Conservatives Led the Way in Criticizing Lott's Remarks

New York Times ^ | 12/16/02 | JIM RUTENBERG and FELICITY BARRINGER

[kattracks]

arly, widespread and harsh criticism by conservative commentators and publications has provided much of the tinder for the political fires surrounding Senator Trent Lott since his favorable comments about the segregationist presidential campaign of 1948.

Conservative columnists, including Andrew Sullivan, William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, and publications like National Review and The Wall Street Journal have castigated Mr. Lott for his remarks at Senator Strom Thurmond's 100th-birthday party, arguing that the conservative movement's credibility on racially tinged issues like affirmative action and school vouchers has been squandered.

Mr. Sullivan, on his Web site, and Mr. Krauthammer, writing in The Washington Post, are among those who have called on Mr. Lott to resign. Others, like Sean Hannity of Fox News Channel and the radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, have said the remarks were indefensible but were not necessarily reason enough for Mr. Lott to step down. An editorial in The Wall Street Journal stopped short of a direct call for Mr. Lott's ouster, but named three Republicans it preferred in the post.

The responses by conservatives have provided a marked contrast to the contention — put forth most recently by former President Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore — that the nation's conservative news media acts as a monolithic Republican support system.

Robert Bartley, the editor of The Wall Street Journal, said, "I don't know that there's anything close," when asked if he could remember such a revolt against a conservative leader by those who are usually like-minded on the issues.

Richard Lowry, the editor of National Review, said that young conservatives particularly feel undermined by Mr. Lott's comment.

"The reaction to this on the right has been tinged with outrage," Mr. Lowry said. "I think that's a product of decades of hard work that conservatives have done on racially charged issues out of idealism and principle. To have those positions tarred, even inadvertently, with this backwardness on race is extremely distressing."

The intensity of the criticism has even surprised Democrats, who say they are unused to seeing the conservative press take on one of its own so ferociously.

"It's a level of cannibalism that we generally don't see," said Chris Lehane, the Democratic strategist who was the spokesman for Al Gore's presidential campaign.

Some Democrats, in fact, are crediting conservative commentators with providing the momentum for the story, which was first reported only in dribs and drabs in the mainstream press.

Even before prominent Democrats joined the criticism, conservatives with active Web sites were posting highly critical columns.

Mr. Sullivan, one of the first conservatives to highlight the issue, wrote: "After his disgusting remarks at Strom Thurmond's 100th-birthday party, it seems to me that the Republican Party has a simple choice. Either they get rid of Lott as majority leader; or they should come out formally as a party that regrets desegregation and civil rights for African-Americans.

"Why are the Republican commentators so silent about this? And the liberals?"

Mr. Sullivan and the few who weighed in on the issue early on were not alone for long. In his call last Thursday for Mr. Lott to resign from the leadership, Mr. Krauthammer wrote, "What is so appalling about Lott's remarks is not the bigotry but the blindess," and he noted that "the civil rights movement forever set the standard for social transformation in America."

"Lott sees the civil rights movement and `all these problems over all these years.' He missed the whole story," Mr. Krauthamer wrote.

The next day, the lead editorial in The Wall Street Journal all but called for Mr. Lott's resignation, saying: "The Senate Republicans will now have to defend against the race card that Mr. Lott gave their enemies to play. In light of this, it's remarkable that Senate Republicans have shown the restraint they have."

The editorial named three Republican senators — Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Bill Frist of Tennessee and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania — who, the editors thought "would all do better as G.O.P. leaders than Mr. Lott."

The televised debate, meanwhile, has at times resembled a bizarre world with various guests taking wholly unexpected positions.

Last Wednesday, "The O'Reilly Factor," the Fox News Channel talk show with Bill O'Reilly as host, featured a white guest from the conservative Family Research Council, Kenneth L. Connor, who skewered Mr. Lott for his remarks. Squaring off against him on the program, was Kevin Martin, of the African American Republican Leadership Council.

"I'm defending it," Mr. Martin said, because "both sides, conservative and liberal, are playing this for their own political agenda."

The split within the ranks of conservative commentators is not over the wisdom of Mr. Lott's remarks, but over calls for his resignation.

"There's really not a lot of disagreement about how conservatives feel about what he said," said Sean Hannity the conservative co-host of "Hannity & Colmes" on the Fox News Channel who also hosts a radio program. "They didn't like it; they know it's wrong."

Mr. Hannity has been joined by Robert Novak and Tucker Carlson, the conservative side of the desk on CNN's political talk show "Crossfire," in his argument that Mr. Lott should not give up his leadership.

Mr. O'Reilly began last week by saying, "I have looked at Trent Lott's record, and I don't see that vitriolic thing toward the blacks," but ended it with "the people of the United States must hold those in power responsible for what they do and say."

Mr. Limbaugh has criticized Mr. Lott for the remarks but has warned that his resignation could embolden Democrats. He has also accused "conservative punditry" of trying to prove to mainstream colleagues that they are not "like all those people in the South."

Mr. Carlson said in an interview that some conservatives were calling for Mr. Lott's resignation less out of their professed moral outrage than from their long-held belief that he is too accommodating to opponents.

"They don't think that Trent Lott is fundamentally on their side," he said, "that he is not fundamentally a conservative."

And, of course, there are those who believe that Mr. Lott's continued position in leadership will become a powerful hammer against all Republicans, including the president, during the 2004 campaign.

