To All Those Waiting to Crucify Lott

NY Post, NY Times, Washington Post, Washington Times, LA Times, AJC, JWR, Boston Globe, EIB | 12/14/02 | TC

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

1. 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed with Republican support, almost filibustered by Leftists. Gore’s father was one of those who was vehemently against it yet they escape judgment on their actions. It was passed against their vote.

2. If the same type of things were said/written about Byrd... how would the Leftists react? Why are you... selectively choosing our "candidate"?

3. Congress has worked with Lott for decades, why haven't they been exposed to consistent racial characteristics by Lott in the past?

4. Why has Thurmond remained silent?

5. What effects do Welfare and education have on segregation and racism? Until recent years which party has implemented reform on each? How did Lott vote?

6. Anyone recall Kennedy's one way conversations with ML King? When does it come time to "cleanse" for that?

7. Which party is being "cleansed"? How many of you... truly don't believe Lexus searches were run throughout last week? How far back was too far back during the Clinton administration? As many in our who were victims, what did the Leftists gain? What does it say to you... about today?

8. If you... are going to allow the Leftists (who assert they are free of segregation and racism) to publicly assault our party without demanding they look in their own mirror, what have you... accomplished?

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

How do any of these facts change the reality that Lott will hurt the entire GOP as Senate Majority Leader?

7. Which party is being "cleansed"? How many of you... truly don't believe Lexus searches were run throughout last week? How far back was too far back during the Clinton administration? As many in our who were victims, what did the Leftists gain? What does it say to you... about today?

8. If you... are going to allow the Leftists (who assert they are free of segregation and racism) to publicly assault our party without demanding they look in their own mirror, what have you... accomplished?

[livius]

One thing that has been left out of this equation is Strom Thurmond himself. I'm sure not a fan of his, but many people in his homestate are (I know this from one of my daughters, who lives in SC), and he's been consistently reelected for many a long year. I doubt that he could be elected only by white votes, because SC has a large black population. But Strom, even though he is known for being a Bill Clinton level letch and sounds personally odious, knew how to bring home the bacon and get pork and jobs for his state. That's what you elect a senator for, folks, and when they stop getting you stuff, you stop voting for them. He got stuff for the state of SC, and that's why they voted for him.

I have no knowledge of Strom Thurmond's current personal views on race, but he does have black staffers and certainly has not said anything to make it seem that he still subscribes to Dixiecrat aims. And in any case, it's pretty obvious that Lott was praising Strom Thurmond as an effective Senator and polititian, and not a racist wannabe. Remember also that Lott was 7 years old at the time of Thurmond's Dixiecrat campaign, and what Lott remembers is the "new reformed Strom Thurmond," and not the old racist one.

I think Strom should have said something, but the fact remains that he's 100 years old. My daughter told me that at the dedication of a Habitat house that she arranged, they had to make sure to get a shovel light enough for him to hold, and take the picture so that it only looked as if he was doing the groundbreaking. And this was before the last time he was reelected. Towards the end of his last term, in fact, folks in SC weren't even entirely sure that he was going to make it through. So I can understand that he may not be up to personal involvement in this fray.

I still think that Lott should have stepped down as majority leader, but that's partly because I don't think he was effective in any case. But in terms of his words about Strom Thurmond, maybe everybody should give another glance to Thurmond's post-Dixiecrat record. There were a lot of people, mostly Dems, with really ugly baggage to shed (look at Byrd). And remember that Republicans voted for the initial Civil Rights Act by 81-86% ( I've forgotten which), while Dems voted for it by just over 60%.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

How many here "converted" to conservatism?

How many voted for Reagan... on the Leftist platform?

[inkling]

But if Lott is forced to step down from his leadership position and then decides to resign his Senate seat, the odds of the GOP losing control of the Senate will rise significantly. If that happens, there will be hell to pay.

So you, a Lott defender, believe that he would put his personal pride above the needs of his nation -- in a time of war no less -- and resign his Senate seat. Right when his party and nation need him, he is willing to quit because he has hurt feelings. Only a disgusting, evil putz would be that type of traitor. And apparently, that's what even his supporters think he is.

[Reagan Man]

>>>... Lott has plunged a soaring party into disarray.

You're the one in disarray. The GOP is doing fine. If you wild-eyed nincompoops would just cool you rhetorical jets, things would begin to die down. Instead, of dredging up everything you can find to slam Lott with, show some support and fight the liberal esatblishment. The leftwing is loving every minute of this.

[desertcry]

The crucification of Sen. Lott has nothing to do with civil rights as anyone with any brain knows. It is purely a political manuver that the democrats call the politics of personal destruction. The democrats are experts on this because they lack any positive agenda, and they use it to cover their failures. Having said that, I'm very disppointed
with Senator Lott for throwing such a juicy red meat to the demons. It's just unbeleiveable that a man of his political experience, and stature that he said what he said.
It was purely idiotic! All the work the Republicans have done to reach out to the minorities was blown sky high in one stupid comment. The demons will make this "RED MEAT" very fresh come 2004, and the demagogery on this will be so laud(with the help of the liberal media of course), that any positive agenda by the Republicans will be completely buried in the noise. Lott has to face the reality of this. Lott has to think about this, what ever he is going to do to repair this damage.

[Peach]

From a Human Events article posted on FR today, Lott had this to say: "Lott said what many conservatives had thought: that in praising Strom Thurmond he was not thinking of the segregationist views that Thurmond has long since repudiated but of Thurmond’s support for "a strong national defense and economic development and balanced budgets and opportunity".

We'd have to do a little research to see if your claim is true, that the Dixiecrats and Thurmond in particular had only one platform upon which they ran.

