« Quote Of The Day | Home | Hillary Pollster Mark Penn's Firm Tests Negative Messages On Obama And Edwards -- Including On $400 Haircut »

CNN Picks Up Story Of Rudy South Carolina Co-Chair's Racially Charged Comments

Looks like the big news orgs are starting to pay attention to the "controversial" background of Rudy Giuliani's new South Carolina campaign co-chair.

Yesterday we reported that the official, Arthur Ravenel, Jr., has a bit of a history when it comes to making what are commonly referred to as "racially charged" remarks. Ravenel's greatest hit was probably his reference to the NAACP the "National Association For Retarded People."

Now CNN has grabbed on to the story:

Arthur Ravenel, a former U.S. Congressman and state senator, has his own controversial history. A supporter of flying the Confederate flag on the statehouse grounds, Ravenel referred to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) as the “National Association for Retarded People” at a flag rally in 2000, according to the Charleston Post and Courier.

Arthur Ravenel later said he inadvertently mixed up his words and apologized to mentally handicapped people for comparing them to members of the NAACP, according to the newspaper.

CNN adds this interesting tidbit: The Rudy campaign is declining to comment on its new S.C. co-chair's colorful past. If more big news orgs pick up on this, that might change.

More soon.


26 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

it's nice to see the media give one-tenth the scrutiny they have to non-issues of Edwards.

Campaign directors for Giuliani distributing cocaine, covering up pedophilia and now racistst accusations.

there's no way Giuliani gets the nomination.

who drops out first McCain or Giuliani

user-pic

He apologized to mentally handicapped people for comparing them to african-americans? The sounds like a snub in and of itself. How about apologizing to NAACP for saying they're all "retarded" and then apologizing to mentally handicapped people for using the disparaging term "retarded".

This guy is a classic bigot.

user-pic

If it's true that you can judge a person by the company he or she keeps, at the very least, Rudy has a lot of explaining to do.

user-pic

Rudy has a lot of explaining to do, particularly in terms of judgment. Hey, anyone in Giuliani's campaign ever hear of "The Google"? Why not, as a first step, google the name of the person you're going to put into an important position in your campaign? I did it, and came up with 76 hits. Duh, duh, duh.

And thanks, Greg, for calling those remarks "racially charged". The CNN piece is just calling them "controversial". So it's "controversial" now, to be a bigot?

Wait. This is the most trusted name in news that just put Glenn Beck in a guest host position for next week. What am I thinking?

user-pic

"apologized to mentally handicapped people for comparing them to members of the NAACP"

That's the substance of his apology? You've got to be kidding me.

user-pic

Just remember, when he does drop out he's going to endorse someone. How have Rudy's endorsements character references worked out for the recipients in the past? Not so well if memory serves.

user-pic

I don't think any Republicans have ever heard of "The Google". If they had actually used it, The "loyal Bushies" in DC wouldn't have gotten egg all over their face when Rudy tried to get Bernie Chertoff's job. It took all of five seconds to dig up lots of dirt on Kerik.

user-pic

CT Voter,
They have to call it controversial, since as you point out, they have a bigot filling in for Zahn next week. It is obvious that CNN is a joke. Beck's shitty show sucks ratings wise, yet CNN is endlessly trying to keep it alive.

user-pic

Now you can add Racists for Rudy to his coalition outreach, in addition to crackheads and pedophile priests.

The Republican Party of the 21st century is the party of Jefferson Davis, not Abraham Lincoln, and the defection of bigoted Dixiecrats like Ravenel to the GOP illustrates this.

Maybe he should spend more time tending to his yay-yo snorting son and less time on politics.

user-pic

Rudolph a racist? Inconceivable.

user-pic

Off topic, but still good news - looks like someone is actually paying attention to the fact that Hollywood Fred is not, in fact, a D.C. outsider: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070626/ap_on_el_pr/fred_thompson_lobbying.

The sweetest part of the story is that the AP expressly links Freddie to fromer Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

That's gotta sting.

user-pic

Isn't it pretty disturbing that a completely indefensible position is now being labeled as "controversial"? "Controversial"?? How about "stomach churning", "deplorable", "shocking"?

