Skip to comments.
Lott's offhand remark not worth demand for his head
bostonherald ^
| 12/18/2002
| Joe Fitzgerald
Posted on 12/18/2002 8:21:04 AM PST by TLBSHOW
Lott's offhand remark not worth demand for his head
Lott's offhand remark not worth demand for his head
by Joe Fitzgerald Wednesday, December 18, 2002
John Kerry, puffed with righteous indignation, waded into the Trent Lott furor, demanding the Republican's head on a platter.
``There can never be an appearance of racism or bigotry in any high position of leadership,'' he declared.
Funny, but that's pretty much what prominent Italian-Americans were saying about Kerry the morning he tried to come off as droll on the Don Imus show, quipping, ``The Iraqi army is in such bad shape, even the Italians could kick their butts.''
State auditor Joe DeNucci led the angry backlash, charging, ``He wouldn't have the guts to say that about Jews or blacks,'' prompting a Kerry spokeswoman to suggest DeNucci cool his jets, that the senator was obviously being facetious.
Of course, that's the same thing his office said following another appearance on the Imus show when, attempting to belittle Bill Weld's work ethic, Kerry described the former GOP governor as ``a guy who takes more vacations than people on welfare.''
Is this to suggest our junior senator really has a bias against Italians, or that he looks upon the downtrodden with contempt? Not at all. It's just to suggest that he, as much as anyone in public life, ought to understand how a comment made in jest can make a speaker sound like a jerk.
Lott, by the way, did not seek Kerry's resignation.
Then there was Mike Wallace, a little harder to dismiss when, during a break in the taping of a ``60 Minutes'' piece on minority borrowers, he suggested they might have difficulty reading complicated contracts ``over watermelon and tacos.''
When Herald TV columnist Monica Collins called him on it, Wallace pleaded, ``It was light-hearted! I ask you to be fair.''
Isn't that what Lott is asking everyone today?
There's no recollection here of Kerry racing off to Italian-American lodges to clarify his remarks, or Wallace visiting black churches to explain himself.
Nor, for that matter, is there any record of Jesse Jackson showing up at B'nai B'rith breakfasts to convince the ``sons of the Covenant'' that his characterization of New York as ``Hymietown'' was a figure of speech, that's all, a harmless appellation.
Does anyone remember Kerry, that self-styled pillar of propriety, questioning Jackson's anti-Semitism? If not, what did Jesse ever do to deserve the benefit of anyone's doubt?
Alan Dershowitz once charged Billy Bulger with using ``code words'' like ``manipulative'' and ``crafty'' to communicate a bias against Jews, yet there was no ambiguity whatsoever when Dershowitz claimed English au pair Louise Woodward couldn't expect a fair trial in Cambridge because ``it has a very large Irish population.'' No bias there, right, counselor?
Really, it isn't complicated. Anyone who writes for a living understands the truth of a Red Auerbach maxim regarding communications: ``It's not what you tell people that matters; it's what they hear.''
Does Kerry believe Italian soldiers are inferior, or that welfare recipients are slothful? No. The assumption here is that he tried too hard to be what he's not, i.e., witty.
Does Wallace view blacks as cartoon caricatures? No. The assumption here is that he engaged in careless idle talk.
Does Dershowitz believe the Irish can't be expected to have integrity? No. The assumption here is that he was looking for any angle that might enhance a defense.
And the other assumption here is that Trent Lott wasn't speaking from a heart filled with malice when he tried to flatter a man who had just turned 100, assuring him he did indeed have the stuff of national leadership, essentially giving him a eulogy he could hear.
An act of hatred? Please. It was an act of kindness.
Indeed, Harry Belafonte likening Colin Powell's support of President Bush to ``a slave in the master's house,'' or Ted Kennedy's insistence that Robert Bork's appointment to the Supreme Court ``would take us back to the days of segregated lunch counters,'' were much clearer examples of irresponsible commentary. But it served their purposes and both got away with it.
Lott has nothing to apologize for, save a misconception.
