Posted on 12/13/2002 10:07:29 PM PST by ArcLight
I watched the event when it happened and in my mind Lott did nothing wrong. Many conservatives joined many liberals this week, in blowing this event way out of proportion and unjustly castigating Lott in the process.
Making a stupid or insenstive remark, should not be the basis for forcing someone to resign from their job. Especially not after several public apologies, on top of everything else.
Baloney.
Sorry, in most cases, I know its kowtowing.
This is pretty simple. Many conservative pundits have been loudly condemning Lott because they don't want to be seen as being insensitive to the blight of Black America. Some conservative pundits view this in strict political terms and don't want to damage their standing with the liberal establishment, which, btw, is a majority of white folks. I already explained (RE:#119) the problem that many FReepers have with Sen.Lott.
And I'm extremely disappointed in PresBush. His remarks about Sen. Lott, made him out to be a practicing racist. Bush sounded like a liberal, not a conservative.
But Lott has had many defenders on the right, telling him not to resign. Those included blacks like Niger Innis, JC Watts, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, Rod Paige, Kevin Martin. Lott has also been defended by staunch conservatives like Rush, Hannity, Fred Barnes, Mark Levin and Ann Coulter.
Like I said, fail to recognize.
They weren't running that year.
Fail to recognize what? That when it comes to race white conservatives are scared to death of dealing with reality and many of the very few black conservatives are just as hyper sensitive to it as Jesse Jackson?
That many conservatives were genuinely outraged by Senator Lott's recent conduct. Your response was denial ("baloney") and yet you accuse others of being afraid of reality. There is no basis, other than your own imaginings, for you to reject the fact that Senator Lott has outraged some conservatives. It would be more plausible to reject the outrage of liberals, who have such clear ulterior motives for feigning outrage.
That when it comes to race white conservatives are scared to death of dealing with reality
By "reality" I can only assume for now that you mean your own perception of it, as unwilling as you are to admit any divergent perceptions.
It's not reacting with terror. Lott was just plain, ordinary, garden variety stupid. He should have known better than to make a quip like this. And let's be clear, it wasn't some sort of great policy speech - it was an off the cuff quip, not intended to illuminate any particular principles whatsoever. That means the Democrats are overreacting to what he said, and Lott was stupid to give them the fresh meat to pounce upon.
We can all wish that things are different as they are and that such quips wouldn't be treated like this - but that's hardly realistic. Lott really should have known better. He should have known better during impeachment. Given these examples, he is unfit to remain leader.
Regards, Ivan
Gosh, I didn't think so. The President criticized Sen. Lott's remarks. I didn't hear him make any specific criticisms of the man. He correctly responded to this brouhaha by reaffirming American principles on race and equality. If anything, he chose to highlight the positive--what we stand for--and did not take any shots at Sen. Lott directly. The liberals, I am sure you have noticed, say Lott is unfit for office. I didn't hear the President say that. But I don't disagree at all with his critique of Lott's remarks.
But Lott has had many defenders on the right, telling him not to resign. Those included blacks like Niger Innis, JC Watts, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, Rod Paige, Kevin Martin. Lott has also been defended by staunch conservatives like Rush, Hannity, Fred Barnes, Mark Levin and Ann Coulter.
Yes, he has loyal party defenders. That's fine. These folks would line up just about anyone who is opposed by Jesse Jackson, et al. That's politics. But Bush is the President. He has a higher duty than mere politics.
No in this case the "reality" that you and many others have reached is rooted not, in what the man said or his 30 year voting record but, on your "connection of dots" that in the Racial playbook has only one picture.....RACISM. When every social program we have today is race oriented then in the minds of those that benefit every question regarding their efficacy can only be construed as RACISM. That is why you could place the most conservative senator in the senate as ML and he would be no different than Lott. You could elect the most conservative president and he/she would act no different than Bush because, as someone said earlier "race to a republican is like holy water to a vampire". There will never be a conservative government until the race issue is behind us and democrats will NEVER allow that to happen. The sad thing is that Blacks, by voting almost exclusively democrat appear to like things just the way they are and it has zip to do with their "fear" of republicans......just the opposite.
1. Is he a neo-confederate?
2. Does he sympathize with the neoconfederate cause?
3. Is the CCC a white supremacist group?
4. What is Sen. Lott's relationship to the CCC?
As you know, there is a lot of talk about these issues lately. Maybe you can educate me.
Your exactly right. Its unfortunate as hell right now, but sometimes life hands you a lemon.
Lott wasn't Borked. The Mississippi redneck did it to himself. He's incompetent, has been incompetent, and continues to set back conservatism with his presence.
If he somehow remains as Leader, how many millions/billions will be extorted from Gov't coffers inorder to rehablitate his carreer?
This promotes conservatism how?
Lott stepping down as ML is a small step in that direction. A "Leader" can not be identified with an immoral history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.