[inkling]

" If you... are going to allow the Leftists (who assert they are free of segregation and racism) to publicly assault our party without demanding they look in their own mirror, what have you... accomplished?"

The most convincing arguments I've heard to remove Lott have come from the right, not the left. Again, I cannot fathom how any real conservative could support Trent Lott. What has he EVER done for conservatism? (I've asked this question several times this week and have never received an answer.)

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

How would the Leftists feel about it if Lott went Independent?

[Slyfox]

Do you notice that the Demoncraps can't go after anything substantial, only symbolic references that are not real? You have this Lott gaffe and the Confederate flag controversy. These fights are nothing more than a smoke and mirror defense because of what somebody thought they saw as a reflection in one of those mirrors. And for the lamestream media to be running full boar to cover this actually shows how vacant their reporting really is.

[BuddhaBoy]

If you... are going to allow the Leftists (who assert they are free of segregation and racism) to publicly assault our party without demanding they look in their own mirror, what have you... accomplished?

Integrity, that’s what. And that is enough in my book. If Lexus searches turn up racist comments by others then that I the breaks. If they are thrown out like Lott will be (just wait) then it’s our fault for electing them in the first place.

[G.Mason]

"Tell me how I defend this statement to friends I have that are black that I want to become Republicans?"

You could read about the "Dixiecrat" Party and ALL it stood for, and against, in 1948. (don't hurt yourself!)

Tell them to talk with blacks that are conservative. (un-hyphenated Americans)

[BuddhaBoy]

You won’t get an answer, because Lott has done nothing for Conservatives, except to increase spending on his own state. Like Byrd of West Virginia, Lott has bought his Senate seat with your money.

[vbmoneyspender]

What you said is not a defense of that statement. The statement is outrageous and cannot be defended. The Strom Thurmond who ran for President in 1948 was a racist and the platform he ran on was a segregationist platform that was despicable. Are you familiar with what the South was like in 1948. People were being lynched because of their skin color. Simply put, anyone who would contend that he was proud of what Thurmond did in 1948 is not someone that I want as Senate Majority leader.

Moving on to defending what Lott said, in order to defend the statement you have to say that he didn't really mean what he said. You have to say that Lott just got caught up in the moment when he was saying how proud he was of Thurmond's run for the presidency in 1948. Such a defense seems ridiculous to me and more fitting of the people I saw defending Clinton during the 1990s.

[inkling]

The crucification of Sen. Lott has nothing to do with civil rights...

No one I know wants to crucify Lott. No Republican wants him to leave the Senate. We just want him to place the good of the party and the nation above his personal career path. The fact that Lott doesn't seem willing to do that -- in time of war no less -- says much about his character.

Keeping Lott as one of our party's leaders will damage us. Placing McConnell or Frist or Nickles into leadership will help us. My first concern is getting this nation on the right track, not soothing the fragile ego of a spoiled, old aristrocrat who has never done ANYTHING for conservatism except damage it.

I'm sorry to see several Freepers place a higher priority on "sticking it to Sharpton" than they do to winning the War on Terror, electing conservative judges and creating a better America. The GOP will stick it to Sharpton alright, and lose the Senate and the House in 2004. But I guess that's okay, since Lott said he likes being Minority Leader better than being Majority Leader (immediately after pathetically losing the Senate to Daschle).

[Jhoffa_]

TRENT LOTT APOLOGIZES FOR OWNING STOCK IN THE MANUFACTURER OF THE PICKUP TRUCK THAT DRUG JAMES BYRD TO HIS DEATH.

That was in hymie town, wasn't it?

[Peach]

Oh, dear, it seems you just want to be argumentative. #1: It's entirely possible Lott meant what I said he may have meant (re defense, etc.). #2: If he mis-spoke, as he claims, he has apologized repeatedly. #3: You have yet to address the matter of Clinton giving a Presidential Medal of Honor to a segregationist and racist. Had the media or the Black Caucus made a big deal of it, he could have said he didn't mean it, forgot about Fulbright's past, etc. It was a mistake to bestow such an honor on a man with Fulbright's past. But I don't see any Democrats or media making a big deal of that little faux paus. But, argue away all you like. I said in my editorial an apology was required, and it has been given. But the left still cannot claim moral superiority. What about Byrd being a former KKK member? You and your friends in the other party have a few things to "apologize" for and a few things that are indefensible as well. Without the help of the press, remaining silent on the DNC's own racist past, it should be much more difficult for the left to throw stones at the GOP and Lott. But we all know what the press is all about, or most of us do, anyway. I guess fairplay isn't in their playbook.

[inkling]

"There's something liberating about being in the minority. You're freer to advocate positions and amendments you really think should be adopted."
--Trent Lott, June 2001. The Republicans' self-saboteur speaks.

[Reagan Man]

You people just don't get it. This is not simple about defending Lott on this specific issue. For the record, I called for him to step down last yaer after the Jeffords fiasco and the GOP losing the Senate. I thought his remarks last week were stupid, but he has apologized numerous times.

This is about a trumped up charge of racism, being made, once again I might add, by the liberal establishment against a conservative and its working one more time. This tactic employed by the left, will continue to work, so long as conservatives and Republicans act like cowards. The time has come to say, enough is enough.

I have been ashamed of my fellow conservatives this past week and for so many on this forum to be applauding such obvious and blatant attempts by the liberal establishment to dictate the terms of any agreement on this subject.

Wake up people!

[Chi-townChief]

Lott's problem is really a case of Daschle's media echo chamber effect. I believe that Trent made his goofy statements last Friday; however, last weekend most talk venue just mentioned it in passing. But this weekend, they are all outraged, OUTRAGED! by Senator Lott. Interesting turn of events.