It's the ones now exploiting his embarrassment who ought to be ashamed, especially the ones who have been down that road themselves.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: lott
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-106 next last
1
posted on
12/18/2002 8:21:04 AM PST
by
TLBSHOW
To: Texasforever; nopardons; All
ping for the truth
2
posted on
12/18/2002 8:21:51 AM PST
by
TLBSHOW
To: TLBSHOW
Nobody is calling "for his head". Sheesh.
I've also here Arlen Specter said it is an offense that doesn't call for "the death penalty". No kidding! That is the same argument that was used to defend Clinton.
Stepping aside as Majority Leader and retaining his Senate seat is not a call of "off with his head", but if he keeps up his apologies it may get to that point.
3
posted on
12/18/2002 8:23:39 AM PST
by
cyncooper
To: cyncooper
"here" should be "hear".
4
posted on
12/18/2002 8:25:03 AM PST
by
cyncooper
To: TLBSHOW
Defending Lott by pointing out the other side's bad guys is asinine. The political reality is, Republicans are held to a higher standard by the media. It isn't fair, but that's life.
I can't imagine many conservatives will be sorry to see this spineless weasel go anyway...especially now that his ability to lead is even further compromised (if that's possible).
To: TLBSHOW
OK, you've convinced me. I've crossed Ted Kennedy, Mike Wallace, Alan Dershowitz and Harry Belafonte off my list as possible new Senate Majority Leaders.
The problem with the argument here is that Lott's remarks were not truly light-hearted. Anyone who has seen the video can see that there was nothing joking in the delivery.
This is buttressed by fact that he was repeating almost verbatim what he had said in 1980 in a dead-serious political context, and suggests that he meant what he said at the Thurmond affair.
To: governsleastgovernsbest
The complete list of the 21 Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes Senators:
- Hill and Sparkman of Alabama
- Fulbright and McClellan of Arkansas
- Holland and Smathers of Florida
- Russell and Talmadge of Georgia
- Ellender and Long of Louisiana
- Eastland and Stennis of Mississippi
- Ervin and Jordan of North Carolina
- Johnston and Thurmond of South Carolina
- Gore Sr. and Walters of Tennessee
- H. Byrd and Robertson of Virginia
- R. Byrd of West Virginia
Democrat opposition to the Civil Rights Act was substantial enough to literally split the party in two. A whopping 40% of the House Democrats VOTED AGAINST the Civil Rights Act, while 80% of Republicans SUPPORTED it. Republican support in the Senate was even higher. Similar trends occurred with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was supported by 82% of House Republicans and 94% of Senate Republicans. The same Democrat standard bearers took their normal racists stances, this time with Senator Fulbright leading the opposition effort.
It took the hard work of Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen and Republican Whip Thomas Kuchel to pass the Civil Rights Act (Dirksen was presented a civil rights accomplishment award for the year by the head of the NAACP in recognition of his efforts). Upon breaking the Democrat filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Republican Dirksen took to the Senate floor and exclaimed "The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!" (Full text of speech). Sadly, Democrats and revisionist historians have all but forgotten (and intentionally so) that it was Republican Dirksen, not the divided Democrats, who made the Civil Rights Act a reality. Dirksen also broke the Democrat filibuster of the 1957 Civil Rights Act that was signed by Republican President Eisenhower.
