The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #59351   Message #948396
Posted By: GUEST
08-May-03 - 03:10 AM
Thread Name: Toby Keith/Willie Nelson laud lynching??
Subject: RE: Toby Keith/Willie Nelson laud lynching??
Guest:

Hell, if you have figures on lynchings prior to the end of the
19th century, and can show that these earlier lynchings were
a good thing, out with it.

But we _do_ have the numbers on lynchings during the Klan era,
and I'd say you'll have a hard time topping those numbers,
even "adjusted for population".

As for "evil attempt to suppress black civil liberties",
that's a bit of an understatement. Blacks didn't have
much in the way of civil liberties then, despite the
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. What it was was
a campaign to terrorise the blacks, and if it was an
"attempt", it was a damn good one.

No, Toby Keith doesn't mention "lynch". He says "rope"
and "oak tree". Think you can put two and two together?
And you're right, he doesn't mention "vigilantes". Must
have been an oversight on his part, or maybe his mind
just wasn't on vigilantism. . . .

Yes, I think it is a racist song (and to tell the truth,
as the originator of this thread, I think I brought that
up first). Call it an "overactive imagination" if you
will, but I've presented facts here, which is more than
I can say for you. How you can assume that it refers
to "rough frontier justice", when even Keith doesn't
talk about vigilantes, and when the facts show that the
main people being strung up by mobs were uppity Nigras,
is a bit beyond me. Do elucidate.

Oh, and BTW, "trials", in my mind at least, are these
things where they look at the evidence, and where the
accused has a chance to present their own. See prior
comments of mine concerning how easy it is to convict
innocents (particularly in Texas) even with full "due
process". What do you think of the concept of setting
a time limit for production of exculpatory evidence?
Do you think that Texas's policy of a hard "drop-dead"
date (so to speak) for bringing up new evidence is
a good idea? If someone has incontrovertible _proof_
that they're innocent, should the law allow this to
be considered, or should it just say, "whooops, too
late, too bad" (as Texas and a number of other states
do)?

Cheers,

                            -- Arne Langsetmo