Seems disturbingly tame, to me.

user-pic

Not a question of Julie Annie being racist. It's a question of his judgment in managing a campaign. Like, think about Katherine Harris' campaign.

Impending implosion, anybody?

user-pic

I agree. This guy is a classic bigot.

Obama had a very successful rally in Greenville, SC, a couple of weeks ago. He attracted a highly enthusiastic, racially diverse crowd, that was more than twice as big as the most optimistic prediction that had been made.

I was hoping that Obama's success would be a good omen for the future, but it is a very bad sign that Giuliani has elevated this slimeball to such a high position. I hope it bites him.

user-pic

The people that Rudy is trying to appeal to probably agree with what this guy said. This seems like classic republican politics, by appointing this guy Rudy is saying I agree with his views but cannot say it because of the politicaly correct media.

Rudy gets the best of both worlds he can claim moderate views on gay rights and abortion rights and guys like this can tell the base that Rudy really is one of them.

user-pic

None of this matters, of course. Unless Ronald Reagan's corpse comes back to life and enters the race, I just don't see the Republicans having a viable candidate for '08.

user-pic

I am a progressive Democrat who has lived in Charleston, SC, for 35+ years. For those who care for information, rather than getting their jollies by insulting people they know little about, I offer the following about Arthur Ravenel, Jr.

Ravenel is not a "typical bigot." But he does step on his tongue rather often -- as did another moderate Charleston politician, former US Senator Ernest F. Hollings.

Arthur Ravenel, Jr., had a Downes syndrome son who was a treasured member of his family and who has always been included in campaign photos of Ravenel's family. One of Arthur's daughters, now a nurse but formerly a lawyer, is as liberal politically as they come.

Is it bizarre for a father who has lovingly included a son with Downes syndrome in family activities for years to use the word "retarded"? You're damn right it is, and all of us (especially Ravenel's daughter) groaned when Ravenel did it.

Ravenel ran an independent campaign for mayor of Charleston in 1971 and won a majority of the African-American vote against the entrenched establishment. In the 1950's and 1960's he did not care about the color of a customer's skin, just the color of his/her money, and he enabled many African-Americans to become homeowners at a time when no other home builder would help them get mortgage loans.

It is hard for those of you who are under 50 to understand, but in the 1950's and early 1960's it took courage to treat African-Americans with respect in South Carolina and many other Southern states. In 1963-64, as a high school student body president, I attended meetings of an integrated group of high school leaders in Columbia, S.C. -- that was a mild form of civil disobediance then, since each of us could have been arrested and jailed for meeting persons "of another race" as social equals.

Even though he was never personally a racial bigot, Arthur Ravenel, Jr., has always had a soft spot in his head for all matters Confederate.

Arthur Ravenel, Jr., is definitely a South Carolinian of his generation, but there is not much that is really "typical," about him. Of course, the details of his history will not prevent the press from savaging Giuliani about Ravenel's stupid statements in the past.

In a real-politik sense, Arthur's stupid statements about the NAACP could actually help Giuliani with that segment of South Carolina Republicans (mostly white male professionals and local business men) who are in fact racist.

user-pic

Wow hardhead....don't you sound like a real apologist member of Concerned Citizens Council...or should I say CCC..as in C's to replace the KKK. So how do you account for the full quote of Ravenel's statement given that he was 'such' a real friend of the "coloreds"? You know when he said:

"Ravenel, who has a 40-year-old son whom he describes as retarded, said he misspoke and that while his apology to retarded people was genuine, he owed no apology to the NAACP."

user-pic
Wow hardhead....don't you sound like a real apologist member of Concerned Citizens Council...or should I say CCC

I missed the apology while noting the explanation, independent of whether I accept it.

Offhand I can't remember the name of the author seemingly first describing the most puritanical prude being an aging whore but I would imagine many copied the thought later. One might consider the amazing conversion of Mitt Romney on so many issues just coincidentally needed if Romney is to have any chance of getting the Republican nomination.

I am not overly enchanted by those who took part in blatant racism but sometimes even less so by those who find it incumbent to lecture others on not being sufficiently pure.

How exactly does one think the once solidly Democratic south became a Republican stronghold so powerful that many have proclaimed only a southern Democrat has any chance of being president?