Outside of Congress, the three most notorious opponents of school integration were all Democrats:
- Orval Faubus, Democrat Governor of Arkansas and one of Bill Clinton's political heroes
- George Wallace, Democrat Governor of Alabama
- Lester Maddox, Democrat Governor of Georgia
The most famous of the school desegregation standoffs involved Governor Faubus. Democrat Faubus used police and state forces to block the integration of a high school in Little Rock, Arkansas. The standoff was settled and the school was integrated only after the intervention of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Even the Democrat Party organization resisted integration and refused to allow minority participation for decades. Exclusion of minorities was the general rule of the Democrat Party of many states for decades, especially in Texas. This racist policy reached its peak under the New Deal in the southern and western states, often known as the New Deal Coalition region of FDR. The Supreme Court in Nixon v. Herndon declared the practice of "white primaries" unconstitutional in 1927 after states had passed laws barring Blacks from participating in Democrat primaries. But the Democrat Parties did not yield to the Courts order. After Nixon v. Herndon, Democrats simply made rules within the party's individual executive committees to bar minorities from participating, which were struck down in Nixon v. Condon in 1932. The Democrats, in typical racist fashion, responded by using state parties to pass rules barring blacks from participation. This decision was upheld in Grovey v. Townsend, which was not overturned until 1944 by Smith v. Allwright. The Texas Democrats responded with their usual ploys and turned to what was known as the "Jaybird system" which used private Democrat clubs to hold white-only votes on a slate of candidates, which were then transferred to the Democrat party itself and put on their primary ballot as the only choices. Terry v. Adams overturned the Jaybird system, prompting the Democrats to institute blocks of unit rule voting procedures as well as the infamous literacy tests and other Jim Crow regulations to specifically block minorities from participating in their primaries. In the end, it took 4 direct Supreme Court orders to end the Democrat's "white primary" system, and after that it took countless additional orders, several acts of Congress, and a constitutional amendment to tear down the Jim Crow codes that preserved the Democrat's white primary for decades beyond the final Supreme Court order ruling it officially unconstitutional.
Hispanics in South Texas were treated especially poorly by the Democrat Party, which relied heavily on a system of political bosses to coerce and intimidate Hispanics into voting for Democrat primary candidates of choice. Though coercion is illegal, this system, known as the Patron system, is still in use to this day by local Democrat parties in some heavy Hispanic communities of the southwest. The simple truth is that the Democrat Party's history during this century is one closely aligned to bigotry in a record stemming largely out of the liberal New Deal era up until the modern day. Bigots are at the center of the Democrat party's current leadership and role models. And in a striking display of hypocrisy, many of the same Democrats who dishonestly shout accusations of "bigotry" at conservatives are practicing bigots of the most disgusting and disreputable kind themselves.
http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/democratrecord.html
7
posted on
12/18/2002 8:26:57 AM PST
by
TLBSHOW
To: NittanyLion
I'm not sure it was "further compromised".......more like further EXPOSED! I think he was already compromised long ago.
To: NittanyLion
Republicans are held to a higher standard by the media. It isn't fair, but that's life. Then maybe it is time to stand up instead of rolling over for it.
9
posted on
12/18/2002 8:28:14 AM PST
by
AppyPappy
To: AppyPappy
Then maybe it is time to stand up instead of rolling over for it. Trent Lott was never a friend of conservatives. What's more, his performance since these stupid remarks has been plain awful. Why would anyone stand up for him?
To: TLBSHOW
Oh cripes ... Now you've resorted to quoting that commie rag in defense of your buddy - after just calling George Will a "hack" ??!!
You MUST be dellusional as someone said earlier.
Realizing that his inability to LEAD and further an AGENDA is not the same thing as being a senate member.
LOTT is toast - deal with it.
To: NittanyLion
Your 100% wrong either stand with Lott or fall...because the rats want your blood..........
12
posted on
12/18/2002 8:34:49 AM PST
by
TLBSHOW
To: TLBSHOW
Your 100% wrong either stand with Lott or fall...because the rats want your blood.......... Gee, that's just the kind of logic (and grammar) I've come to expect from your replies.
To: TLBSHOW
Trent Lott, via his little apology show on BET has now put the GOP in a no-win situation. Now all the Blacks that were previously calling for his head, are not begging him to stay to work for their agenda. Now if the GOP kicks Lott out, the party will be accused of racism for "lynching" him. This is precisely the reason that Trent never should have done the BET show. But with Trent, it's all "Me Me Me", just like a certain ex-President.
