Ralph Northam yearbook page shows men in blackface and KKK robe

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”

I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.

But, military also has access to camouflage--and it is not that hard to remove. Think about the black that athletes use under their eyes.

[Anonymous]

My new conspiracy theory:

Fairfax was on the Planned Parenthood Board.
Planned Parenthood could not have been pleased about Northam's public statements on abortion at delivery and the "discussion."

Maybe, PP had something to do with the yearbook release.......I know they've said it was a classmate upset about his comments about abortion...maybe, we should not assume that it was a pro-life classmate.

This certainly changed the subject.

[Anonymous]

From Jonathan Martin of the NYT:

NEWS: AG Mark Herring had a private meeting this morning with the legislative black caucus, Del. Lamont Bagby confirms.

Asked if Herring discussed a photo of his own, Bagby said “He’ll talk about it.”

Before he could say more, the House min ldr pulled him into a private room.
https://twitter.com/jmartnyt/status/1093180925893070854?s=21

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”

I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.

Polished boots for years. You use thick cloth and don’t get a lot on your hands. You apply a thick coat, let it dry, and polish. Yes you get some on your hands but not that much. Also many people used a swab like container of liquid polish that is even cleaner and more easy to apply.

Never in my life have I seen anyone in the Military walking around with hands stained with polish.

Anyone who would apply boot polish to their FACE is absolutely insane. It has a strong chemical smell and is probably extremely bad for your facial skin. It smells like oily chemicals.

I have no idea how anyone could defend this in thei slightest.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”

I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.

Polished boots for years. You use thick cloth and don’t get a lot on your hands. You apply a thick coat, let it dry, and polish. Yes you get some on your hands but not that much. Also many people used a swab like container of liquid polish that is even cleaner and more easy to apply.

Never in my life have I seen anyone in the Military walking around with hands stained with polish.

Anyone who would apply boot polish to their FACE is absolutely insane. It has a strong chemical smell and is probably extremely bad for your facial skin. It smells like oily chemicals.

I have no idea how anyone could defend this in thei slightest.

Uh, explaining is not defending. You are saying that you don't know why anyone would put shoe polish on their face because of the inherent properties of shoe polish, right? Yet, I assume that you have never put shoe polish on your face. The poster above seems to believe that you could only know the problems of putting shoe polish on your face if you had previously put shoe polish on your face. You are an example of that not being true. You are providing an example of exactly what I was saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”

I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.

But, military also has access to camouflage--and it is not that hard to remove. Think about the black that athletes use under their eyes.

Not nearly as viscous as shoe polish and not available in 1984.

[Anonymous]

Virginia sure has a weird way of celebrating Black History Month.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”

I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.

Polished boots for years. You use thick cloth and don’t get a lot on your hands. You apply a thick coat, let it dry, and polish. Yes you get some on your hands but not that much. Also many people used a swab like container of liquid polish that is even cleaner and more easy to apply.

Never in my life have I seen anyone in the Military walking around with hands stained with polish.

Anyone who would apply boot polish to their FACE is absolutely insane. It has a strong chemical smell and is probably extremely bad for your facial skin. It smells like oily chemicals.

I have no idea how anyone could defend this in thei slightest.

Uh, explaining is not defending. You are saying that you don't know why anyone would put shoe polish on their face because of the inherent properties of shoe polish, right? Yet, I assume that you have never put shoe polish on your face. The poster above seems to believe that you could only know the problems of putting shoe polish on your face if you had previously put shoe polish on your face. You are an example of that not being true. You are providing an example of exactly what I was saying.

Why did you remove the description the governor gave of putting shoe polish on his face? He clearly did so? He admitted if publicly. It was a public press conference and he explained how and why he did it?

[Anonymous]

Former Sen Allan Simpson (R-WY) performed in blackface in 1968 while he was a minority whip, served 3 more terms and gave a eulogy at President Bush's funeral.

No one blinked an eye.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”

I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.

Polished boots for years. You use thick cloth and don’t get a lot on your hands. You apply a thick coat, let it dry, and polish. Yes you get some on your hands but not that much. Also many people used a swab like container of liquid polish that is even cleaner and more easy to apply.

Never in my life have I seen anyone in the Military walking around with hands stained with polish.

Anyone who would apply boot polish to their FACE is absolutely insane. It has a strong chemical smell and is probably extremely bad for your facial skin. It smells like oily chemicals.

I have no idea how anyone could defend this in thei slightest.

Uh, explaining is not defending. You are saying that you don't know why anyone would put shoe polish on their face because of the inherent properties of shoe polish, right? Yet, I assume that you have never put shoe polish on your face. The poster above seems to believe that you could only know the problems of putting shoe polish on your face if you had previously put shoe polish on your face. You are an example of that not being true. You are providing an example of exactly what I was saying.

Why did you remove the description the governor gave of putting shoe polish on his face? He clearly did so? He admitted if publicly. It was a public press conference and he explained how and why he did it?

That's not in dispute. Why don't you read the thread and figure out what we are discussing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Virginia sure has a weird way of celebrating Black History Month.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”


I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.


But, military also has access to camouflage--and it is not that hard to remove. Think about the black that athletes use under their eyes.


Not nearly as viscous as shoe polish and not available in 1984.

And this is just symptomatic of the whole issue, isn't it? Things were seen differently in 1984. Should we try to understand the context of this whole thing as it relates to time and place? Or should we condemn based on our 2019 "awareness"? I'm not saying this guy was right, but this has to be considered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I fail to understand why the smoking gun is ignored: He said he only put “A little bit of shoe polish on his cheeks” because he knew “you cannot get shoe polish off.”


I also thought of that, but then he was in the military and, therefore, had lots of experience with shoe polish from polishing shoes and boots. I assume that it is just as hard to get off of your hands as it is your face.


But, military also has access to camouflage--and it is not that hard to remove. Think about the black that athletes use under their eyes.


Not nearly as viscous as shoe polish and not available in 1984.

And this is just symptomatic of the whole issue, isn't it? Things were seen differently in 1984. Should we try to understand the context of this whole thing as it relates to time and place? Or should we condemn based on our 2019 "awareness"? I'm not saying this guy was right, but this has to be considered.

This conduct was unacceptable in 1984.

[Anonymous]

I went to medical school around the same time as Northam, and I am African American. If I had been at that party and Northam and his friend appeared like that, I would have departed, saying nothing. They might have been so caught up in themselves that they would not have noticed who was offended. Then we would have had little to do with each other afterward. So Northam would have learned nothing about his behavior.

[Anonymous]

Northam should at least apologize to his classmates.