Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by Woodchuck, Dec 12, 2002.
Is Trent Lott REALLY that stupid?! Also, what "problems" was he referring to?
I don't really thing Lott is that stupid. But I DO think that this thing has gotten blown out of proportion completely. When guys like this get together and do a bunch of backslapping and story telling as was being done at this birthday party, I really don't understand how every single word spoken should be measured against what the public reaction might be to hearing what is said. The statement alone, out of context, and analyzed by itself - could be interpreted like the media says. However, if looked at as a whole, why couldn't it equally be that Lott was referring to the Cold War, Viet Nam, the gas crisis of 1973 or any number of other sticky situations this country has gotten itself into in the last 50 years? In that light, it shouldn't be forgotten that Thurmond was a DEMOCRAT at the time he ran for president. That fact has been overlooked in the hurry to string Lott up. It is also a fact that most Democrats of the time were segregationist and this even extended to Al Gore's father, who voted against the Civil Rights Act years later in 1964.
This whole situation comes from liberal democrats who've had their butts whupped lately and are looking for any single issue to try to make points. As usual, a bullying, vocal minority has claimed to have it's fragile sensibilities offended and can't get past the petty, partisan politics of personal destruction. Does that sound familiar? They can't find anything in his record, or his public policies so they latch onto an ad-libbed comment as if it were doctrine.
It's really too bad that this type of witch-hunt wasn't in full force when the Rev. Jackson made his "himeytown" comment. Then things really would have been better.
That is correct, sir. Strom ran for president as a Dixiecrat (which is not the same thing), and ran on a segregationist platform.
And, while I don't believe that Trent is a racist (my mom went to high school with him), I do think he needs to better explain what he meant by "all these problems." And, he also needs to explain how he made the same mistake he made over 20 years ago when he said pretty much the exact same thing.
I'm with Hambone, I think his summation is spot on.
And for those who would be quick to jump on the 'holier than thou' bandwagon, they should take an introspective look at some of the comments made by high profile Dems in past years. Even back in April of this year, I can think of a prominent metro leader who made comments far more racially divisive than anything Lott has put forth recently. I love how the knee-jerk reactionaries are always so quick to point the finger, meanwhile their peers are shooting themselves (and their party) in the foot.
It goes round and round, both parties play host to some loose cannons. Both parties also play host to people who are insensitive to race and race issues.
Here is your answer.
As a bleeding heart liberal, I will go on record that I don't think his comment is grounds for him resigning, or even stepping down as Majority Leader in January.
I do, however, think that his explanation and apology, so far, have fallen short of what is needed to make the situation go away. But, it will go away.
I'm sure that it was simply a joking way of praising Strom (ie--The world would be a better place if you'd been in charge, Strom), and, unfortunately, both sides have their attack dogs who will jump over the smallest comment/action and try and turn it into a big deal--Jesse Jackson getting bent out of shape over "Barbershop," Bob Barr calling for impeachment over, well, anytime Clinton opened his mouth, or blinked.
Politics as usual, I'm afraid. If it wasn't liberals attacking Lott, it'd be conservatives attacking Daschle.
Heck, what else do they have to do until Congress gets back together in January?
Man, I shouldn't even think of posting here...but ***...here goes.
As a registered Republican and a fairly conservative person politically (small gov't, strong defence), I think Lott's statement, and totally inept attempt at "apologizing", are yet another reason he should not be majority leader.
He should have been MORTIFIED that what he said was very reasonably interpreted to mean he would have supported a segregated society in any way, shape or form, especially if he in fact does NOT believe that. Even assuming he truly doesn't believe it, he has failed miserably in convincing anyone that's the case.
Other Republican leaders should step forward...quickly and sincerely...and admonish Lott for his stupidity. Good leaders make mistakes, poor leaders fail to recognize them.
I was just about to edit my last post to mention that I found it interesting that some conservative groups have started to pile on Lott. But, Chris did a much better job of illustrating that than I could have--not that he is piling on, but that it isn't only liberals, blacks, or Democrats saying he was out of line.
I need to lay down--I just halfway defended Lott (not that I mind watching him squrim, mind you ) while the registered republican blasted him.
Oh, and BTW, Chris--good quote "Good leaders make mistakes, poor leaders fail to recognize them."
Is that yours?
Craig Garfinkel, that was a great post.
I am a VERY far leftist, and I applaud you for acknowledging bad apples in your own party, something the Democrats haven't seemed to be doing recently.
They have to realize this: Here is my opinion, please don't let this thread be closed for this. If you disagree with me, PLEASE SEND ME A PM!!!!!!
The Dems don't seem to have an agenda right now. Although I vehemently and intensely disagree with what Bush and his followers are doing, at least he KNOWS what he wants done and isn't standing around slandering. The Republicans seem to have an agenda, something they want done, while the Democrats just seem to spend their whole time midslinging.
But I could be wrong.
Also, since Strom was a seperatist and a Dixiecrat, I seriously doubt that Lott was referring to the Cold War as the "problems". Remember, this is the man that said, "Racial discrination does not violate federal policy."
Thanks for not letting this turn into a huge arguement!
"Don't blame me! I voted Perot!"
I think Lott should resign, but I am reluctant to discuss this matter.
Foreign policy, terrorism
I have mixed emotions about the Lott matter.
The news spends a lot of time about cross burning, gun rights, free speech., etc., . People exchange often ill-thought but vociferous opinions.
Matters of policy that deserve discussion are overlooked.
I am starting to wonder if these matters that draw such attention (Lott, cross burning, Cardinal Law, etc., ) keep us occupied (and news networks in business), while the more important matters are decided with little coverage and no consideration from the constituents.
And from Slate:
(FYI: The leading coverage on Lott has come from a journalist
named Joshua Micah Marshall writing on his own Web site. See http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ )
Rusty Shackleford...best name ever!
I wish they would spin off the Dale Gribble show.
That would be fantastic.
As another moderately conservative Republican, I also think it was reprehensible and generally a dopey thing to say.
But the liberal piling-on is typical and transparent.
You are correct that he ran as a "Dixiecrat" but Dixiecrats were a part of the Democrat party. Here's the description of a Dixiecrat from the Encyclopedia Britannica:
Thurmond, then a Democrat, later changed over to the Republican party.
No one should misunderstand me on this. If one believes that there is ample evidence of racism (a too often misused word) from Lott's statment, then they should present their proof. Tell us what the man was thinking when he made the statement, rectify this with his legislative agenda/track record, and then I might be persuaded to believe he is what he's being accused of. But just as I don't know what Lott was thinking, his critics don't either. And there isn't enough here to destroy his life. I would be giving a Democrat the same leeway in this situation if there wasn't already such a blatant double standard when it comes to judging conservatives.
Politician = Foot in Mouth
It's part of the natural order of things. Is Trent Lott really a racist? Probably not. Is he a classist? Probably. That would put him in a very large group indeed.
A little off topic, but still relevant:
ALL politicians should be limited to ONE term in office. Everyone, from the city council member to the president. After that term is up, they should not be allowed to run for any office ever again. If every politician knew that they were only getting one shot at it, I suspect we may not be having so many political problems. Strom Thurmond serves as the perfect, if not an extreme example.
Just my opinion, folks.
wait what did he say, i've been sick with no TV and i don't know any news