinion.

It was 1991. They didn't have credibility at all, as far as the mainstream press was concerned. Low credibility is better than none. A press conference would have been ignored.

I'm also pretty much sure that hoodlums who spray paint swastikas over the homes of Jewish residents think it's funny. To them, swastika is just a sign.

Since we're making bad analogies, how about comparing this video to someone helping slaves get out of the South on the underground railroad. The person is damaging property (the slaves) and causing hardship for the property owner. Why couldn't they just hold a press conference to tell people that slavery is bad?

[nmwolfboy]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

I hear your points, but I am the one who supports non-violence, and this is the reason why I didn't like what these guys did in the video. Personally, I find their actions to be violent, and I am surprised that they didn't get arrested on the spot. But, we don't know what happened to them afterwards.

And i support non-violence, too. i just don't see this historical action as violent. Certainly not in comparison to Helms' vitriolic actions at the time which were directly linked to the illness and death of so many. His obstructionism in such a health crisis, THAT was violence.

Actually, i do know what happened to the activists. And a quick google search turned up eye-witness reports as well as reports from the activists themselves. When the cops arrived, the activists were told to remove the 'condom'. The cops stood by while the activists climbed up again and removed the 'condom'. They did. No one was arrested. No charges were filed or pursued.

Pax et bonum,
scott

[Alecto]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Yes, Jesse Helms was being an insensitive and offensive bigot, but by law, what these people did was an act of vandalism. They could have made a video, hold up signs, set up press conferences expressing everything about Helms to the public, but them putting a condom over his house have given them a low credibility, in my opinion.

I'm also pretty much sure that hoodlums who spray paint swastikas over the homes of Jewish residents think it's funny. To them, swastika is just a sign.

Speaking of destruction of property, since somebody mentioned Focus on the Family, I read that 10 years ago, somebody threw rocks into the windows of its campus in Colorado Springs, which broke them.

The fact that it might be deemed vandalism legally speaking is not the question here, and in fact has NO impact (you should know by now from this site) on the moral implications.

As for the swastika: did we really just compare a symbol of hatred and an implicit threat of violence with what effectively is a simple message banner that decided to accessorize? So you're one of those people for whom the word "faggot" is totally the same thing as the word "breeder", right? It's been addressed elsewhere, but NOWHERE CLOSE.

[andrewlittle]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

So, you find it funny that these activists have vandalized the private property of Jesse Helms? So, I guess it means it's all right to commit vandalism, and even destruction of other people's properties, just because their politcal opinion is different from ours? Is that right?

... and even better to destroy the whole damn world - world? Nay, the universe, just because of different political opinions. You saw, I presume, the same video that I did. What vandalism? What damage? What did you see in your imagination that escalated this to "destruction of other people's property"?

This has all the earmarks of someone working themselves up into a lather - and over what? A story that is, as has been pointed out, 17 years old. What is really the problem here, Inca? If this reaction is truly about this story, it appears you may just be a wad looking for a pair of knickers - any pair of knickers.

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Yes, Jesse Helms was being an insensitive and offensive bigot, but by law, what these people did was an act of vandalism. They could have made a video, hold up signs, set up press conferences expressing everything about Helms to the public, but them putting a condom over his house have given them a low credibility, in my opinion.

I'm also pretty much sure that hoodlums who spray paint swastikas over the homes of Jewish residents think it's funny. To them, swastika is just a sign.

Speaking of destruction of property, since somebody mentioned Focus on the Family, I read that 10 years ago, somebody threw rocks into the windows of its campus in Colorado Springs, which broke them.

As has been pointed out, the leap to the swastika is equally as irrational and disengenuous. At least you didn't say anything about these queers humping Helm's dog, too, or having some mass polyamorous marriage ceremony on his lawn. Shit, man, get a grip - the whole point was to wreck all the hetero marriages on the block and recruit the divorcees, and their teenage children, to ho-mo-secks-you-al-ity.

Tell you what, answer me this. Do you think anyone who puts a giant condom on someone's house is concerned about their credibility? Don't you think they are looking to make one big statement - get media attention - and even possibly get arrested? And, you know, I'm just guessing, but I'd bet they didn't do this because they thought it was funny. I figure they did it because it would send chills of ickiness streaming down peoples' backs.

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Keltic and Scott,

I hear your points, but I am the one who supports non-violence ...