[Yaelle]

It is interesting to see how the talk show pundits have been divided over the step-down issue. I have been completely flabbergasted at Hannity's, Rush's, and Larry Elder's apologist arguments for Lott. I simply can't understand, especially in the light of Rush's (white) and Larry's (black) career-long colorblindness, how they can fail to see that Trent's comments were not innocent and that this firestorm is not out of proportion with the importance of the continuation of conservative ideals in American politics.

[Maynerd]

I am amazed that the NYT's would print an article that is complimentary to the conservative press.

Will the sun rise tomorrow morning ?

[ApesForEvolution]

All I can say about the NYT is that even a broken clock is right twice a day. The outrage of the Lott's supporters is stupifying to say the least. I see what was a dim future for conservative issues on many matters with Lott in leadership as alive again...and we will all be glad that the Lott did it to himself, when he did and gave us new found life to *REALLY* kick some communist butt now. No more ineffectual, pandering, RAT-leaning, quasi-conservatism leadership from the Lott. Lott is Lott and that is the reality we just witnessed. Now, is he a team player at all when the push comes to his shove? If not, he might as well leave the country.

[A.J.Armitage]

Will the sun rise tomorrow morning ?

No. It's going to be replaced with a giant smiling Florida orange.

[TLBSHOW]

wow

[CedarDave]

Lott did not help his cause by being so unforceful, bumbling and incomplete in his explantaions and apologies. Each one was worse than the previous one and tonights BET interview topped them all with him apologizing for Southern actions (or inactions) regarding Blacks, asking for forgiveness, promising an agenda more favorable to Blacks, and just generally groveling before the interviewer. This man has got to go. With the packs of Rat and media wolves ready to pounce on any mistake or sign of weakness by a Republican leader, our leadership must be forceful in explaining and articulating our beliefs, views and agenda. Especially so in the area of race, where views and proposed programs contrary to the NAACP or CBC are automatically labeled "racist" even though such programs could and likely would lift African-Americans out of their economic and social bondage. The irony is that today's economic Black bondage is not due to the White man's racism, but to Democratic ideas and policies that, by emphasizing Blacks as helpless victims, have not worked for the past 40 years and will not work in the future.

[kattracks]

ping

[Paleo Conservative]

Some Democrats, in fact, are crediting conservative commentators with providing the momentum for the story, which was first reported only in dribs and drabs in the mainstream press (ie. the New York Times).

This is great. The New York Times is admitting they don't usually pay attention to conservatives .

[Dianna]

I want every article written about this subject to trumpet the fact that conservatives pushed Lott out. YES WE DID (trying to, anyway). He's a lousy excuse for a leader. Thank you Dems for giving us the opportunity to rid ourselves of this nitwit.

If beginning tomorrow we lead a discussion on race and what conservative policies mean for people of all colors, we will come out of this ahead. Let's use this opportunity to make our policies clear.

[Bush2000]

I simply can't understand, especially in the light of Rush's (white) and Larry's (black) career-long colorblindness, how they can fail to see that Trent's comments were not innocent and that this firestorm is not out of proportion with the importance of the continuation of conservative ideals in American politics.

Sadly, Hannity, Rush, and Elder are trying to "pull a Clinton". People knew that Clinton was a liar and a scoundrel -- and, I believe, they have a pretty good idea what Trent Lott was talking about when he praised Thurmond's 1948 presidential run. You can't just explain that away. Lott screwed up. And, frankly, we don't need somebody in charge who shoots himself in the foot that easily.

[The Great Satan]

I want every article written about this subject to trumpet the fact that conservatives pushed Lott out. YES WE DID (trying to, anyway).

At the end of the day, when the dust settles, this will be perceived as Bush's decision. Independents, especially, will see it as Bush cleaning house, taking out the trash. And that's a very good thing for the GOP.

[Leisler]

The NYTimes gets it wrong, again.

It started minutes after Lott said his tripe. It was on the various Weblogs, Andrew Sullivan, Instapundit, etc, for days untill picked up by columnists.

[walden]

David Frum of NRO spoke out for the first time on Monday 12/9-- the birthday party was Thurs 12/5, and Frum didn't do a column on Fri 12/6 or over the weekend (NRO doesn't publish over the weekend.)

[The Wizard]

and I'm proud it was us that called him on his comments

[ventana]

Thank God Lott is hoisted on his own pitard! Bravo turkey. Now, as to conservatives skewering him as well, and bringing this prominently to the light of day for discussion amongst ourselves and in the culture at large, it shows what we long have known, and what the likes of Rush and Coulter have observed: we tolerate dissension and diversity of opinion. We alone on the political scene have truly got ideas which we debate and further in a lively, healthy fashion. We are the party of ideas; we are alive, and until our Democratic counterparts can do the same within their conclaves, they are the dead party: literally and figuratively. V's wife.

[Leisler]

It is on my daily checklist.

http://instapundit.com

Great personal web log.

[GailA]

The three major market talk radio hosts in Tennessee, Phil Valentine, Steve Gill and Mike Fleming have all called for vaccant lott to step down.

[GailA]

You can listen to Steve Gill comments on vaccant lott's grovel fest this morning on BET here: GILL

[TLBSHOW]

the girly-boy consevative writers are fakes and really democrat hacks!