pageok
pageok
pageok
Larry Darby, Holocaust-Denying Atheist Alabama Attorney General Candidate,

is in the news again (thanks to InstaPundit for the pointer); for more on this fellow and his remarkable views about the Holocaust, our "Zionist-Occupied Government," and more, see here.

SLS 1L:
Does this guy stand any actual chance of winning the nomination?

Question: if not, is it because of his anti-semitism or his atheism?
5.13.2006 2:40pm
Steve:
There's no way the guy will win, although there's not much separation in the polls at this point because no candidate has much name recognition at all.

As for the reason why he will lose, it's hard to break it down much further than "he's a kook."
5.13.2006 3:08pm
Beerslurpy (mail) (www):
Alabama has been occupied by zionists? I can almost see the literacy rate rising.
5.13.2006 3:34pm
Muliebrity:
My spouse used to live in Louisiana when David Duke was running for governor against the even-then much-indicted (but unconvicted as of that date) Edwin Edwards.

Lots of cars apparently sported bumper stickers that said:
"Vote for the Crook, it's important"
5.13.2006 5:02pm
Cornellian (mail):
Well it is the state that elected Roy Moore as Chief Justice, so I wouldn't rule anything out.
5.13.2006 6:56pm
John R. Mayne (mail):
Wow, a holocaust denier ends up allying with overtly racist nutjobs.

Shocked, shocked I am.

Has anyone considered that Darby hasn't gone far enough? We have no reliable evidence that this thing called "World War II" existed. The eyewitness statements are from old, unreliable folks, and the non-forged historical records simply don't support the existence of a "war," "Europe," "Germany," or, "Japan." It's an obvious ruse by the quite active World War II industry.

--JRM, pretty sure the trilateral commission is in charge.
5.13.2006 7:00pm
Rational Actor (mail):
OK, I understand why it is troubling to have as a candidate for an important elected position someone who denies the existence of the Holocaust, but why his atheism be an issue? If his atheism in some way makes him a bad candidate, please explain why; and if not, it seems somewhat gratuitous to mention his religious belief next to the word "holocaust denying." It seems, from what I have read, that the guy is a nut job, but I do not think it is fair to hold him out as reprentative of atheist beliefs.
5.13.2006 8:49pm
Eugene Volokh (www):
Oh, I don't think his atheism makes him bad -- as some of the other posts on this thread show, I've criticized hostility to atheism myself. In this post, Darby's atheism is a back reference to remind readers of past posts who this guy is; in those past posts (see the link above), I stressed his atheism because I wanted to warn atheists away from this fellow, who had been a leader in atheist circles.

It's also interesting to see into what odd corners anti-Semitism has spread. We're familiar with Christian anti-Semitism (though fortunately there's much less of it these days than in the past), and with Muslim anti-Semitism -- I wonder how it is that passionate atheism and passionate anti-Semitism go together.
5.13.2006 9:09pm
plunge (mail):
"I wonder how it is that passionate atheism and passionate anti-Semitism go together."

If you think about it, this is as goofy a statement as "I wonder how it is that not being Brad Pitt and anti-Semetism go together." Seriously, how hard is it to understand that atheism isn't itself any sort of guide to anything a person might believe (OTHER than that they don't believe in Gods)?

Now, what I have to wonder is why we hear screams of outrage when people suggest that an insane bigot like Robertson is part of the Republican party and agenda (a man who many people in the Republican party, especially in VA, still regularly kiss the ring of and court the close supporters of, despite the occasional need to distance themselves from one of his wacky pronouncements), but this wacko who basically is running in a Democratic primary that allows in anyone who can get some minimal amount of signatures is being paraded around the conservative blogosphere as an example of what Democrats are all about.
5.14.2006 3:50am
Eugene Volokh (www):
Plunge: I don't know about "the conservative blogosphere" generally, but I'm pretty sure that I haven't once suggested that Darby is an example of what Democrats are all about. If you have some pointers to conservative bloggers who are suggesting that Darby is indeed such an example, please feel free to quote them and link to them.
5.14.2006 4:30pm
the real Eric:
Obviously "passionate" atheism and antisemitism go together at the very least because Judaism is a religion. Among other things.
5.14.2006 8:40pm
plunge (mail):
Well, let's see. I DIDN'T say that you did. But your incredulity about the story being all over the conservative blogsphere is mindboggling.

The story has been on drudge's front page for weeks now in some form or another. It's mentioned FoxNews and its assorted radio pundits variously. Come to think of it, nearly every conservative blog has found reason to mention it in some way or another.

Here's your freerepublic thread, compelte with Byrd in a KKK outfit for chuckles:
weee

Here's "Democrats And America's Enemies Still Think Alike. Racist Dem Denies Holocaust."
yay!

All this for a candidate with no money, who's never broken 12% in the primary polls (which at this point are mostly o people who know nothing about the man or his views), and who is part of the race because they by their own party laws have to allow any registered D to be part of the race if they want to run no matter how ridiculous they are.
5.15.2006 11:20am
Russ (mail):
Plunge,

This would be a chance for democrats to say, "This is not what our party is about. He won't get nominated, and if he did, we'd oppose him so much we'd even vote for the Republican."

I am amused you turn this around on Republicans even when it's a democrat primary. Clean your own house before you go looking to others.
5.15.2006 12:57pm
Lee P (www):
I am a "conservative blogger," and I have posted several entries on Darby over on my site. In my most recent post on the subject, I actually defended the Democrats...well, sort of.

Darby only changed his party affiliation to the Democratic Party within the past year, by the way. Previously, he had considered himself a Libertarian. In the Dem primary for AG, Darby is running against a better-known and better-financed DA from Mobile named John Tyson, Jr. Darby has no chance whatsoever of winning that primary.
5.15.2006 1:24pm
plunge (mail):
"I am amused you turn this around on Republicans even when it's a democrat primary. Clean your own house before you go looking to others."

The house isn't dirty: this guy has no chance of being elected. Anyone that wants to can run as a Democrat in a primary as long as they register as one (or whatever it takes in a given state) and put in minimal effort to qualify. There is no "party veto" over who can run and who can't. It doesn't work like that (in most states, by law it CAN'T work like that).
5.15.2006 2:52pm
Russ Meyer (mail):
"The house isn't dirty: this guy has no chance of being elected."

Fine, then shout that from the rooftops. Say that he is a leftover embarrassment from the Bull Connor era and anyone would be better. But don't get pissed at Eugene for pointing out that he IS a democrat.

Yes, there are some Republicans that do this kind of crap, and I get ashamed of them every time, but I do my best to drum such primates out of the Republican Party. I don't blame democrats for pointing them out - I get mad I didn't find them and deal with them in the first place.
5.15.2006 11:27pm
Public_Defender (mail):
Ads attacking a little known candidate in a primary can increase his name recognization and therefore boost the candidacy (one primary dirty trick is for one party to run ads attacking the weaker candidate of the other party). But here, the cat's out of the bag.

The state Democratic Party has denounced the guy. Other than denouncing the bigot and supporting the non-bigot, what more can the party do?

In all, I think the attention is good. Democratic voters in Alabama have to know how really, really bad it would be for the state and the party for this bigot to be nominated. Atheists need to know that they don't want this guy in any leadership position.
5.17.2006 3:44pm