Talk:Jesse Helms/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

NPOV

What about this senator's wild attacks against art and artistic critical thinking? This senator was a censor and an ennemy of democracy in his crusade against the arts, not far from the infamous Mac Carthy. This article is not encyclopedic, it is a hagiography. I guess it is being controlled by Americans, and furthermore by American Conservatives... See Steven Dubin, Arresting images, Routledge, 1992, if you want to correct this grossly inappropriate Wikipedia article!

There are other parts to Helms's career than his racism - arts policy and relations with the UN come to mind. His Wikipedia article shouldn't be merely a collection of anecdotes about how he doesn't like black people. That shortchanges readers on both sides of the aisle. --Saucy Intruder (talk) 13:06, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

On the other hand, Helms is perhaps most famous for his most controversial remarks. No doubt why so many of them show up here. I'm sure his statements on the arts and the UN are a bit more boring. Beanbatch 17:08, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Maybe so, but who are we to decide it's not worthy information for an encyclopedia? We don't only include what is flashy or controversial! At least, I hope we don't... Zanturaeon 11:12, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

We DO get decide what is worthy, this is Wiki! We could just say "Jesse was a senator" and be done. But any encyclopedia focuses on why someone is famous (or infamous). There are lots of senators. There are not many Jesse Helmses. What makes him different and interesting? Mainly the controversial stuff. We should not shy away from documented facts, even if they are ugly. We should neither engage in hostile POVs, as some of this article does. I see nothing wrong with including documented quotes from the senator himself. Folks added these to back up their racist claims with facts. Beanbatch 17:38, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Beanbatch has a very good point I think. To not point out his racism would be like ignoring the elephant in the room. H.P. Lovecraft was racist, and there's even information about that on his wiki. Roint 04:52, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

To not point out his racism would be simply honest. There's not a shred of evidence that Helms was ever racist or segregationist.

Nor was he ever against the arts. In fact, he was a longtime patron of the arts, for example with his very generous support for the non-profit classical musical station, WCPE Raleigh. He opposed government-supported porn, not art. To pretend otherwise is to blatantly misrepresent him.

I deleted the link to this ridiculous Barry Yoeman smear piece: http://www.barryyeoman.com/articles/whitewashed.html which says that Helms "had his fingers in everything from black-voter intimidation to a veiled threat against President Clinton's life." Of course he did no such thing, ever, and that sort of smear has no place in Wikipedia, even as a link. NCdave (talk) 15:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC); 04:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC); and 01:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC).

Soooooo, the quotes from his TV editorials, those were fabricated by this Yeomans guy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gogosoul63 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Invading Geneva

I just noticed this on a discussion board somewhere:

Actually I do believe US senator Jesse Helms called for as much recently. I believe during the whole "Americans should not be subject to trials at the world court for war crimes but we don't mind if brown people are put on trial" debate, Helms demanded congress pass a law that basically said if an American was ever put on trial before the world court, it would automatically trigger a law compelling the US government to invade The Hague.

Is there a source for this? [this unsigned comment was added on 24 August 2005 by 211.202.17.124]

Quotes, etc.

I think that anything attributed to the Senator as a quote must be documented by a verifiable source. This business about racism is interesting, but much appears to be politically motivated. Obviously there are different perspectives on this man and we should strive for objectivity.

Questionable sources are not acceptable either. Mike 14:21, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

These certainly should be cited:

...as his "humorous" habit of calling all black people "Fred." Helms' seemingly nostalgic remembrances of segregation also led many to call him racist.

These editorials are often cited as proof that Helms is prejudiced. For example, in one he calls the University of North Carolina the "University of Negroes and Communists."

The fact that the former quote was whitewashed from his page several times is completely ridiculous. Helms used the term "University of Niggers and Communists" several times on his old radio show. He was asked about his use of the term several times. This is a fabulous example of conservatives using bias to cover up fact. Many people used the term "Niggers" in the 1950s and 1960s (and even later) as that was the customary term to use at the time. It says more about history than anything. That Helms' supporters demand that it be cleansed from his Wiki entry is an example of them trying to hide what the Senator believed.

Beyond the matter of proper citations, the article is peppered with many NPOV flags like "many have said" or "some say." Who said what? When did they say it? Where and when was it reported? [this unsigned comment was added on 28 February 2006 by 137.189.4.1]

Controversies References

The controversies section is very poorly referenced, the references are either to ideological publications or are nonexistant. Fix them or they should be removed per convention. 70.17.101.218 (talk) 21:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I strongly agree! At first glance the reference links after several of the alleged racist remarks make it appear that there must be something to these accusations against Helms. But if you follow the links you'll find they point to unreliable sources, like the notoriously leftist FAIR, and an anti-Christian blog site, www.bettybowers.com. NCdave (talk) 06:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps there does need to be some mention of some of the controversies surrounding Sen. Helms, but it should be truthful, not a load of undocumented and poorly documented accusations by his political enemies.