14
posted on
12/18/2002 8:39:50 AM PST
by
dfwgator
To: dfwgator
Now all the Blacks that were previously calling for his head, are not begging him to stay to work for their agenda.That should read, "Now all the Blacks that were previously calling for his head, are NOW begging him to stay to work for their agenda."
15
posted on
12/18/2002 8:40:54 AM PST
by
dfwgator
To: NittanyLion
Too bad.......as I am right
The next time Democrats take to the national airwaves to dishonestly accuse Republicans of racial hatred, remember who the historical record up until this very day points to as the real bigots: The Democrat Party. In all possible ways, the Democrat Party is built around the pillars of ultra leftists, many of whom are known participants in racism and/or affiliates of racist hate groups. Consider the Democrat Party of today's heroes and leaders:
- Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Democrat icon and orchestrator of Japanese Internment
- Ex-House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, former affiliate of a St. Louis area racist group
- Ex-Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Byrd, former Ku Klux Klansman known for making bigoted slurs on national television
- Rev. Jesse Jackson, Democrat keynote speaker and race hustler known for making anti-Semitic slurs
- Rev. Al Sharpten, Democrat activist and perennial candidate and race hustler known inciting anti-Semitic violence in New York City
- Sen. Ernest Hollings, leading Democrat Senator known for use of racial slurs against several minority groups
- Lee P. Brown, former Clinton cabinet official and Democrat mayor of Houston who won reelection using racial intimidation against Hispanic voters
- Andrew Cuomo, former Clinton cabinet official and Democrat candidate for NY Governor who made racist statements about a black opponent.
- Dan Rather, Democrat CBS news anchor and editorialist known for using anti-black racial epithets on a national radio broadcast
- Donna Brazile, former Gore campaign manager known for making anti-white racial attacks. Brazile has also worked for Jackson, Gephardt, and Michael Dukakis
The simple truth is that the Democrat Party's history during this century is one closely aligned to bigotry in a record stemming largely out of the liberal New Deal era up until the modern day. Bigots are at the center of the Democrat party's current leadership and role models. And in a striking display of hypocrisy, many of the same Democrats who dishonestly shout accusations of "bigotry" at conservatives are practicing bigots of the most disgusting and disreputable kind themselves.
http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/democratrecord.html
16
posted on
12/18/2002 8:41:29 AM PST
by
TLBSHOW
To: TLBSHOW
- Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Democrat icon and orchestrator of Japanese Internment Don't forget about turning away the Jewish refugees on the "Voyage of the Damned."
17
posted on
12/18/2002 8:42:46 AM PST
by
dfwgator
To: TLBSHOW
He never should have apologized in the first place.
His initial statements were vague and fairly benign. Plenty of wiggle room.
Last night they showed how the furor developed from a small piece on the ABC website, to Gwen Eiffel to Timmy "I hate tax cuts" Russert.
The media pimped this Big Time.
Lott's performance has gotten increasingly more deperate with each appearance. If he would have stuck with the initial response and disappeared for a while, this would be yesterday's news.
I can't help but think some Republicans helped this as well. Trent has burned them too many times in the past.
To: MassExodus
Lott ain't goin' nowhere. He's got the cards:
Santorum 'confident' Lott will survive .
And a lot of people on this site have been proving themselves utterly deficient in a sense of humor and a sense of human decency in taking Lott's kindly, jesting language seriously. Which is just the point of this column.
To: NittanyLion
I agree with your assessment of Lott - he is a spineless weasel. This hoopla about his racism is ridiculous of course. Besides that, people always have a right to adhere to their own particular beliefs, likes, dislikes, etc. If someone dislikes blacks, so what? How many of them like us? It is the same with all races - some of a race are very likable and desirable as associates and others are not. The races are equal in God's sight and there are many unlikable white people. Perhaps one only needs to keep one's mouths SHUT when in the public eye, and keep his/her own personal feelings to oneself when acting on the behalf of a whole segment of society which may be black, red, green, purple or white!!!! It is after all a matter of the heart.
20
posted on
12/18/2002 8:48:06 AM PST
by
Clifdo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-106 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson