This in my opinion is rediculous…
Lott was only trying to speak well of a fellow rebublican senator…
This is not the thing that should have caused such a reaction.
IMHO, all this is… is a way for Republicans to get in better with minorities…
If he stays, the democrats will talk about how racist republicans are… if he goes, the republicans will talk about how they support minorities and even asked the majority leader to step down(without losing a seat)
This has been done to death. The words that came out of his mouth were an endorsement of a segregationist candidate. The words that came out of his mouth were that if we had elected a segregationist candidate (whose only policy plank was maintaining Jim Crow) we would have avoided all kinds of problems over the years. It would be nice to say that wasn’t what he meant, but his record over the years (affiliation with the Council of Conservative Citizens, writing for racist and neo-Confederate magazines, filing appeal briefs defending the right of Bob Jones University to enjoy the benefits of a tax-exempt status while also forbidding interracial dating), really left him with no benefit of the doubt.
Whoa! This is a development! Just add this to the list of big stories I first heard about on the SDMB, I guess.
Now that all is said and done, I really don’t think it can be said that Lott was hounded out by liberals. If anything, the Republican party sees that it has an image problem, it sees that it’s costing them votes, and it’s only logical that they should ask “What can we do about this?”
While I’m not fond of Lott in the least, it bothers me to think that politicians can kill their careers with one sentence. This will only encourage them to be even more ambiguous and evasive in the future.
I find it interesting when he uttered “the sentence” that he was labeled a racist, and many things from his past were dug up to support that notion. It confuses me that the people whom suddenly care so much, didnt express themselves before this incident. I’m not really expressing this how I would like to, but you get the gist of it.
The thing is, though, that the whole thing would’ve probably blown over in due time if only he didn’t have the questionable past to speak of. However, I agree that his going down is politically motivated, because he’s the same Lott he’s always been, right? Why hound him now if not for a political sideshow?
Or conversely, why should I ignore the offense just because the corporate media like to bury the racist evidence of Republican leaders? If you’ll recall, the corporate media again attempted to ignore this, and was only due to the emergence of online liberal media sources who were able to thrust it into the face of those simpering ass-lickers. Folks like Joshua Micah Marshall and Atrios forced them to deal with it – that’s why! It’s been a while since we had populist media outside of one NY Times column, but now, at long last, we’re hearing from both sides. Look out, Delay!
Hey, speaking of the ORKIN man, question to the happy dance Republicans:
Will the rest of the Republican covert racists and religious nuts resign, or just this one?
Didn’t Byrd recant? As did Thurmond, which is why nobody’s been calling for his head. Lott, otoh, has yet to offer a satisfactory apology (satisfactory=either “non-racist plausible explanation” or “i shall resign while attempting to cleanse my mind from the foul stench of racism”).
Weird. What was Byrd’s non-racist plausible explanation? And why are you pretending that Lott hasn’t apologized a bazillion times and state unequivocally that he finds segregation to be abhorent?
Byrd has never (IIRC) been majority leader. Precisely for that reason, I suspect.
The majority leader is a different animal from the other Senators. He is the public face of the Senate majority, the one who oversees the legislative process and the implementation of the majority party agenda. (In this case, where the same party also occupies the White House, his role in setting the agenda is diminished, but it is part of the role.) He’s a very visible representative of the national party, not just a senator from Mississippi. As such, it is appropriate to question why the party would tolerate someone whose public record reflects less than full dedication to the principles of racial equality to a prominent, nationally visible position. Very few were suggesting that Lott’s transgression was grounds for expelling him from the Senate. As a Senator, he only represents Mississippi. As majority leader, he is one of the leading public faces of the party.
1977-83 and 87-89, and minority leader in between. He did repudiate his racist past before that time. Thurmond actually didn’t, though, although he has often received credit for not believing in that stuff anymore. Rather, he was part of the group of politicians that accepted desegregation in practice as a political fact, but never repudiated their previous feelings. Lott is clearly another.
This is such a canard. There would be droves of Democrats, myself included, who would be thrilled if the racist, pork-barreling Byrd stepped in enough shit to be run out of the Senate. Really, Shodan, he’s all yours.
Why? It was a terrible sentence. I could kill my SDMB career with a single sentence quite easily; why should politicians not have to be at least as careful of what they say?
It’s been said here before - Lott’s statement was a classic political gaffe. He accidentally said what he really thought, and it cooked him. I doubt if many other senators think like he does/did - even Thurmond had long repudiated his own 1948 views.
What Lott said was simply un-sayable (for a public figure), and should be.
