Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lott Decried For Part Of Salute to Thurmond(Senate Leader Hails Colleague's Run As Segregationist)
Washington Post ^ | 12/07/2002 | Thomas B. Edsall

Posted on 12/07/2002 4:32:52 AM PST by KQQL

Senate Republican leader Trent Lott of Mississippi has provoked criticism by saying the United States would have been better off if then-segregationist candidate Strom Thurmond had won the presidency in 1948.

Speaking Thursday at a 100th birthday party and retirement celebration for Sen. Thurmond (R-S.C.) in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Mississippi; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-137 next last
To: Huck
Do you agree with Trent Lott that the party of "segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race" should have been given the keys to the White House?

Did either party of that time disagree with those positions? Did they believe they should be decided on a State by State basis or by national legislation? Congress had not enacted any recent laws against segregation until many years after 1948 to my knowledge.

101 posted on 12/07/2002 11:22:41 AM PST by The Irishman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
I occasionally take potshots at racist Freepers, so I'm delighted to see the reaction to Lott's stupid and appalling remark. Can we just get rid of this guy? Please?
102 posted on 12/07/2002 11:49:10 AM PST by ArcLight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
You are right- I was thinking of (and had checked the dates on) the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That was what had passed and was signed into law a few months before Thurmond switched.
103 posted on 12/07/2002 11:59:27 AM PST by William McKinley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

Comment #104 Removed by Moderator

To: Catspaw
Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it.

I wish Lott would stop speaking for my state in this way. It does nothing to combat the widely-held image of Mississippi as a hotbed for racism and a "scar instead of state."

This is just a ridiculous remark, and I'm glad that Lott is being taken to task for it. I, for one, am not proud that my state voted Dixiecrat in 1948, and I wish Lott would just shut up and stop embarassing this state.
105 posted on 12/07/2002 1:12:19 PM PST by bourbon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: All
I think ya'll are making a mountain out of a molehill.
106 posted on 12/07/2002 2:59:23 PM PST by CyberAnt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillCompton
Lott, the current leader, said we would have been better off if a segregationist had won the presidency in 1948. What was the purpose of this comment?

Though I agree that Lott's wording was a case of clear stupidity by giving the 'rats ammo to use against him and the GOP, in his defense it does not appear he was saying the country would be better off under Thurmond because of segregation. Listen to Lott's whole speech - he praises Thurmond extensively for a career of fighting for conservatism in Congress, an accomplishment deserving of praise. The context of this particular comment was that Thurmond had been a lifelong advocate of smaller government, and in that context, Lott suggested government would not be the monster it is today if conservative opposition had halted its growth in the second half of this century. Though the comment sounds bad out of context, was stupidly worded, and invites others to draw associations to segregationism, Lott said nothing in praise of segregation itself.

As for the 'rats and damage control, we do need to be ready on this one...and not to save Lott's rear, but to rebut a smear of our party including its senate leader even if we find him to be an idiot. The best way is to point out hypocrisy of the 'rats, who for decades have campaigned on how much better the country is supposedly better off thanks to their own political deity's victorious runs for the presidency in 1932, 36, 40, and 44. Little mention is ever made of FDR's appalling record on race which includes, among other things, appointing a Ku Klux Klansman to the United States Supreme Court. He tapped liberal klansman Democrat Senator Hugo Black for the job in part as a reward for being a New Dealer in congress. Black had a lengthy history of white supremacist activities in Alabama and had gained much of his early political fame as a Klan attorney who successfully defended hooded terrorists who murdered a Catholic priest in Birmingham circa 1921. This was but one of FDR's many affiliations with bigots and his own racist actions as president, including ordering Japanese internment. But the Democrats proudly display his name on everything they do without penalty.

107 posted on 12/07/2002 5:25:28 PM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: What is the bottom line
Just did a web search and came up with the following link (and a number of others): http://www.fair.org/press-releases/ccc.html

Looking for an accurate account of Lott's flap with the CCC from fair.org is about like looking for an accurate account from Pacifica radio. Part of that has to do with the fact that fair.org is a mouthpiece for Pacifica radio.

