While the article your paper ran on the death of Senator Helms (”Unbending Conservative was Senator for 30 Years”) was not original and merely picked up from the Los Angeles Times, the Post-Dispatch bares some responsibility for its content.

Far too often, conservatives are demonized in the press. That we have come to expect.  However, it is the blatant disregard for fact and evidence that consistently leaves me shaking my head. A partisan or agenda-driven statement does equate to truth or accuracy. So including an article that charges that Helms utilized race-baiting tactics and that, by extension, Republicans are all in league with racists is easy enough to do. Backing that assertion up is substantially harder.

Sure, one could ask an “expert” who happens to be a college professor for his opinion on the late senator. That is like asking a little kid if he wants ice cream for dinner — why ask if you already know the answer? In this case, it is obvious that the reporter for the LA Times simply wanted to paint her story with a patina of investigatory responsibility.

If Ms. Neuman had actually been interested in doing the actual background digging necessary for the bold, and wildly inaccurate, assertions she makes, perhaps she would have been wise to take a cue from author Diane Alden, an author and political commentator who has actually researched and documented the facts of the matter with regard to politics and race.

Ms. Alden points out that in 1948 Harry Truman is rightfully credited with integrating the military. However, his Republican presidential opponent was equally dedicated to that end. a simple look at voting records of the time illustrate that of the 26 major pieces of civil rights legislation after 1933, Democrats opposed them 80% of the time while Republicans supported them 96%. Again, though, why believe one person? Simply look at the historical record — it is open to the public.

Even the landmark 1964 civil rights bill came out of the house with a scorecard reading 138 Republicans for versus 34 against whereas the Democrat score card illustrated much more opposition with 152 for and 96 against. To strengthen her implied point of Helms’ alleged racism, Ms. Neuman could have simply mentioned that the senator was a Democrat at the time. At least then history might have strengthened that allegation or implication. Unfortunately, that would have undermined her overall message that conservative Republicans are to be vilified while liberal Democrats are to be exalted — even if the record shows something entirely different.

 One wonders, when such “luminaries” as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton eventually pass on, will they be referred to as “race baiters”? While I doubt it, I do not doubt that conservatives will further bare the brunt of media-manipulated bias and true prejudice.

Bob Atchisson

Affton