Indeed Fritz Hollings had a - ummm - way with words.

Best, Terry

user-pic

I missed the apology

Apologist don't give apology's they give excuses and rationalizations for their 'acceptable' behavior based on the circumstances, time era, popular views., They justify actions/bigotry not on what is actually  right and wrong  but on whether it is majority opinion i.e. popular. As long as it's popular it's OK...you know just like the excuse Hillary gives for voting on the war 'we all thought' she says as if that justifys her gross error in judgement.. As llong as the majority is doing it...it's right.etc.. That was the point.

People like Ravenel and Hillary don't get wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it and right is right even if no one is doing it. Right and wrong are not popularity contests. People who lack of strength of character often get confused about that because they are WEAK and prefer to PANDER than to stand up with conviction for what is right.

user-pic

Even in the deep South, there are many shades of gray when it comes to racism. I'm not inclined to automatically accept, just from what hardheaded posted, that Ravenel actually has a progressive mind behind his dumb mouth...but it's not beyond the realm of possibility that someone who speaks off-color may also practice respect and tolerance for minorities.

Also, it's not a given that Ravenel's NAACP comment automatically makes him a racist. It's possible he just hates the NAACP (either the entire org. or the local chapter or both) and thinks its members are a bunch of, in his words, retards. I could own a lot of guns and remark that the NRA stands for National Retard Association, out of dislike for their advocacy strategy and philosophy.

Being a big fan of the Confederacy, though, is never helpful in burnishing your racially-tolerant image.

user-pic

I mentioned this in my response to the parent comment, but it's possible Ravenel hates the NAACP yet still respects blacks. The NAACP has been integral to the advancement of civil rights, but it is not a perfect organization.

Obviously, Ravenel doesn't care much about being politically correct. If he were racist at the KKK level, why wouldn't he just outright insult black people, instead of directing all his disdain towards the NAACP?

user-pic
Apologist don't give apology's they give excuses and rationalizations for their 'acceptable' behavior based on the circumstances, time era, popular views., They justify actions/bigotry not on what is actually right and wrong but on whether it is majority opinion i.e. popular. As long as it's popular it's OK...you know just like the excuse Hillary gives for voting on the war 'we all thought' she says as if that justifys her gross error in judgement

I don't really agree with that, whiterosebuddy.

Even accepting that times were quite different, Thomas Jefferson's racist diatribes were abominable. I do not find it particularly difficult to revere the thought behind The Declaration of Independence while abhoring the action of writing racist tracts even while maintaining a relationship with a slave mistress.

What is wrong with Hillary Clinton's current stance regarding Iraq IMO is that she is still wrong. Her vote for cloture to permit a vote on the war was an aberration in my view.

I personally do not fault John Edward's for an admission of error without excuses. One may, of course, question if both his previous vote for the war and his current opinion that continuing the war is wrong - if that is what the latter really is.

JMO.

Best, Terry

user-pic

I don't really agree with that, whiterosebuddy.

Even accepting that times were quite different, Thomas Jefferson's racist diatribes were abominable.

Yes, that's what I said. What are you disagreeing with?

Apologists are the ones who do not get that they base right and wrong on what was popular at the time to justify not being wrong since it was 'popular'.

What is wrong with Hillary Clinton's current stance regarding Iraq IMO is that she is still wrong. Her vote for cloture to permit a vote on the war was an aberration in my view.

We are in agreement. I said this.

I personally do not fault John Edward's for an admission of error without excuses

My focus was on Ravenel and the Hardhead poster apologizing for his bigotry by rationalizing his words/deeds as part of what was the prevailing attitude or popular mindset at the time. Rather than acknowledging that wrong is still wrong even if everybody is doing it and right is still right even if few are doing it.

user-pic

why wouldn't he just outright insult black people, instead of directing all his disdain towards the NAACP?

Because there is no difference between doing so. Ravenel is a typical southern racist. There are black individuals he tolerates but he despises the race. He justifys all negative acts against the group as a race by pointing to what he does for a few individuals. The truth is he is an out and out racist.

user-pic
What are you disagreeing with?

Not much.

Just trying to be disagreeable. Isn't that what these boards are for? :-)

Take care.

Terry

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address