OMG - FINALLY. Now I know who is THE ONE supporting non-violence. I have been wondering who it is - and now, after all this time I find out it is you. I had at times thought it might have been a national figure like MLK Jr, or maybe Keltic or Scott, or even Daniel - actually, one time I even worried it could be me acting on my subconscious inclinations - but now I can rest easy. It is you who is THE ONE that supports non-violence. I am off the hook.

Btw, is your ego in the Guinness Book of World Recortds, too?

... and this is the reason why I didn't like what these guys did in the video. Personally, I find their actions to be violent, and I am surprised that they didn't get arrested on the spot. But, we don't know what happened to them afterwards.

In what way where they violent? Who got hurt? Where is the injury - other than your sensibilities, of course? What property was damaged? What the hell is your definition of "violent"?

If what you have communicated is non-violence - bringing up Nazism into this discussion, using "red herrings", and drawing conclusions using increasingly irrational and absurb hyperbole - I'll eat your shorts. You have done violence to the meaning of non-violence itself.

Just because there is a written justice, it is not always being enforced accordingly, but that's not the real issue. My point is that we must bring about the message nonviolently, and always strive to be the best in doing this.

Actually, there is a written law - not a written justice. Justice is an outcome that may or may not occur with the application of a law. Then again, if it's not the real issue, why the hell did you bring it up? What you are advocating is bringing up messages that don't make anyone uncomfortable, don't anger or offend anyone, and don't make any difference whatsoever. Jesus was non-violent, but he pissed off a lot of people and offended their sensibilities.

There's something about your post that is - well, unnerving. You use language that is more extreme than the sitruation warrants, you escalate the offenses in your mind as you get yourself worked up, you bring up old hurts (although, for the life of me. I don't know what a few broken windows at FOF has to do with you or this subject) as if they just happened and are actually pertinent to the conversation. I don't know - I'm trying to put my finger on it.

I know, you sound like someone someone else who ued to post here a long time ago. You couldn't be him, though - he was an out and out nutjob.

[inca nitta]

Originally Posted by nmwolfboy

And i support non-violence, too. i just don't see this historical action as violent. Certainly not in comparison to Helms' vitriolic actions at the time which were directly linked to the illness and death of so many. His obstructionism in such a health crisis, THAT was violence.

Actually, i do know what happened to the activists. And a quick google search turned up eye-witness reports as well as reports from the activists themselves. When the cops arrived, the activists were told to remove the 'condom'. The cops stood by while the activists climbed up again and removed the 'condom'. They did. No one was arrested. No charges were filed or pursued.

Pax et bonum,
scott

Thanks Scott for bringing this up. I was not aware of it. I am glad that they have complied with the police. I believe it was a right thing to do.

Originally Posted by Matt Algren

Sometimes the message needs to be presented in multiple ways.

The video of the house condom is 17 years old. It was made pretty soon after Helms helped vote down a massive AIDS relief bill because he thought The Gays deserved to get sick. It was made when the epidemic was less than 10 years old, and people were just starting to get a handle on it. Helms made sure that homeless people with AIDS couldn't get the AZT they needed.

Does it really surprise you that some people found a non-violent (he wasn't even in town) way to make a statement? It surprises me. I'm almost surprised there wasn't more violence, given the times and the attitude toward us.

It was 1991. They didn't have credibility at all, as far as the mainstream press was concerned. Low credibility is better than none. A press conference would have been ignored.
Since we're making bad analogies, how about comparing this video to someone helping slaves get out of the South on the underground railroad. The person is damaging property (the slaves) and causing hardship for the property owner. Why couldn't they just hold a press conference to tell people that slavery is bad?

I'm sorry but I don't see any similarity, here. Slaves were living human beings, while houses are objects. Perhaps, throwing dirt at the mansions of the plantation owners would be a better example. The point I was trying to make, was that when people do certain things, they don't think that their actions could offend somebody. It is also common that people who either throw objects, spray paint, or cover up with something at other people's houses, they think that it's just a little prank, some fun, what have you.
For me, it was personal connection; my grandparents are Jewish and one day, they saw a swastika painted on their mailbox. When they caught the perpetrators, they discovered that the kids who did it, had no hate towards them whatsoever, but did it just for joking, to get their attention. Eventually, it was also discovered that the kids who did it, were my grandparents' neighbors, who lived in the same apartment building. A couple of days before the incident, my grandpa has come to their apartment and complained that they were playing their music too loud. He even threatened to call the superintendant. Certainly, those kids were highly displeased with this.

When I saw this video, I noticed that Jesse Helms' family were offended by that big piece of condom on their home. Right then and there, I remembered that personal story, mentioned above and this is what I discovered: whenever somebody does or says something offensive to somebody else, the offended party tends to respond to the offender in some crude, prankful way, which would also offend the party back, and I believe that such actions will not stop hostility. Jesse Helms had said and done gruesome, horrible things that have offended many people, but putting condom on his house where he lived, therefore it offended him and his family, has not brought about any positive changes, definitely it did not reach his heart, as far as I know.

My grandpa was being pretty grumpy when he complained to those kids about their music. BTW, they were Afro-American and he expressed himself in a way that they found to be offensive, thus it elicited them to spray paint swastika on their mailbox. However, that action has influenced my grandparents to have a pretty close minded opinion of Blacks.

My point is this; when somebody intentionally or not intentionally offends us, please, don't do something to that somebody that would offend him or her. I don't believe that it would be productive.

I guess my definition of violence is any action that has a high potential to offend somebody.

PS: If what I've said so far, has offended anybody, then I apologize.

PPS: Yes, Alecto. I personally find the word "breeder" to be dirty. Almost as dirty as the one you mentioned before.

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by inca nitta

Thanks Scott for bringing this up. I was not aware of it. I am glad that they have complied with the police. I believe it was a right thing to do.



I'm sorry but I don't see any similarity, here. Slaves were living human beings, while houses are objects. Perhaps, throwing dirt at the mansions of the plantation owners would be a better example. The point I was trying to make, was that when people do certain things, they don't think that their actions could offend somebody. It is also common that people who either throw objects, spray paint, or cover up with something at other people's houses, they think that it's just a little prank, some fun, what have you.
For me, it was personal connection; my grandparents are Jewish and one day, they saw a swastika painted on their mailbox. When they caught the perpetrators, they discovered that the kids who did it, had no hate towards them whatsoever, but did it just for joking, to get their attention. Eventually, it was also discovered that the kids who did it, were my grandparents' neighbors, who lived in the same apartment building. A couple of days before the incident, my grandpa has come to their apartment and complained that they were playing their music too loud. He even threatened to call the superintendant. Certainly, those kids were highly displeased with this.

When I saw this video, I noticed that Jesse Helms' family were offended by that big piece of condom on their home. Right then and there, I remembered that personal story, mentioned above and this is what I discovered: whenever somebody does or says something offensive to somebody else, the offended party tends to respond to the offender in some crude, prankful way, which would also offend the party back, and I believe that such actions will not stop hostility. Jesse Helms had said and done gruesome, horrible things that have offended many people, but putting condom on his house where he lived, therefore it offended him and his family, has not brought about any positive changes, definitely it did not reach his heart, as far as I know.

My grandpa was being pretty grumpy when he complained to those kids about their music. BTW, they were Afro-American and he expressed himself in a way that they found to be offensive, thus it elicited them to spray paint swastika on their mailbox. However, that action has influenced my grandparents to have a pretty close minded opinion of Blacks.

My point is this; when somebody intentionally or not intentionally offends us, please, don't do something to that somebody that would offend him or her. I don't believe that it would be productive.

I guess my definition of violence is any action that has a high potential to offend somebody.

PS: If what I've said so far, has offended anybody, then I apologize.

PPS: Yes, Alecto. I personally find the word "breeder" to be dirty. Almost as dirty as the one you mentioned before.

Who said the point was 'reaching his heart'? Their point was to get publicity and to make a political statement that would not otherewise be heard. Jesse Helms' heart was never going to be reached, and the time came to work around him. One way to do that is to minimize him and openly mock his ridiculously hateful point of view.

And I'm sorry, putting a big tent over somebody's house is not the same as painting a symbol that represents hate and murder. It's not even close.

I get the impression that you want everybody to sit down and have tea and hug this all out. Sorry, but the bigots ain't coming to the table without a little help. And SEVENTEEN YEARS AGO, while thousands were negatively affected (up to and including death) by Helms's vote, one of the ways people helped them to the table was to make a mocking, HARMLESS statement that DIDN'T HURT ANYBODY.

As for the analogy, I already said it was a bad one. And no, slaves were not people. At best they were 3/5 of a person, and they were usually treated as less than that. They, as far as their owners were concerned, were property, the same as the tractor in the back 40. That's why getting them out was more important than worrying about whether you were causing angst or offense or whatever to the slave owner.

But I digress.