If nothing else, Lott's idiocy with the CCC and this poorly worded yet out of context remark shows the double standards of the media and the left.

When the Democrat's highest ranking senator, Robert Byrd, used the n-word on national tv, nobody made a peep. Yet when Lott even remotely confers praise on Strom Thurmond's 1948 presidential bid, they're up in arms. They were also up in arms when Lott spoke at a CCC event because the CCC practices a concealed form of racism. You probably didn't hear very much about it though when a newspaper in St. Louis revealed that Dick Gephardt had spoken as a congressman at several meetings of the now defunct White Citizens Council, an openly racist group. It was later reported by persons who were there that Gephardt had even solicited the group's endorsement for his first congressional bid.

Same goes with their treatment of Thurmond himself. We always hear about him holding segregationist views in his presidential bid, but do we ever hear about the open racism espoused by FDR? Absolutely not, even though FDR appointed a Klansman to the Supreme Court, surrounded himself with segregationist democrat advisors, and personally ordered japanese internment. As with all things of the left, there's a double standard. Republicans get raked over the coals in the press for offenses far lesser than many things democrats of comparable stature and rank get a complete pass on.

108 posted on 12/07/2002 5:52:43 PM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
You may be right. I think perhaps Lott is going to get a pass on this anyway. There doesn't appear to be anything in the Sunday papers about it. Go figure.
109 posted on 12/07/2002 11:42:24 PM PST by BillCompton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
What a stupid thing to say...........Crap like this is why 90%+ African Americans vote RATS......

No it's not. The majority of blacks have a difficult time sticking together for a common cause. There's a very small difference in voting for one white candidate over another. At least Lott and Thurman you know where they stand.

It's the wolves in sheep's clothing in the democrat party that has fed the black population a multitude of lies and still haven't paid up. Hopefully the next generation will realize their power is not just being black and held as a block of votes for the smoothest talkers.

110 posted on 12/07/2002 11:54:17 PM PST by swheats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
True and it is so amazing that 60 years is still so fresh in so many people's mind. Once again the media will carry the dems water on this one.

The dems can't complain or it will open Byrd up for scrutiny. We might all have a bit of racist history to deal with if we really want to deal with this stupidity.
111 posted on 12/08/2002 12:02:07 AM PST by swheats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: BillCompton
So if someone says "George Washington was a great president" that means they support slavery? Lott was trying to be nice, people that want to spin this are just being ultra-PC.
112 posted on 12/08/2002 11:49:36 PM PST by Michael2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: metesky
The right of free association should not be left to die, however.

That's a far different issue from government-mandated separation.

113 posted on 12/09/2002 8:25:51 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
I know.
114 posted on 12/09/2002 9:59:34 AM PST by metesky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
Great post.
115 posted on 12/09/2002 10:15:52 AM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

Comment #116 Removed by Moderator

To: BillCompton
>>Normally, he is a very careful man. I see this blowing up big. I don't think he will survive as leader. This is really bad.<<

I hope the fool is fired, pronto.

He's a pantywaisted twit.
117 posted on 12/09/2002 11:09:13 AM PST by SerpentDove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dave23
that 50 something lady was not his daughter....That' s was
Hired person...who plays Ms.Monroe..
118 posted on 12/09/2002 11:19:36 AM PST by KQQL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
>>If these insignificant remarks are considered the worst thing he's done we've really lost control of the conversation. PC brainwashing has
worked.<<

The problem with your theory is that the remarks were not insignificant, as they have given ammunition to opponents of the Republican party.

And they go to the heart of the problem: the Senate has an unthinking fool for a majority leader.
119 posted on 12/09/2002 11:24:51 AM PST by SerpentDove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: I still care
>> There was nothing to this statement other than a joke. <<

So it was supposed to be funny? I don't get it.
120 posted on 12/09/2002 11:28:47 AM PST by SerpentDove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-137 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson