LOTT MUST STAY, THE BORKING MUST END.

THE LOGICAL VIEW ^ | 12/15/02 | MARK A SITY

[logic101.net]

Lott didn't say anything in support of segragation, yet he is being called a racist. Your point about him not being called a child molester is silly. They might as well call him that, there is just as much evidence of it!

MARK A SITY

ps. With the exception of Waters, no one is calling him a
racist, they are just implying it over and over.

[ChuxsterS]

There’s no comparison between defending Lott and defending Clinton.

Senator Lott’s only “wrong” consists of a particular interpretation of what he said–he did not say that America would be better off if it had supported a segregationist platform in 1948, but that America would be better off if it had elected Strom Thurman, the old man whom he was trying to praise. I’ve seen the tape and heard the tape a dozen times and every time my honest impression is he was just trying to be nice to an old man and said something off-the-cuff which could be interpreted badly. Do you really think that Lott is such a fool that he had any conscious intent to even imply, in front of cameras and microphones, that he pines for the days of segregation?

In stark contrast with Clinton’s formidable obstruction in the Lewinsky/Paula Jones affair, Lott immediately apologized extensively, repeatedly, without dissembling, without rationalizing, without minimizing what he said. We haven’t heard the excuse that a birthday party for one of his colleagues was part of his private life. We haven’t seen Lott pounding a podium and saying “Listen to me. I’m going to say this again. I never supported segregation with that Senator, Mr. Thurman, not once, never.” He hasn’t lied to anyone, under oath or otherwise. He hasn’t pressured others to lie for him. He hasn’t sent goons to threaten a potential witness against him. We haven’t seen Mrs. Lott on Sunday shows theorizing about some vast left-wing conspiracy determined to destroy Republican senators in order to undo an election, and shift the balance of power back to the Democrats.

[gitmo]

If the nominee gives a speech how he longs for the good ole days of Jim Crow, yes, maybe we should drop him.

I agree. But what if the nominee toasted a respected US senator at his 100th birthday party, and said he would have made a good president?

No speech. Nothing said about racism.

[Bluntpoint]

When did he run, what was his platform all about. Strom Thurmond, and this is no bombshell, ran as a rabid segregationist. You do not need to have a PHd in political science to know that.

Replace Strom with George Wallace and have President Bush stating the same at Wallace's 100th birthday party.

What do you think the next morning's headline would be?

[gitmo]

You're INFERRING that's what Lott was referring to. OK, I give in. Let's destroy any Republican who says something that can be INFERRED to be racist/homophobic/pro-life/Christian/anti-feminist.

[SoCar]

Agree!!! Thanks for the terrific post.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Levin honored Thurmond in the Senate and even complimented his run for president. Why aren't we reading the same about him?

[Bluntpoint]

He inferred this. He opened up the floodgates by such an asinine statement. I did nothing to put Lott in the situation he is in today. Nothing.

Cable news did not call me to ask my opinion. Nor print news. Nor the white house.

Lott is a situation that Lott put himself in.

Words do in fact mean something.

Nobody better than a carreer politician knows this.

[Bluntpoint]

We know how the game is played today. This is no surprise.

[treesdream]

Very well said.
As I posted earlier on another thread ...
As we continue to dance to the tune being played by the real enemy of free people, the LEFT WING MEDIA, we lift our little feet in unison as we tap to THEIR beat and flog our fellows when they might miss a step. All the while, we struggle to be friends with this enemy and play fair even though we know they rarely do. We either dismiss or ignore completely the fact that the main stream media is the behind-the-scene life blood of the dimocRat party. We insist upon its shelter and protection despite the notorious and obvious bias and intent. Their symphony plays the tune and we meekly put on our dance shoes. When we tire of their music and begin to embrace a new band in the form of talk radio, they turn up the volume of orchestrated attacks as they continue to finely tune their instruments seeking that “just right” note that will resonate with the little dancers out their. Shhhheeezzzz . . . it’s a broken record.

[Jorge]

The point is not 'who is attacking him' but 'what he said'. And 'what he said' was that we would all be better off if a segregationist had won the 1948 Presidential election. That is utterly reprehensible and it doesn't become any less so if the Dems are saying it too. Even if they are being perfect hypocrites about it.

I agree.
The idea that we should keep Lott on as ML leader just to spite the RATS, no matter how much his presense continues to damage the Republican party is crazy.

[duckln]

Well, there's 'segregation' and 'integration', both were forced to some degree. How about a middle ground, lets say we call it by a favorite Democratic word 'choice'.

I think Lott stumbled into initiating much needed discourse on where we were to where we are.

Take a good look at what is happening in former Rhodesia and South Africa when the 'whites' were disposed. In the USA many prefer their own and opt for 'their' suburbs.

The most racist in this country IMHO is the NAACP, the black Caucus, the Jacksons, the Sharptons and Maxime Water's. And they are leading the charge. The Democrats get 93% of the black vote because of these people to the detriment of us all.

Compared to them, Lott is an 'patriot'. The way to change this is to deny them success and have 'new' leaders the likes of Keyes, Sowell, Thomas, Condi and maybe Powell.

[DCPatriot]

I absolutely agree!

We must draw the line and with FOXNEWS, Rush, Hannitty, Liddy et al, along with us here at FreeRepublic.com we can finally DISCUSS THE ISSUE!

We can win really big here.

LOTT STAYS! Now, I dare you to cross that line.

[hope]

Before Lott inserted foot in mouth the tone was already set at the Paul Wellstone memorial service, where the dims in one accord booed his presence...

[Bluntpoint]

"Well, there's 'segregation' and 'integration', both were forced to some degree. How about a middle ground, lets say we call it by a favorite Democratic word 'choice'."

Sorry, lame attempts of social engineering that were a failure are no comparison to state mandated, white controlled segregation.

Forced integration usually ends up bad.

Forced segregation always starts off bad.

"Separate but equal" is never equal when one side gets to make up all the rules and and decide who has "rights" to participate in this segregated society.

[Jorge]

You can't. That's why you aren't even trying. So, now you are a racist because you can't prove that you aren't.

This is so infantile.
And in no way comparable to what's going on with Trent Lott.

You can't make a public statement that appears on the surface to be racist, then just expect people to accept on faith that you intended nothing racist, and yet offer no explanation of what you really meant.

Especially when you've said it before, and also in the past lead a successful effort to block blacks from a college fraternity.

If Lott wasn't supporting segregation in that speech, then it should be easy enough for him to simply clarify what he really meant by "all these problems".

The fact is Lott has apologized FIVE times for what some of you people still claim was totally innocent. Lott won't even defend his own words, yet there are people here who continue to. This is laughable.

Newsflash; Senate Republicans are beginning to challange Lott's leadership. Yes!

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

The idea that we should keep Lott on as ML leader just to spite the RATS, no matter how much his presense continues to damage the Republican party is crazy.

Jorge signed up 2000-11-26.

Recovering Democrat!

The pot calling the kettle black.

[Bluntpoint]

Recovering Democrat!

Yeah, shame on him for seeing the light.

Back to you , Pot.

[gitmo]

He inferred this. He opened up the floodgates by such an asinine statement. I did nothing to put Lott in the situation he is in today. Nothing.

The verb would be implied. He implied. You inferred. Somehow you claim to know that what he implied was what you inferred, and that implication is different that what he said he implied.

This statement was an isolated incident, and does not reflect his words, his actions, nor his votes over the last 20 years. We should give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Bluntpoint]

"We should give him the benefit of the doubt."

Excuse my poor choice of wording, I am not a great self-editor in this type of environment.

That said, he said what he said and caused us all this trouble.

He needs to do his own damage control. Just not on our time. He needs to step down as ML.