Some of the material in this section is very obviously nonsense. For example, after a describing a conversation which (Sen. Moseley-Braun claimed) occurred between herself and Sen. Helms in an elevator, the article says, "Following the incident, Helms hired Claude Allen, who is black, as his press secretary." Actually, Mr. Allen worked for Sen. Helms in the 1980s, and Moseley-Braun did not become a senator until 1993.

This paragraph is especially pernicious:

"Helms used racial issues in many elections; for instance, in 1990, he ran the famous 'Hands' television ad in a tough re-election race. The ad has become legendary in Southern political circles as the most direct appeal to white backlash in modern American politics. The ad played upon white voters' fears that affirmative action policies might prevent them from getting a job that would go to a 'less-qualified' black person"

That description turns the truth exactly upside down. The ad in question was anti-racist. It accurately criticized Gantt for supporting racial quotas. The key line in the ad was this:

"Gantt supports Ted Kennedy's racial quota law, that makes the color of your skin more important than your qualifications."

But to read the Wikipedia's description of the ad you'd think that it was Helms, rather than Gantt, that was supporting a racist policy. NCdave (talk) 06:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Two weeks ago I added a citation request for one of the smears of Helms which was supported only by an accusation on the notoriously leftist FAIR web site. The accusation was that, "in one [WRAL] editorial he labeled the University of North Carolina (UNC) the 'University of Negroes and Communists.'" That claim stretches credulity. If there were documentation available for such a thing, you can bet that his U.S. Senate opponents would have dug it up and used it against him (in other than whisper campaigns). Since they did not do so, it is a safe bet that no such documentation exists. So I am not surprised that nobody answered the citation request.

Nevertheless, I tried hard to find a real source for that accusation. There just isn't any. There is neither a transcript or a recording of such a remark, and no accuser even gives a date on which he was claimed to have said it. The Wikipedia article referenced a FAIR article[1] with a laundry list of accusations of racism against various people. It makes the charge that Helms used that phrase, but does not give any indication of where or when he supposedly used it. However it cites the name of a newspaper as its source, and gives a date. Well, I found the newspaper, and the referenced article. The newspaper isn't in North Carolina, it is in West Virginia (where Helms' editorials were never aired)! What's more, the article wasn't even a news article, it was a 1995 Helms-bashing editorial, which said that Helms started out in politics as "a segregation-forever crusader" (which is transparently false), and also claimed that he had once "dubbed UNC the 'University of Negroes and Communists.'" And there the trail stops. The West Virginia newspaper gave no source for the accusation. If (as the Wikipedia article claimed) the remark was made on the air, in one of Helms' WRAL editorials, then it would have had to have been prior to 1973, which means that there is no source for the accusation dated within twenty-two years of the latest date when the remark could have been made!

Being unable to find anything remotely resembling a reliable source for the accusation, and no citation from a reliable source having been produced by anyone else, I've deleted the accusation. NCdave (talk) 10:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

There are about ten more outrageous and unsupported or poorly supported accusations against Helms in the "Controversies" section of this article. I went to a lot of trouble trying to track down the "University of Negroes and Communists" accusation. I do not have the time to do that with the others.

Most of them would be so politically damaging if they were provable that his Senate opponents would surely have used them against him; hence we can conclude with high confidence that they are unproven. However, for now, I've just flagged the section with a {{disputed-section}} tag. If anyone thinks they can dig up any documentation from reliable sources for any of those dubious accusations, please add the citations pronto, or at least discuss it here. NCdave (talk) 10:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I've done some research on this. It seems that the term comes from the Senate race between Frank Porter Graham and Willis Smith. Some people say that Helms was the one who came up for the term. However, that's not proof that Helms did use the term (and Helms did deny it)

Reeves also jerked the senator's chain with the statement that Helms was a "local Rush Limbaugh 25 years ago who made his mark by calling the University of North Carolina the University of Negroes and Communists." Helms said that is a lie; he is sure he never used that term.

Reeves said he wrote it after seeing "documentation" of its accuracy. His documentation, however, turned out to be a transcript of a National Public Radio broadcast earlier this fall in which a newspaper editor from Alabama made the statement that he had heard that Helms was "credited" with inventing the racially charged slogan 45 years ago during the U.S. Senate race between Frank Porter Graham and Willis Smith. Helms was a campaign aide to Smith in that Democratic primary and later worked on Smith's senate staff.

"HELMS SAYS THE JOURNALISTIC SHARKS ARE ALREADY BEGINNING TO FORM A CIRCLE"

NED CLINE

986 words

1 November 1995

Greensboro News & Record

Willis Smith ran a scurrilous campaign. His people distributed a "cropped" photograph showing Graham's wife dancing with a black man. His campaign literature referred to UNC as the "University of Negroes and Communists" - a phrase attributed to Smith's chief media adviser, a 28-year-old radio announcer named Jesse Helms.

Speak Now Against the Day: The Generation Before the Civil Rights Movement in the South._(book reviews)

David M. Oshinsky

2158 words

19 December 1994

The New Leader

13

Vol. 77, No. 12, ISSN: 0028-6044

So it seems like this could go in the "Early career" section about the Smith campaign. 99.249.180.247 (talk) 02:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

My apologies! After reviewing the history, I noticed that the "Controversies" section has already been through this process. The really embarrassing thing is that I was the one who flagged the section almost a month ago... and then forgot that I'd done so! After it had been flagged for about 9-1/2 days, someone else deleted the section, per WP:BLP. It stayed deleted for a couple of weeks, and then, two days ago, an anonymous editor (74.132.217.217) reinserted the whole section, minus the {{disputed-section}} tag.

So I'm just going to delete the section again. 74.132.217.217, whoever you are, please discuss it here on the Talk page before reinserting the section. There might well be some bullets from that section that are worth resurrecting, but if you think so then let's discuss them here, first, and try to reach a consensus about the wording and sourcing. Also, I suggest that you read WP:BLP. I think you'll find it helpful. NCdave (talk) 10:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Another anonymous editor (128.211.207.47) has reinserted this section, in defiance of WP:BLP, and without so much as a comment here on the Talk page. I'll revert it. NCdave (talk) 05:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

New user Potato_dude42 reinserted it again. I've reverted and left a message on his Talk page. NCdave (talk) 23:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

This entire wall of text does not appear to be a discussion but seems merely to be a conversation that one user is having with himself. In addtion, I do not really see the validity of most of the arguments made. The great majority of the points stated in the section were properly cited. Just because one may disagree with the source of the facts (i.e. FAIR) does not necessarily make the facts untrue. In any case, I am confused why the entire section was simply deleted, rather than just the specific points that were brought up. Thus, I am re-inserting this section into the article for now. --Potato dude42 (talk) 02:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

"One user having with himself?" I did not start this discussion section, and I did not initially delete the controversies section from the article. However, I did notice one obviously and provably false claim: that Claude Allen was hired after Helms supposedly sang or whistled "Dixie" in the presence of Carol Mosley-Braun. The version you inserted includes the equally false statement that Claude worked for Helms at the time of the incident:

"Helms once deeply offended a black colleague, Democratic Senator Carol Moseley-Braun of Illinois, by singing part of "Dixie" on a Capitol elevator... He then proceeded to sing the song about the good life during slavery to Mosely-Braun... At this time, his press secretary was Claude Allen, an African American.

Actually, Claude Allen quit working for Helms many years before Mosley-Braun was first elected to the Senate, and Dixie has nothing at all to do with slavery.

I tried very hard to track down a reliable source to document one of the many claims in this section, which appeared to have a source. It was a claim that was also made elsewhere in the article, and it cited an article in FAIR. But, as you can see, I tried to find where the accusation came from, and I was able to find nothing anywhere that resembled a reliable source. Neither the FAIR article nor the nasty little West Virginia newspaper editorial that it cited gave any indication of where or when this supposed remark by Helms was made. The claim that he said it in a WRAL editorial is completely unsourced. So what we are left with is an allegation that he said it somewhere, sometime, with no indication of where or when. What's more, if the allegation had been provable, it would have been pure gold for his Senate opponents, yet none of them used it in their multi-million dollar campaigns against him. Can you explain why? I think you know why as well as I do: despite their best efforts, they couldn't find any proof, because it most probably never happened.

WP:RS prohibits inserting unsourced or poorly sourced smears in biographies like this one, and you have reinserted many of them. If you really believe that one of those accusations is true and well-documented, please say which one, here, and show the documentation for it. We've been asking for seven weeks, and nobody has stepped forward with a reliable source for any of these accusations. I welcome you to this discussion, but please do not just reinsert the whole pack of lies again. Pick an accusation you think you can find reliable documentation for, and discuss it here, first. NCdave (talk) 14:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

A Washington Post article isn't considered well documented, well resourced?? http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1871 Please return the controversy section in the name of honest disclosure. Jason —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.75.64 (talk) 02:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Forever Tarnished... A true symbol of Bigotry

I truly believe Jesse Helms legacy will be forever tarnished due to his Racist policies while in office. Wikipedia users should not read half-truths! The true nature of Sen. Helms actions while in office and warped ideals concerning other races and nationalities, should be brought to light in plain view.

The state of North Carolina should be ashamed to have a man like Jesse Helms hold a public office. He was in the same way of Sen.George Wallace, A true symbol of Bigotry! —Preceding unsigned comment added by GRANDEXTRAV (talk • contribs) 17:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Any you'd like to give examples of? --MartinUK (talk) 17:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I've lived in NC for almost a quarter century, and I've never seen any examples of Sen. Helms' "bigotry," "racist policies," or "warped ideals." This sort of name-calling is a violation of Wikipedia's Talk page guidelines, which state, at the very beginning:

The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views.

GRANDEXTRAV, if you have an encyclopedic contribution which you'd like to make to the article, by all means do so. But please try to keep your personal animosities out of it.

Also, please "sign" your Talk page comments with four tildes ("~~~~"), which will automatically add your name & the date/time. NCdave (talk) 19:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

GRANDEXTRAV, you have twice thrice inserted the unsupported statement, "He is also known as a symbol of Bigotry" into this article. Such name-calling violates of Wikipedia's Biographies_of_living_persons policy. I removed it the second time; someone else removed it the previous time. Please do not persist. NCdave (talk) 19:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

GRANDEXTRAV, reviewing the article history, I see that you have inserted this remark about ten times this month, including five times in 24 hours (which is called a "3RR violation"). Please acquaint yourself with WP:BLP and WP:3RR. Both are official Wikipedia policies, which you have violated. NCdave (talk) 20:33, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sen. Helms's legacy will be forever tarnished and he is a true symbol of bigotry. As an aide to the 1950 Senate campaign of North Carolina Republican candidate Willis Smith, Helms helped create attack ads against Smith's opponent Frank Graham, including one ad which read: "White people, wake up before it is too late. Do you want Negroes working beside you, your wife and your daughters, in your mills and factories? Frank Graham favors mingling of the races." :end quote

This is not a personal animosity, its a personal quest for the truth to be told. Not half-truths! The state of North Carolina should be ashamed to have had this man hold a public office.

Alvin A Harris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.232.153.118 (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

In 1950 Helms was a 28 year old Democrat. Now, don't you feel a little bit embarrassed?

When you just uncritically accept every bit of unproven slander you encounter against someone you badly want to despise, to further stoke the fires of your hatred, you end up believing (and repeating) nonsense like that... which certainly doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article.

Also, please sign your comments with four tildes ("~~~~"). NCdave (talk) 05:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

FYI, GRANDEXTRAV was blocked for violating WP:3RR.The block is only 24h, but hopefully he's learned his lesson, and this will put a permanent end to his edit warring. Yilloslime (t) 05:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

anonymous paganism essay

An anonymous editor (152.13.148.211) has added a lengthy essay which ends with the conclusion:

"This ia an example of the still ever-present buring times for neo-Pagan groups and a reason why people must remain vigilant in order to safeguard their rights and freedoms. A.G.H."

I suppose that "A.G.H." might be the signature of whoever wrote it?

Anyhow, it is obviously misplaced in this biography, so I'm going to revert it. NCdave (talk) 20:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

That paganism essay was apparently inspired by an obscure failed amendment that Helms once proposed. While I would contend that it is insufficiently notable to be covered in this biography, a list of Helms' most notable successful legislative efforts would be a valuable addition. For instance, his crusade for a strong effort to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa, especially by the use of anti-virals to stop transmission of HIV from mother to newborn child, was his last big triumph (and it subsequently became a pet cause of President George W. Bush). What else belongs on such a list? NCdave (talk) 21:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

anonymous segragationist accusation

Another anonymous editor (218.158.40.155) has inserted this poorly sourced accusation:

"The campaign which went to a run-off was spearheaded by Helms who, true to his segregationist pedigree, circulated doctored pictures of Smith's opponent dancing with a black man entitled 'White People Wake Up' after which Smith became Senator for North Carolina"

Helms' "segregationist pedigree" was simply the fact that he grew up in the segregated South, which could be said of any Southerner his age, and he was a Democrat, which is certainly not sufficient justification for the accusation. There is no evidence that Helms doctored any photos or circulated any doctored photos, and the (then) 28 year-old Helms certainly did not "spearhead" the successful Democratic primary campaign of NC Bar Association President Willis Smith.

218.158.40.155, if you have evidence that Helms doctored photos or circulated doctored photos, please share it. For now, though, I'm deleting this attack on Helms from the article per WP:BLP. NCdave (talk) 21:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Barrel scrapings

In this edit, I deleted a lot of trivia. First item among seven: Helms is mentioned in the lyrics to "Smells Like Queer Spirit" by Pansy Division, a cover of Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit". The fact that Helms was mentioned -- in what way? to what purpose? -- in the lyrics to some song is desperate barrel-scraping.

I've been generous in leaving five. First among them: Musician Todd Rundgren wrote a song about Helms entitled "Jesse". Uh huh. And? What does it tell anyone about Helms? We're not told, but at least it suggests that it might have said something about Helms (rather than for example providing something to rhyme with "overwhelms") so it stays for now. -- Hoary (talk) 23:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Good job, Hoary. Unencyclopedic is another word that comes to mind for such barrel scrapings. NCdave (talk) 08:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I am a novice on Wiki editing and discussions, but it would seem noteworthy that son Charles was a 9-year old orphan with cerebral palsy when the Helms adopted him.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jesse_Helms" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cohibachurchill (talk • contribs) 15:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

{{refimprove}} tag

On June 13, Coccyx Bloccyx added a "this article needs additional citations for verification" tag to the article, but with no edit summary or comment on the Talk page. Coccyx Bloccyx, would you please tell us what part(s) of the article you think are most in need of better citations/references? Thanks. NCdave (talk) 08:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Adopted son

I am a novice on Wiki editing and discussions, but it would seem noteworthy that son Charles was a 9-year old orphan with cerebral palsy when the Helms adopted him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cohibachurchill (talk • contribs) 15:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Done. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. [Cohibachurchill] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.160.43.173 (talk) 20:26, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Controversies Section

Hi, I just wanted to say that the Controversies section is terrible. Much of it is unverified by any sources, and much of the criticism seems to be made against Jesse Helms simply because he wasn't a liberal. That seems to be the norm on wikipedia, if a politician has an idea that isn't liberal, then it should be put in the criticism section, because some hippy somewhere in America has criticized the person for it. -Brad Kgj08 (talk) 19:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay I took out a bunch of things from the controversy section. Someone took out more though. I think some need mention. I think the "hands" ad should go in its own separate section. When readers see it under the "controversies" section, they immediately will make a certain opinion before actually reading what happened. The arguments laid out in the ad against affirmative action are very common and legitimate. We can't simply throw them into the controversies section because the arguments aren't liberal. But other than that, many of the controversies either had no source, sources that are not trustworthy, or the sources were used incorrectly. There needs to be some mention of some of his racist comments (which we should also point out were in the past...for example, we don't quote Robert Byrd speaking at KKK rallies because we believe in redemption) but they must be verified by reputable sources. -Brad Kgj08 (talk) 19:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Is it ironic or significant that he died on July 4?

Is there significance, or just symbolism, in the date of his death (July 4)? _{Bradley923 (talk) 03:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)}

Notwithstanding one's opinion about Helms' divisive position on many important issues, it seems at least symbolic that a longterm U.S. senator dies on July 4, and in the very early morning hours, as though he hung in there just to make it to the 4th...

Presidents Jefferson, Adams and Monroe, as well as Chief Justice Melville Weston Fuller, also died on that symbolic day. See other July 4 deaths.

According to an early compilation of reaction to his death, the Associated Press quotes several people, including Pres. Bush, the Rev. Billy Graham and Charlotte, NC, mayor and North Carolina GOP gubernatorial candidate Pat McCrory, as referencing the symbolism of Helms dying on July 4.[2]

A startling display of innumeracy on their part. There have been 42 U.S. Presidents, 46 Vice-presidents, 110 Supreme Court Justices, 1897 U.S. Senators, and god-knows-how-many U.S. representatives. It would be extraordinary if there weren't several deaths for any date you'd pick. That there are 5 that you know about for the 4th of July is completely unremarkable. - Nunh-huh 05:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

3 presidents out of 42 dying in the same week would be notable, let alone on the same day. The number of senators is irrelevent to this argument - and I doubt that significantly less than 5 senators have died on the day--MartinUK (talk) 10:11, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Helms was a senator, and the item being discussed is the significance of his death date. Of course the number of senators is completely germane! - Nunh-huh 10:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I added this The Wall Street Journal editorial to the external link sectiob: Jesse Helms: A hero of the Cold War. Asteriks (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)