LOTT SHOULD NOT RESIGN

Human Events ^ | Dec. 16, 2002 | Paul M. Weyrich

[FairOpinion]

Political correctness reared its ugly head again with the media firestorm over remarks that Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R.-Miss.) made at the 100th birthday party for Strom Thurmond (R.-S.C.). In an attempt to be gracious, Lott said the nation would have been better off if Thurmond, retiring after his long years of service in the Senate, had been elected President in 1948 when he was the nominee of the State’s Rights Democratic Party.

Quick to take offense was Rep. Elijah Cummings (D.-Md.), the new chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, who is quoted in [the December 10] Washington Post as being "very concerned" and "very upset" about what Lott had said. Cummings said the CBC was "trying to resolve exactly what action we will take." Perhaps the CBC is debating whether to call for Lott’s censure or his departure from the leadership post.

Whatever else one thinks of Thurmond, his record in Washington belies the stereotype of a crude Southern racist in the mold of a Senator Bilbo, particularly in the later years when he paid very close attention to the concerns of black voters of his state. Human Events political reporter John Gizzi reviewed Thurmond’s record in an online story. Gizzi noted that in the years following World War II when Thurmond was governor of South Carolina and made his presidential bid, there is no question that he was a supporter of segregation. Almost any successful Southern politician was back then, including those thought to be relatively progressive such as Senators John Sparkman (D.-Ala.) and J. William Fulbright (D.-Ark.). However, as governor, Thurmond sought to abolish the poll taxes that limited black voter participation and to improve the state’s segregated school system.

I’ve known Trent Lott for almost 35 years. We have spent a great deal of time together both socially and professionally, including many instances where he was out of earshot of reporters. We were on trips overseas and were in situations where, if Trent is a racist, it would have been clear. Yet, I’ve never heard one word come from his mouth that could be construed as racist. Not a joke. Not a flip remark. Nothing.

But political reporters seized upon his remark, causing even Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D.-S.D.), as partisan a Democrat as you will find, to come to the defense of Trent Lott. Now, Daschle has backtracked, facing criticism from within his own ranks for having come to the defense of his adversary across the aisle.

Those in the conservative movement know that I have had serious differences with Trent over the years regarding his leadership of the Republicans in the U.S. Senate. Believe me, I am hoping and praying that he will be a tougher leader of the 108th Congress than he was in the last session or in other past ones.

However, he absolutely should not resign over the unfortunate remarks that he made at a birthday party in attempting to pay homage to an aging senator.

Knowing Trent as I do and how strongly he is opposed to communism, I believe what he meant to say is that Thurmond was a patriot and had he been elected we would have taken a much tougher stance vis a vis the Soviet Union than what the foreign policy establishment would have favored. Resigning over this issue would greatly strengthen the opposition. So, Trent would be doing the right thing by his country by not giving the left the victory they want just because he had made an unthinking comment.

________________ Mr. Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.

[TLBSHOW]

The fact is that the civil rights “leaders” and elite liberal Democrats are at fault for the poor condition of the black community, not white racism. But, having largely given in to their lies, the white culture is suffering not only because blacks are free to be immoral without complaint, but also because many whites now lack character as a result of giving in to this fear.

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/article_337.shtml

[FairOpinion]

GraniteStateConservative: "He doesn't have a right to lead my party in the Senate while espousing those views."
___
IMHO -- he did NOT espouse "those views". Almost nobody is quoting his exact remarks, everyone only talks about what the Democrats projected into his remarks. All Lott said, that he and others voted for Thurmond, "and if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either", IOW, the country would have been better off if they had elected Strom in 1948.

I agree with the assessment of the author of the article, racism and segregation probably didn't even enter Lott's mind, when he made the above statement, at the 100th birthday party of the man they were honoring. Making on offhand remark, "the country would have been better off, if they had elected you" does NOT translate into racism. Thurmond was not a KKK Wizard, as Byrd was. So every time someone says anything nice about Sen. Byrd, they endorse the KKK?

I think the closing paragraph of the article sums it up well:

"Knowing Trent as I do and how strongly he is opposed to communism, I believe what he meant to say is that Thurmond was a patriot and had he been elected we would have taken a much tougher stance vis a vis the Soviet Union than what the foreign policy establishment would have favored. Resigning over this issue would greatly strengthen the opposition. So, Trent would be doing the right thing by his country by not giving the left the victory they want just because he had made an unthinking comment. "

[RichardEdward]

i think he should step down as majority leader.. but NOT because of this .. he should step down because he is a lousy majority leader

[norraad]

Dig it, as usual, your always right.

Lott is a careful man & a player, that's why I side with the crowd who realize this to be a diversionary play to take attention off what might otherwise be the #1 story;

Everyone gets a shot with their name on it

See Hitachi MU chip(.04mm 128k transparent transponder chip)

But look at the up side you won't need your car keys anymore as you can program the computer to respond when you are near it.

[The Shootist]

The writer can refer to this as "political correctness" as much as he wants.

It doesn't change the fact that the GOP needs the minority vote and will never get it as long as it is preceived to believe like Lott.

Stupid Republicans. Stupid Democrats. A pox on both their houses.

[FairOpinion]

Cicero: "The Republicans and conservatives have to get together on this and stand up to the race-baiters, or they will just keep pulling this kind of thing. They can't be allowed to get away with it. We need to push hard on this, and remind people of the truck-dragging ad that was used against George Bush as a clear illustration of the tactics that are being used. Republicans need to confront their black problem directly, because the more they shuffle and dodge, the worse they do in black public opinion.

We also need to attack the media directly on this nonsense. "

------
I agree 100%. That is exactly what we should do. If we give in, that is just a signal to them to attack us more with phony charges and lies, no holds barred, because that is the only thing the Democrats are good at, since they are totally devoid of constructive ideas.

[sinkspur]

You can only excuse Lott if you can say with a straight face that he had no idea what the Dixiecrat Party was about.

He didn't mention the Dixiecrat Party.

When I was in college, I learned about something called "already listening." It's what we all do when somebody opens their mouth. We hear a code word, or a phrase, or think about the person's background, and our minds are off to the races. We're "already listening" all the time. We can't help it, unless we become very disciplined at ACTUALLY LISTENING TO WHAT THE PERSON SAYS.

You're convinced Lott's a racist, so you're concocting all kinds of scenarios behind words that were said at an old man's birthday party.

No matter how many people who know Trent Lott very well say differently, you're not going to change your opinion.

That's fine, but putting words in Trent Lott's mouth is not changing any opinions around here.

In fact, I'm noting a distinct movement toward Trent Lott on FR after yesterday.

I know what Trent Lott meant and I think you do too.

[chachacha]

Hang in there guy! The political correctness crowd will pound on you for a few days as they did me. It's always nice to be able to react in a forward looking mode and not a knee jerk reaction.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

What he said was nevertheless how he felt.

*sniff* If I gave a crap about feelings moreso than deeds I'd be voting the liberal line like for example the two granite-headed RINO babes you keep sending down to DC.

[gulfcoast6]

Thank you.

[bimbo]

Has Hillary Rocker Clinton ever appologized for calling a White House staff memeber a f***ing Jew-Bastard?

and ... Has Robert Byrd ever appologized for using the N-word twice in a 1999 interview?

... Has Byrd ever explained his membership in the KKK?

[chachacha]

What do you feel inside?

Is it or is it not POLITCAL CORRECTNESS?

IT'S THE "N" WORD ALL OVER AGAIN.

WAKE UP AMERICA.

[holdonnow]

Which speech -- the one in which he mentioned Lott, or the one in which he signed the campaign finance bill? You see, we're not all as perfect as you and your friends.

[Mr Rogers]

I don't know what Lott meant. I DO know he said a man who broke away from the democrat party because it wasn't racist enough should have won - that the country would have been better if he had.

I'm a white guy who lived a couple of years in Selma Alabama in the 60s. I have NO desire to go back to those days.

[holdonnow]

You don't understand the rules of this debate, as dictated by the leftwing race-baiters and the conservative pundits --you are ONLY allowed to discuss Trent Lott. Please be mindful.

[holdonnow]

When Ronald Reagan used the phrase "states' rights," should he have dropped out too? Thurmond ran as the "States' Rights" candidate. That was the name of his party. Reagan also opposed the Civili Rights Act of 1964, as did Barry Goldwater, not because they were racists, but for libertarian and constitutional reasons. Were they racist for this, too? Learn some history, for God's sake, and stop repeating the lib mantra and the mantra of those on our side who are falling all over each other to get noticed for their supposed evenhandedness and enlightment.

[sinkspur]

I DO know he said a man who broke away from the democrat party because it wasn't racist enough should have won - that the country would have been better if he had.

He said all that, did he?

You're "already listening" a week later!

You've got Lott convicted of a thought crime when you don't know a damn thing about how he felt when he said what he said, and when men who've known him for years say he's anything but racist.

I'd hate to be an innocent man with you on the jury.

[hole_n_one]

"Knowing Trent as I do and how strongly he is opposed to communism, I believe what he meant to say is that Thurmond was a patriot and had he been elected we would have taken a much tougher stance vis a vis the Soviet Union than what the foreign policy establishment would have favored.

If that is in fact the case, why do you suppose that Lott has found it necessary to apologise (multiple times) for his comments rather than simply clarify them?

[holdonnow]

He has both explained them and apologized for them. Perhaps you weren't listening to any of his 14 statements on the subject?

[holdonnow]

Oh, you're back again. Aren't you the fool who called Lott a racist and a terrorist? And you did this complaining about Lott's statement! Maybe you should be the next Majority Leader, you think? Dope.