Razing, redux

With all of the pandering done by Democrats to garner support from the iconoclasts, when will they move to rename the Richard Russell Senate Office Building?  A staunch segregationist and bigot, Russell not only filibustered in an attempt to block the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but along with a dozen or so other Southern Senators boycotted the Democratic National Convention later that year to protest after Lyndon Johnson signed the bill into law. 

It's quite an honor to have one of only three Senate office buildings carry one's name.  I think there have been about 2,000 US Senators in history, going back to 1789.  Three out of 2,000!  And there was nobody with a cleaner record than Richard Russell?  

As a point of fact, if I recall, the only Senator to vote against naming the building for Russell was--Michigan's own "Conscience of the Senate," Philip Hart!!!!!!  Now, regardless if I agreed or disagreed with Hart's politics, there is a man to admire.

 

For that matter, what about the noted Klansman Robert Byrd, a long-time Dem leader honored by the party at his death.  He served in the US House and Senate for almost 60 years.  At his funeral, a certain President eulogized him as "a true champion" and "a voice of principle and reason."  Granted, maybe the man changed over the years.  But if he could change, why in the eyes of so many are others with questionable pasts not allowed to change?

 

I believe any attempts to censure either man was met with the rationale from Democrats, "He was a product of his times."  So, then, why weren't Washington, Jefferson, et al, even Columbus, "products of their times?"

 

If I recall correctly, too, aren't there statues of Lenin in NYC, LA, and Seattle?  What about the statue of Che Guevara in NYC?  Real friends of democracy there, both of them.

Of course, maybe like the British demonstrator who didn't know Winston Churchill, these American protesters don't know the history of their country either.

 

Just askin'.